Press Mention The Atlanta Journal-Constitution August 5, 2004
SACE Referenced
Environmentalists, utilities clash on plan
In this mention
A working group of environmentalists and Georgia's two largest electric utilities met for the first time to develop an energy conservation program, with significant disagreement over funding for experts and access to utility data. The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy led environmentalist efforts to push for efficiency incentives in the state's long-term resource plans, though they were not included in the approved plans. The PSC created the working group to continue exploring energy-efficiency programs, with a plan due in February.
Original clipping
PDF didn't open? Open it in a new tab →
Full transcript
GEORGIA FOCUS
Environmentalists, utilities clash on plan
By MARGARET NEWKIRK
mnewkirk@ajc.com
A working group of environmentalists and two of the state's largest electric companies sat down for the first time Thursday, launching a six-month effort to come up with an energy conservation program in Georgia.
Kumbaya it was not.
As the meeting began, the audience was divided, with representatives from Georgia Power, Savannah Electric and their law firm, Troutman Sanders, bunched on the one side of the room and environmentalists across the aisle.
Among other things, environmentalists want Georgia Power to pay $100,000 to $300,000 for experts to help the new working group. Georgia Power opposed the idea.
Security also came up.
Environmentalists balked at a suggestion that they sign nondisclosure forms related to information the utility calls trade secrets.
Georgia Power's Jeff Burleson said the company wants to base any new programs on its own, confidential data.
"Ultimately, whatever program we come up would be a program that belongs to gia Power and will be a plemented by Georgia Power," he said. "I'm not comfortable using a program if its decided based on inaccurate data."
The new working group is the product of the state Public Service Commission's July 9 vote on long-term resource plans for the state's two monopoly utilities.
Those plans included incentives for customers to cut back on energy use as a way to meet future demand. Environmentalists had pushed hard for such incentives, asking the PSC to abandon a strict cost-benefit test that routinely has screened out energy-efficiency programs.
Energy-efficiency proposals don't pass a cost-benefit test because the lower revenue the utilities would receive from reduced consumption is added to program costs, such as rebates for energy-efficient appliances.
Although environmentalists, led by the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, failed to get efficiency incentives into the approved long-term plans, the PSC kept the possibility of such programs alive by creating the working group.
The group is to come back to the commission with a plan in February.
PSC staff consultant Jim Buttone asked the two sides to consider unusual approaches to energy-efficiency programs.