Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Austin Energy’

Tonight – 6 p.m. – Defend Citizen Control of Austin Energy

Posted in Consumers, Energy, Good Government, Utilities, tagged , , , , , , , on February 14, 2013 |

While the proposed resolution to give Austin Energy governance responsibilities to an appointed board has been taken off the “consent agenda”, it’s still alive and kicking.

City Council will take up the issue at 6 p.m. this evening (Thurs, 2/14) and I hope you can take a bit of time before dinner to stand up for your rights. 

Austin Energy is a owned by us, the citizens of Austin.  Currently, we can influence the direction the utility takes by showing up at City Council meetings (just as I’m hoping you will tonight) and voicing your opinions.  The people of Austin have spoken passionately and convincingly on a variety of issues including development of strong solar energy programs,  assistance for the poor and keeping rates affordable for everyone.  City Council has often changed it’s course as a result of public outcry.  They do so because they know that they can be held accountable at the ballot box (or the electronic voting machine, as the case may be).

An appointed board could dramatically limit the ability that each of us has to ensure that Austin Energy is governed in a way that aligns with our values.

Some have argued that a board could focus more on the important issues at Austin Energy, but an appointed board is not the only option.  With City Council soon to be enlarged – when we move to the 10-1 system with geographic representation – there could easily be a subcommittee that focuses on the governance and oversight of Austin Energy.  If some members of City Council don’t wish to be burdened with the responsibility of governing our most (monetarily) valuable asset, then they could decline to serve on such a subcommittee.

Some Austin Energy customers who live outside Austin have complained that they have no representation in the governing body of Austin Energy (which is Austin City Council).  That’s a fair point and could easily be remedied by reserving one seat (or whatever is proportional based on population) on the subcommittee for an elected representative of those customers residing outside city limits.  What doesn’t make sense it to disenfranchise everyone just because some people aren’t currently represented.

Yes, the system could be more perfect and we at Public Citizen are always working toward making it so, but with all the awards and national recognition that Austin Energy has received, we must be doing something right.

So, please, make your voice heard at City Hall tonight.  The proposed resolution is “Item #46” and will be taken up at 6 p.m.  You can register to speak or register your opposition at the kiosks in the City Hall lobby.  You can donate your speaking time to someone else, but you must be present at the meeting to do so. If you drive, you can park in the garage underneath City Hall and get your parking validated in the lobby.

If you can’t make it to the meeting tonight, send City Council a letter letting them know you oppose the formation of an appointed board to govern Austin Energy.

For more information, please visit www.cleanenergyforaustin.org.

Read Full Post »

Austin Energy drought proofs its energy with new Webberville Solar Project

Posted in Global Warming, Renewables, solar, tagged , , , , on January 6, 2012 |

On a blustery and brilliantly sunny Texas winter day a couple hundred Central Texas citizens, that included officials and solar enthusiasts, gathered on what had been an empty 380 acre field only three years ago to usher in a new era of “drought-proof” energy for the City of Austin.

Former Austin Mayor Will Wynn, PUC Commissioner Rolando Pablos, Austin Councilmember Bill Spelman, Travis County Commissioner Ron Davis, Webberville Mayor Hector Gonzales, Austin Energy General Manager Larry Weis, Austin Councilmember Chris Riley, Austin Mayor Lee Leffingwell and Mark Mendenhall of SunEdison.

On Friday, January 6, 2012, Austin Energy held a grand opening ceremony for their new Webberville Solar Project, the largest facility in Texas and among the largest in the nation with 127,728 ground mounted solar panels that rotate with the sun and will generate 30 megawatts (MW) of electricity – enough to power 5,000 homes annually.

A number of years ago, the City of Austin purchased this land planning to install a new coal-fired power plant.  When those plans fell through, a landfill was proposed for the site that now boasts 280 acres of solar panels with a view of downtown Austin along its horizon.

Public Citizen says kudos to the City of Austin and Austin Energy for their vision and efforts in completing this project.  Given that the State Climatologist is warning us that Texas can expect up to 5 more years of the current drought cycle, this project came just in time to help provide our community with drought–proof electricity during the peak use times – that will come in handy next summer.

