A compelling analysis of the basis and terms of their agreement with Cape Wind was sponsored by National grid and authored by National Grid exec Richard Rapp and renowned energy economics expert Susan Tierney, PhD here. It is the case for why the deal should be allowed to go forward and they filed it with the oversight authorities for this week's hearings.
In response to the hearings, the Boston Globe featured a vigorous statement of support for the deal by PBLN member CEO George Matouk. His Fall River manufacturing plant uses 300,000 kilowatt hours a year of National Grid power, and in George's view, paying slightly higher prices for wind energy is a bargain if it means stepping up to the challenge of changing our total energy supply. In his words, “I think that the potential benefits from having more wind energy in Massachusetts, from an economic point of view, would offset [moderately higher prices in the short-term.]’’
The same article features the news that Wal Mart has come out publicly against the power purchase agreement, saying the price being too high for the number one company in the Fortune 500. Strange that such a widely recognized corporate champion for greening their business would take such an awkward stand. It is not the first time in recent memory that Wal Mart has popped up in a Massachusetts renewable energy conversation. They were rebuffed by Massachusetts Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles in February 2010 for failing to include any provision for renewable energy in their plans to open a new store in Salem, Massachusetts. The state has stringent requirements for new commercial construction that are part of a whole policy package intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The Associated Industries of Massachusetts has ripped the Cape Wind-National Grid deal showing no interest in a long-term vision of the transition to clean energy that Cape Wind represents. They also ignore the fact that there are many companies, probably including many in their own membership who are more than happy to pay slightly higher prices in the short term in order to see the region investing in first-mover advantages in what could become a defining 21st century feature of our state's economic growth.
Look for the businesses supporting Cape Wind to try to get their views out over the din of chatter about Wal Mart. Some of them include Legal Sea Foods, Saunders Hotel Group, Millipore, Aggregate Industries, Genzyme, Grossman Marketing Group, and many more listed among the Environmental League's Corporate Council.
We won't be able to blog about Cape Wind every week forever but it does seem like a rich microcosm of the shift taking place in conventional wisdom about what is "good for business" in the 21st century economy. And it almost goes without saying that if Congress would move Senator John Kerry's American Power Act into law we can begin to see public policy and private sector innovation shape markets for renewable energy growth.Then the price of wind energy will really look good. Even without Congressional action, agency action together with a coming increase in oil and gas prices that is sure to accompany the global economic recovery will make lots of business leaders clamor for cheaper, more stable renewable energy alternatives.
Diane Hessan, President & CEO - Communispace
2 comments:
The information contained above concerning AIM is incorrect.
AIM not only advocated for a national carbon program equal to the one in Massachusetts but we have also advocated for many renewable energy projects and sit on the Energy Efficiency Advisory Council.
In the matter of Cape Wind, the real question is why this group is advocating for the MOST EXPENSIVE renewable power available when several projects can deliver as much clean power for half the price.
Aim wants the MOST renewable power we can get for the least ratepayer impact. We believe a true competitive bid for renewable power will produce far more renewable power contracts for the same amount of money.
PBLM’s goals are misplaced. By supporting only Cape wind, they are losing the opportunity to build many more megawatts of clean renewable power.
Thanks Bob for a thoughtful comment. AIM has definitely done some serious thinking and work on the issue of the energy future. From the PBLN point of view, long term efforts to shape markets for renewable energy are essential. As the complete Energy and Environment Policy Statement on www.pbln.org reflects, our focus is considerably more broad than you suggest. We would welcome the chance to partner with AIM to push for passage of the American Power Act in the US Senate, for example, something we could work together on especially as regards persuading Senator Brown to support putting a price on carbon.
The Cape Wind project is something that provokes diverse views and a good energy conversation. Not all of our members have the same view of it and not all of yours either, I am sure. But we believe the business case for Cape Wind is compelling and we support the project enthusiastically as good for business, and we think the pricing will be a bargain when seen in the context of a more complex equation. There is plenty on this blog on the topic so no point repeating it here. Thanks for your comment. I hope we can get around the same table soon and work together though on Cape Wind, we clearly disagree.
(From PBLN Executive Director Andrew Tarsy)
Post a Comment