Let's face it - being 'green' is the new cool. But sometimes an ulterior, industry-driven motive lurks behind the 'green halo' that we trust in so-called environmental organizations. This blog is dedicated to keeping individuals and organizations who claim to be for clean, renewable energy accountable.

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Check out this podcast - No Size Restrictions in Prop 7

I came upon this podcast the other day, and found it was really helpful in understanding why the alleged size restriction that the No on Prop 7 folks are campaigning on is a false interpretation of language in the initiative. In case you missed it, the ad that the Big Utilities are airing claims that Prop 7 has a "competition elimination" provision. I scoured Prop 7 and found no such language - not even close!

I recommend everyone listen to this podcast, and check out the sections that are pointed to. I lay out my walk-through of the initiative language below.

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/podcast?id=53449

First, lets look at the section of Proposition 7 that actually establishes the law that 50% of the electricity sold in the state come from renewable sources by 2025.
SEC 10. 399.15 (b) The commission shall implement annual procurement targets for each retail seller as follows:
(1) Notwithstanding Section 454.5, each retail seller shall, pursuant to subdivision (a), increase its total procurement of eligible renewable energy resources by at least an additional 4-2 percent of retail sales per year so that 20 percent of its retail sales are procured from eligible renewable energy resources no later than December 31, 2010, 40 percent of its retail sales are procured from eligible renewable energy resources no later than December 31, 2020 and 50 percent of its retail sales are procured from eligible renewable energy resources no later than December 21, 2025. A retail seller with 20 percent of retail sales procured from eligible renewable energy resources in any year shall not be required to increase its procurement of renewable energy resources in the following year.

So according to the section above, a utility company must increase its procurement or share of “eligible renewable energy resources” each year until they reach 50% by 2025. This section establishes the actual 50% renewable by 2025 requirement of Proposition 7. Now, let us see what a “eligible renewable energy resource” is:

SEC 7. 399.12 (b) “Eligible renewable energy resource” means an electric generating a solar and clean energy facility that meets the definition of “in-state renewable electricity generation facility” in Section 25741 of the Public Resources Code.

Now, let us look up what a solar and clean energy facility that meets the definition of “in-state renewable electricity generation facility” means:

Section 25741 of the Public Resources Code says: http://law.onecle.com/california/public-resources/25741.html
(b) "In-state renewable electricity generation facility" means a facility that meets all of the following criteria: (1) The facility uses biomass, solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, fuel cells using renewable fuels, small hydroelectric generation of 30 megawatts or less, digester gas, municipal solid
waste conversion, landfill gas, ocean wave, ocean thermal, or tidal current, and any additions or enhancements to the facility using that technology.

As you can see it is clear that Proposition 7 DOES NOT exclude small renewable energy producers. Their power counts toward the 50% standard and can be bought and sold the same as large producers. The Big Utilities are using a manipulation of terms to scare voters out of supporting Prop. 7, exactly as was done in the lead up to deregulation. Same characters, same scare tactics.

Labels: ,

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've been practicing law in California for over 30 years. I agree completely with Mr. Hunt that (1) there really is no ambiguous language in Prop 7 that would lead to a possible "competition elimination" effect and (2)even if the language is ambiguous, a court isn't going to look to a similar sounding term within the initiative and just transport that definition to it. A court will look to the plain and ordinary meaning of the term and to the proponents' intent. My understanding is that the proponents have signed an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, that there is no size restriction for which energy plants can sell electricity to the utilities. Any court will be inclined to construe Prop 7 to be consistent with an affidavit by the proponents.

September 8, 2008 at 10:54 AM

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home