Read Full Post »

Austin Energy’s Proposed Rate Increases Hurt Austin’s Residential Consumers and Continues the City’s Corporate Welfare Program

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , on September 16, 2011 |

Consumer, low income and environmental groups say the low-income and low energy use customers will bear a disproportionate share of the proposed Austin Energy rate increase and are calling on Austin Energy customers to attend the second of four hearings of the Electric Utility Commission (EUC) on Monday night, September 19th at the Austin Energy Headquarters located at 721 Barton Springs Road, Austin, TX at 6PM.

At that hearing, the commission will be hearing customers’ thoughts on $113 million dollar rate increase proposal for Austin Energy (AE).

“Getting the rates right is critical to assuring that people can afford to live in this city and will continue to move here, said Tom “Smitty” Smith, the director of the Texas office of Public Citizen.  “We see five flaws to the current proposal:

  • they haven’t proven they need this much of a rate increase;
  • the proposed rates overcharge residential consumers almost 20% more than previous methods of allocating costs;
  • the proposed rates continue to be a corporate welfare program that subsidizes large industrial consumers and places the burden on average customers;
  • the proposed rates are unfair to low income users; and
  • the proposed rates discourage conservation and renewable energy use.”

The EUC will be hosting a series of hearings on the proposed rate increase. Monday’s hearing is the second of four and will focus on these issues.  Several consumer groups and low-income advocates will present their alternative proposals.

Josh Houston with Texas IMPACT said, “As an essential element of the city’s social safety net, the issue of electric rates intimately links the faith community and disadvantaged ratepayers.  Austin Energy’s proposed rate design adversely impacts both.  However, it is a false dichotomy that there has to be a choice between clean energy and affordable rates for disadvantaged ratepayers.  Austin Energy has always been an innovative leader and we are confident there’s a solution beneficial to both God’s creation and ‘the least of these’.”

There are numerous elements to the Austin Energy proposal that contributed to some residential customers paying more than their fair share of a rate increase.

“This is a case about subsidization:  Residential ratepayers subsidizing industrial ratepayers; and residential small (low energy) users subsidizing residential large (high energy – over 5,000 Wh per month) users,” said Lanetta Cooper, an attorney with Texas Legal Services Center.

Ms. Cooper elaborated saying, “Austin Energy used assumptions that unfairly shifted costs away from the large commercial and industrial customers onto residential customers and has admitted many of its large commercial and industrial customers are paying $20 million below AE’s cost of service.  If AE had followed the methodology that was consistent with City of Austin council’s precedent, residential customers would have had 20 million dollars in costs less allocated to them.  Unfairly, AE is seeking to raise residential rates twice as much as the increase it needs for the whole utility.”

Much of the huge disparity in rate increases for residential users is due to an increase in fixed customer charges that include economic development costs that benefit commercial customers and have nothing to do with the provision of electric service to residential customers and the addition of a new wires charge from $6 to $25. This results in raising residential small user rates 42%.

Cyrus Reed, the Conservation Director of the Lone Star Chapter of Sierra Club said of this, “Austin Energy’ s recommended rate increase puts too much of a burden on low energy users working families and the residential sector in general with these proposed new high fixed costs  Instead AE should adopt new rates that are a fairer balance between industrial and residential, support it’s generation plan to encourage energy efficiency and conservation solar and moving away from continuing to rely on burning coal at its Fayette power plant.”

Austin Energy customers are encouraged to attend and participate in the meetings in any of three ways:

  • speak during citizen communications (3 minute limit) at any meeting
  • submit written questions or comments at any time via the rate review website
  • request an opportunity to provide formal comments or a presentation during EUC rate review meetings.

Comments or questions on the rate proposals or a request to make formal comments at an EUC meeting may be submitted directly via email to ratereview@austinenergy.com.

Read Full Post »

Heat Wave Renews Call for Renewable Energy

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , on August 11, 2011 |

At the height of the energy crisis last week, Public Citizen’s Texas director, Tom “Smitty” Smith, told the Austin Chronicle, “Austin Energy was one of the first cities in the United States to really aggressively try to do this kind of load management, and days like this show how effective it is in preventing blackouts,” Smith continued. “It’s working, and it’s demonstrably cheaper than burning coal or gas to make electricity.”

To read the story discussing weather crisis and energy in the Texas deregulated market, click here to go to the Austin Chronicle’s story.

