NEWS
Burning energy questions
09/24/2008
By Editorial Board
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Missouri voters have an opportunity to nudge utilities down the path toward more sustainable energy. Proposition C on the November ballot would require large electric companies to get at least 15 percent of the power they sell through renewable sources like wind and solar by 2021.
That’s a bit more, and with fewer loopholes, than a bill passed by lawmakers during the last session. It would have set “targets” for renewable energy of 11 percent by 2020.
Proposition C would add modestly to consumer costs in the first 10 years after it goes into effect, proponents say. But, they argue, the mandate ultimately would save consumers $331 million over 20 years.
Most voters may be unaware of the initiative. It was ordered placed on the ballot earlier this month. Secretary of State Robin Carnahan had ruled that the organizers, a group called Missourians for Cleaner, Cheaper Energy, had come up short of the 14,860 signatures needed to get the measure before voters. But a Cole County judge overruled her.
Last week, the citizens’ group released an analysis of how the mandate would affect electric prices over the next 20 years. That’s a long time for projections — especially given the unknowns swirling around future energy costs.
Chief among them is a mechanism for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Whoever wins the November presidential and congressional elections, it seems all but certain that some kind of cap will be imposed on greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming.
Any carbon cap would have serious implications for Missouri electric customers. Some 85 percent of the state’s electricity is generated by burning coal, which is the major source of greenhouse gas emissions. A cap, whether achieved by strictly limiting emissions or by creating some sort of cap-and-trade system, would add significant cost to coal-fired power generation.
But even without such a cap, the renewable energy mandate would add only modestly to electric rates, the analysis concluded. Peak costs would be less than 68 cents a month, and the average over the first 10 years would be just 36 cents per month.
That’s a small price to pay for sustainable energy that doesn’t harm the planet. What’s more, the mandate would boost the state’s fledgling green power industry and result in creation of new jobs and businesses.
There is no organized opposition to the initiative. Kansas City-based utility KCP&L has endorsed the measure, and St. Louis-based AmerenUE boasts about its commitment to renewable energy.
Ameren’s recent rate hike request includes between $5 million and $7 million a year for expenses related to licensing a new nuclear reactor, which wouldn’t count as renewable energy under the initiative.
At least 27 states already have alternate energy mandates. Missouri should join them. Missourians should vote Yes on Proposition C.