WITH ONLY DAYS left before the Legislature adjourns for the year, lots of eyes are on a House-Senate conference committee working on a sweeping energy bill that will touch on everything from how much natural gas we need to the role of hydroelectricity and renewables in the state’s energy mix.
Here are five perspectives on what’s at stake and what the state should do.
New England leads climate-change battle
Liz Stanton of Synapse Energy Economics in Cambridge says Massachusetts and the New England region should maintain their heading as national leaders in energy policies that combat climate change.
Gas is great
Michael Whatley, of the industry-backed Consumer Energy Alliance, argues for allowing more natural gas supplies — and he takes a whack at Karenna Gore, who was arrested recently protesting a pipeline project in West Roxbury.
Hydro is key
Martin Murray, of the Northern Pass project, says the hydroelectricity it will deliver is vital to the state’s clean energy future.
Clashing views on what legislation will do electric bills
John Regan of Associated Industries of Massachusetts says pending legislation will send electricity prices up.
Former state environment officials Ken Kimmell of the Union of Concerned Scientists and Daniel Esty, a professor of environmental law and policy at Yale University, say the legislation will reduce electricity costs.
CommonWealth Voices is sponsored by The Boston Foundation.
The Boston Foundation is deeply committed to civic leadership, and essential to our work is the exchange of informed opinions. We are proud to partner on a platform that engages such a broad range of demographic and ideological viewpoints.
The deregulation of the electricity industry 20 years ago ushered in a competitive power market run by ISO-NE. ISO-NE is charges with the task of running a free competitive market for electricity to provide reliable service at the lowest possible cost. The energy debate on Beacon Hill is destroying the competitive market by carving large segments at above market costs for special interests. Eight years ago they carved out 20% for renewables (wind and solar). The unintended consequence of that effort is the early retirement of coal and nuclear power plants to be replaced by wind and solar. Intermittent and variable wind and solar power is no substitute for baseload 24/7 available from coal and nuclear. Instead ISO-NE has been forced to more than double the use of natural gas.
Now we need bigger natural gas pipelines, more transmission lines to Canada to get hydro, and the nuclear guys are lobbying for their own carve out for clean power. Wind turbines installed around the state have destroyed neighborhoods, whole mountains, and are killing large numbers of birds and bats. Neighborhoods are forced to suffer out of compliance noise levels, and the mysterious health effects of Wind Turbine Syndrome. Mountain ridges have been cleared, and access roads to the top are robbing mountains of rain water needed to stay green.
And what benefits have accrued? Carbon emissions have started to increase, and rates are on a path to skyrocket.
Tell Beacon Hill to leave the energy market to the professionals at ISO-NE. It’s one thing to set goals, and expectations. It’s another to set mandates that force grid operators to do stupid things like killing nuclear and forcing unreliable wind and solar on the grid that need natural gas and diesel to perform.
We need to tell Beacon Hill to stop! What they are doing is destructive!