Read Full Post »

Solar Si, Nuclear No!

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , on March 9, 2011 |

Citizens spoke at Austin City Hall to let city leaders know that purchasing more nuclear power is unacceptable.  NRG, the energy company that is the major owner of South Texas (Nuclear) Project,  is scrambling for investors in its proposed expansion of the plant, especially since a messy court battle with partner CPS Energy last year that ended with San Antonio reducing their 50% share down to just over 7%.  Reactor development had been costing San Antonio $30 million a month. After spending $370 million, CPS Energy sued NRG for $32 billion, accused NRG of fraud and conspiracy and spent $6.1 million on litigation to determine how get out of the partnership

NRG now wants Austin to buy into nuclear power through a power purchase agreement instead of direct investment.  (Click here to read our earlier post on the letter sent by NRG to Austin Energy.)  “Considering this messy history and the fact that reactor costs have tripled, why should Austin Energy even be talking about a nuclear deal with NRG?” asked Karen Hadden, Director of the SEED Coalition.  Watch the press conference video to see how other concerned citizens are responding to this new NRG tact.

[vimeo 20811734]

Solar Si, Nuclear No! Press Conference
Speakers, in order of appearance:
Karen Hadden, SEED Coalition
Frank Cooksey, Former Mayor of Austin
Susan Dancer, South Texas Association for Responsible Energy
Susana Almanza, PODER
Roy Waley, Vice Chair, Austin Regional Group of the Sierra Club”

The power purchase agreement would raise electric bills 20% or more and would cost $13 – $20 billion over the life of the reactors. These billions of dollars could do so much more if used for safe, clean renewable energy and efficiency projects..

Frank Cooksey, who was the Mayor of Austin from 1985-1988 when Austin was hemoraging money during the construction of the first two units at STP as cost overruns and construction delays caused the existing reactors to balloon to six times the original budget estimate and come online eight years late, said “I was serving during the time when those costs were placed into our electric utility rate base, resulting in large increases in the utility bills of our citizens. The angriest and most difficult public hearing that I ever presided over was the one that addressed the increases in electric rates generated by the high costs of construction of the STNP (South Texas Nuclear Project).”

Austin Energy has been a leader on energy efficiency and in developing solar projects, and other clean energy efforts that benefit our local economy.  The recently approved Austin Generation Plan, developed by a citizen task force with input from Austin Energy and approved by the City Council, builds on that legacy and did not include a power purchase agreement  with a nuclear project that Austin already decided was too risky to buy into as a partner.

Nuclear reactors would consume vast quantities of Colorado River water at a time when regional drought is expected to increase. No other form of power comes with such high security and terrorism risks and creating more radioactive waste adds to a problem that has not been solved.

Austin should steer clear of more nuclear power and pursue a safe and clean energy path.

Read Full Post »

Could Austin make another bad deal with STP

Posted in Energy, tagged , , , , , on February 6, 2011 |

STP ZombieOn January 25th, Juan Garza, President of Advanced Technology with NRG Energy, Inc. sent a letter to Austin Energy general manager, Larry Weis.  The contents of that letter are outlined below.

Two months ago, I informally delivered a proposal to you for Austin Energy and NRG Energy to explore a purchase power agreement from the South Texas Project Expansion. Today I am pleased to formally deliver to you a proposal for an internal framework for moving forward to explore the addition of more nuclear energy to Austin Energy’s baseload. The attached document outlines a series of transactions that NRG Energy believes could have significant value to Austin Energy. The components outlined in this proposal, while only a starting point to negotiations, showcase the potential for a nuclear power purchase agreement.

NRG recognizes that this is a particularly busy time for Austin Energy with a rate case, a power generation plan, an affordability matrix and a new business model all in play. We understand the responsibilities of the utility and believe that we can structure an offer that will help with each of the issues and aid in the fulfillment of your overall goals. We will work to ensure that the time demands on you and your staff are minimal as we move forward to evaluate a potential partnership.

We know that you are focused on reducing the city’s carbon footprint and keeping rates low and we believe we can develop an effective proposal to accomplish both of your goals. If NRG purchases Austin Energy’s stake in the Fayette Power Plant it would provide a significant influx of capital to the utility that could be used to significantly delay the need for a rate increase. Austin Energy could replace the coal–‐generated baseload provided by Fayette with carbon–‐free baseload from STP 3 and 4 through a power purchase agreement, thereby reducing the utility’s carbon footprint by 70 percent while ensuring affordable rates for a generation.

It is the intention of NRG that the points laid out in the attached document include opportunities to support Austin’s long–‐term goals, such as a partnership to develop solar, wind or offshore wind projects. NRG’s corporate focus is on diversification of energy sources that results in a portfolio that provides many options.

I look forward to engaging in this process on behalf of NRG. I hope that we can begin discussions as soon as possible and I will make myself available at your convenience. It is my hope that we can engage in an open discussion through a non–‐ binding MOU agreement about how NRG can best help Austin Energy reach its energy goals.

NRG Energy, Inc. Proposal to Austin Energy

The components outlined below are starting points for the negotiation of a nuclear power purchase agreement between NRG Energy, Inc. and Austin Energy. Once both parties enter into a non–‐binding MOU agreement along with appropriate Non–‐Disclosure/Confidentiality Agreements, these points can be discussed in further detail and adjusted to meet the needs of Austin Energy:

  1. NRG would acquire from Austin Energy it’s fifty percent (50%) undivided ownership interest in each of Units 1 and 2 at the Fayette Power Project for fair market value.
  2. NRG and Austin Energy would enter into an interim power purchase agreement (600MWs) for the purchase and sale of power generated by Units 1 and 2 at the South Texas Project at a fixed price.
  3. NINA and Austin Energy would enter into one or more long term purchase power agreements (for a total of 800MWs) and, together with the Interim PPA, for the purchase and sale of power generated by Units 3 and 4 at STP at a fixed price.
  4. Target closing date is June 30, 2011.
  5. Delivery point—source busbar.
  6. Partner with Austin Energy on a renewable project such as wind or solar.
  7. This proposal will only establish the framework for further good faith negotiations to be conducted among the parties to reach a definitive agreement without any intent to incur any liability or other obligation thereby. A binding agreement or contract will not be deemed to have been entered into by the parties with respect to this proposal unless and until definitive agreements having mutually satisfactory terms and conditions have been duly executed and delivered by each party.
  8. Each party will be liable for its respective costs, expenses, and fees incurred by it and its representatives in connection with the negotiation of a definitive agreement and any related documents.

 

Public Citizen believes this is a bad deal. 

The offer made by NRG to swap Austin’s share of the Fayette coal plants for a contract to buy nuclear power is like giving up smoking cigarettes and taking up smoking crack cocaine. Taking this deal will leave us broke, addicted and dependent on a dealer for our next fix of energy.

We’d loose control of the coal plant to NRG, which means Austin will not be able to reduce emissions from this plant when it threatens our air quality nor will we be able to reduce the damage to the climate.  

Austin has developed a long range generating plant that calls for meeting our energy needs with efficiency, renewables, and natural gas. This plant can be easily changed if the markets shift, while a long term deal with NRG can’t.

 There are 10 good reasons NOT to do this deal

  1. We’ll loose control of our energy future and be locked into a long term deal. 
  2. The cost of buying 800 MW of nuclear energy over the 40 year lifetime of this plant would exceed $20 billion.  The last time Austin bought into STNP, it wreaked havoc on the city’s bond rating.
  3. We could invest that money in energy generated in Austin, and create wealth locally. The people who will make money off this deal are from New Jersey and Japan.
  4. The cost of the proposed nuclear plant has tripled in the last three years while the cost of solar and other alternatives are dropping.
  5. The date this plant is expected to come on-line has been delayed 3 years already.
  6. These nuclear plants will built next to two existing nuclear plants – and if one were to have a leak or an explosion, we’d loose more than 1/3 of our power.
  7. The type of nuclear plant hasn’t been built in the US.
  8. If this plant is built the cooling water will reduce water levels Lake Travis and other Highland lakes.
  9. We’ve looked at buying into the plant twice before and rejected the deals twice.
  10. NRG has been sued for fraud by San Antonio because they weren’t honest about the costs of the deal that they had with them.  This has driven NRG to try something never done before in nuclear construction – finding buyers for the electricity before the concrete is even poured.

    11. 

If you are concerned about Austin pursuing such a deal, call the mayor and tell him about your concerns.

Read Full Post »

STP Outage extended – what will be the cost to Austin and San Antonio?

Posted in Energy, Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , on November 16, 2010 |

A couple of weeks ago an outage at South Texas (Nuclear) Project (STP) occurred when unit 2 automatically shutdown due to an “equipment failure”.  This outage triggered a reliability deployment of LaaRs (Load Acting as a Resource) event at ERCOT.  This shifting of load to cover an unexpected event can be quite expensive and the retail electric providers who purchase their electricity from STP will bear the brunt of that cost.

South Texas Nuclear Plant entrance from NRC.gov

One of these two reactors isn't working. And they call renewable energy unreliable!

South Texas Project has since announced it will extend its Unit 2 outage to repair a seal-housing gasket on a reactor coolant pump, which moves water through the steam generator.   The company has decided that, while the gasket’s condition is within operating criteria, STP will make the needed repairs, while they also continue to run unit 1.

A repair schedule is being finalized and restoration of the unit is projected to be completed sometime in November, but we here wonder if it won’t be even into December before it is repaired.

In the meantime, Austin Energy, which gets 27% of its energy from STP, and San Antonio’s CPS, which gets 38% of its energy from STP will be purchasing energy from other sources to make up for the loss from the STP outage.  Let’s hope we don’t have a major cold front come in before STP unit 2 is back online, or these energy companies could be looking at a lowered earnings projection for their final quarter.

This continues a banner few weeks for the nuke industry, who had to shut down Vermont Yankee because of a radioactive water leak and an unexplained transformer explosion at Indian Point 2, a reactor just 24 miles north of New York City, a known secondary target of terrorists on 9/11.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Related Articles

Read Full Post »

Austin poor spend much of their income on electricity

Posted in Efficiency, Energy, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on October 28, 2010 |

Seal of Travis County, Texas

Image via Wikipedia

Austin Energy hired a consultant to help determine how its rates compare to those of other utilities in preparation for its plan to substantially raise electricity rates in 2012.   The work is ongoing, but an eye-opening statistic has already emerged.  Estimates indicate that the average US household’s energy costs are equal to 7% of household income, but the study shows that on average, the poorest 5 percent of Travis County households spend about 45% of their incomes on electricity.

That is a staggering statistic and points out the need to provide more energy efficiency funding for low-income families.  The short and long term benefits are economic relief and cost-effective home improvements. While assistance relieves pressure on individual households, the benefits also ripple into the community. With less money spent on energy, more money is available for other goods and services. If this money is spent locally, Austin captures this revenue, with further benefits rippling out from there.

Keep in mind, most low-income households are renters.  There should be incentives put in place to encourage landlords to increase the energy efficiency of their properties.  And don’t forget, there are environmental benefits to reducing our energy usage.  This seems like a win win for our city.

Read Full Post »

STOP: Stop Tarsands Oil Pipelines – Voices From Texas Landowners

Posted in Energy, Global Warming, Tarsands, Toxics, tagged , , , , , , , on October 6, 2010 |

Meet Audrey and Jim Thornton, two of the landowners who have the threat of a Canadian tarsands pipeline proposed to run through their land. Tarsands crude is many times more concentrated with toxins and carcinogens than typical, Texas, crude oil. Like just about every other land-owner along the pipeline route, the Thorntons have been threatened with eminent domain if they do not sign a deal with TransCanada – the company building the pipeline.

Interview with the Thorntons:

Vimeo

[vimeo 15598888]

YouTube

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7_zU0Q6RCM]

Like most people, the Thorntons don’t think it is right that a foreign company can come into the United States (and Texas) and use the threat of eminent domain to force landowners into a contract. And, like many others, the Thorntons have quickly learned the vast extent of the negative impacts such a pipeline would have not only on folks like them, but the world in general.

Check out our previous posts on the Canadian Tar Sands Pipeline including this one.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Austin Energy offers consumers assistance with charging stations for their new EVs!

Posted in Air Quality, Consumers, Efficiency, Energy, Global Warming, Renewables, Transportation, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 6, 2010 |

The new Nissan LEAF, or (Leading Environmentally-friendly Affordable Family car), will be availible in the U.S. in 2011.

In the coming weeks you might notice a sleek, new Nissan LEAF or Chevy Volt cruising past you on the road. Many of the major car companies are introducing electric, plug-in vehicles (EVs) designed for the American family market. They range in cost from about $20,000-$45,000 and are small and practical. Not all EVs run completely from electricity, some are hybrids with electric-assisted engines, like a Toyota Prius. Others, like the Volt, are propelled exclusively by electricity, but include batteries and generators. These differences affect the amount of carbon emissions your car produces. All-electric vehicles, like the LEAF, have the potential to emit no carbon at all, from their own engines, or at the power plant where your electricity is generated. As Austinites, we can choose the green energy option from Austin Energy, in which 100% of the electricity we buy is generated from renewables.

Gas may still be necessary to run your EV, depending how it’s engine uses electricity, but the new EVs are becoming quite efficient at using minimal fuel. It’s important to consider that the majority of Austin’s air pollution comes from vehicles. Purchasing any EV is a step you can take to make a positive impact on our environment.

EVs can also make a positive impact on your wallet. An EV averages 100 miles per charge cycle in the city. Comparatively, this costs about $1 or less/gallon in terms of the gas you would have used in a conventional vehicle. As efficiency improves, these costs will also fall, while gas prices are always volatile. If you’re interested, please contact your dealership about buying an EV; they will be fully available in 2011.

What else do you need to know after purchasing an EV? Concerned consumers have contacted the Public Citizen office worried about potentially expensive charging stations. An EV powers up at a charging station that’s a higher voltage than your normal wall plug. It looks something like the plug for an electric washer/dryer. This unexpected expense can naturally cause worries right after purchasing a new car, but Austin Energy has a program to encourage consumers to buy EVs.

All you need to do is contact Austin Energy and let them know you’ve ordered an EV. They will come and provide assistance and incentives to install a charging station in your house. For more information about Austin’s Energy’s charging station incentive program please contact Larry Alford at larry.alford@austinenergy.com.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Smitty’s statement on former PEC/AE GM Juan Garza’s new nuclear job

Posted in Co-op Reform, Efficiency, Energy, Global Warming, Nuclear, Renewables, tagged , , , , , on September 21, 2010 |

Statement of Tom “Smitty” Smith:

We are shocked to hear the news that former Austin Energy and Pedernales Electric Cooperative General Manager Juan Garza has taken a job promoting nuclear power with New Jersey-based NRG Energy. While Garza rightfully acknowledges the danger climate change poses to Texas, nuclear power’s life cycle carbon footprint, exorbitant cost and extreme construction time belie the claim that nuclear is a solution to the climate crisis.

Numerous independent analyses warn that new nuclear reactors are too expensive, including consultants to the City of Austin who twice recommended the city pass on investment in the proposed South Texas Project units 3 and 4 due to high risk and cost. San Antonio’s CPS Energy has cut off investment in the project. Municipal utilities and electric cooperatives should take heed of the nuclear industry’s poor track record of delivering new reactors on time and on budget. The cost of these reactors has more than trebled in three years and when we built the first two units they were 6 times over budget and 8 years late. There are cheaper, cleaner, faster ways to meet new power needs in a carbon-constrained world.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Austin Energy and the EGRSO: EUC Chairman Schmandt weighs in

Posted in Energy, Global Warming, Good Government, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on September 13, 2010 |

For those in Austin who don’t know, the EGRSO (the Economic Growth and Redevelopment Services Office… I had to look it up too) gets a substantial portion of its funding from the municipally-owned utility Austin Energy. What does this office do? From its city website:

[The EGRSO] implements the City of Austin Economic Development Policy as directed by the Austin City Council.

Essentially, the office provides grants and loans of city funds or services in order to promote economic development. Among its awardees are Facebook, LegalZoom, Heliovolt, Friday Night Lights, and the Home Depot Austin Technology Center.

Recently, the Electric Utility Commission voted unanimously to cut AE’s funding of the EGRSO, citing the fact that AE faces tough budget choices inside its own walls. Commissioner Shudde Fath wrote in the Business Journal that AE can no longer be the city’s cash cow.

EUC Chairman Phillip Schmandt released a statement on the matter yesterday:

I applaud EGRSO and its programs.  There are many great ideas in EGROS’ $10 Million budget.

But not every great idea should be funded with government money.

And more to the point, not every great idea should be funded from utility bills paid by our hard working customers who are struggling to make ends meet every month. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Smitty: Austin and San Antonio took different paths when choosing new electric utility management

Posted in Consumers, Efficiency, Good Government, Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , on July 23, 2010 |

This is Andy checking in from Vegas and Netroots Nation: sheesh, we leave Texas for a few days and the wheels start to come off the bus, don’t they?  Of course, our fearless and tireless leader, Tom “Smitty” Smith is there to handle everything, as he has done for the last 2 and a half decades.

This ran in today’s Texas Energy Report, but want to give all of our Public Citizen Texas members and followers a taste if you’re not a subscriber to the Energy Report.

Tom Smitty Smith, Director of Public Citizen TexasSMITTY: TWO CITIES TOOK OPPOSITE PATHS IN SELECTING UTILITY GM

An Op-Ed by Public Citizen’s Tom “Smitty” Smith.

The recently announced new general managers for Austin and San Antonio couldn’t be more different, and may have huge economic repercussions for both cities.

Austin has chosen Larry Weis, a “green” general manager from Turlock, California, Irrigation District. San Antonio’s CPS Energy has chosen Doyle N. Beneby Jr., from Exelon Corp. While Mr. Weis opposes nuclear power due to its costs, Mr. Beneby comes from a utility that has the largest nuclear assets in the country.

The process that each city underwent in selecting their new managers stands in stark contrast with one another. Austin announced its finalists over a month ago and invited the public to question the candidates.

CPS kept its candidates secret. In light of this lack of information, I am left to wonder what San Antonio’s fate will be given the recent track record of Exelon. Could Mr. Beneby signal the re-nuclearization of San Antonio or does he represent a future of renewable energy and green power?

Although San Antonio is still reeling from the trebling of cost of expanding the South Texas Nuclear Project, the CPS board has chosen someone from Exelon, which has tried and failed to buy NRG Energy, CPS’s partner in the nuclear expansion project, while simultaneously trying to develop another nuclear plant near Victoria.

While Exelon does have a mix of fossil fuel, hydroelectric, solar, landfill gas and wind generation sources, it only amounts to a meager 7 percent of its generation assets. The other 93 percent is nuclear.

Since the public was not privy to the public utility’s selection process, we are left to speculate what Beneby ‘s plans are. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Austin Environmental and Consumer Advocates say “Try Again” to Austin Energy General Manager Candidate choices

Posted in Energy, Good Government, tagged , , , , , on July 1, 2010 |

After a several hour closed-door meeting between the two remaining candidates for Austin Energy’s General Manager position and some of Austin’s best environmental, energy, and consumer advocates, all of the groups represented came to the same conclusion: neither of these candidates was a right fit for Austin.

In fact, former City Councilwoman Brigid Shea told reporters that “Mr. Wright is wrong for Austin” and that they had hoped our nationwide search would produce “major league” candidates to fit with Austin’s leadership on energy and community issues.  “No offense, but these guys are more minor league.”

You can see the entire video here of their press conference, led by Public Citizen representative Cary Ferchill:

YouTube:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcXDk-fXEYk]

Vimeo:

[vimeo 13016093]

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas

Read Full Post »

Three Finalists for Austin Energy GM Announced!

Posted in Energy, Global Warming, green jobs, tagged , , , , , on June 17, 2010 |

From the Austin Business Journal:

The finalists include Ronald Davis, Larry Weis and David Wright.
  • Ronald Davis (Burbank, Calif.) Davis has worked 30 years in the electric industry and has led Burbank Water and Power for the last 12 years. Burbank Water and Power is a municipal utility in urban Southern California with a 2009 budget of $410 million and a peak electrical load of 308 megawatts. The company adopted a 33 percent renewable energy portfolio standard in 2007.
  • Larry Weis (Turlock, Calif.) Weis is the general manager and CEO for the Turlock Irrigation District, one of the 30 largest public power utilities in the U.S., which provides water and electricity to Central Valley California. He has 29 years of experience in the electric industry, including 20 years as a general manager. TID is currently supplying 28 percent of its annual energy requirements from renewable resources.
  • David Wright (Riverside, Calif.) Wright is the general manager for the City of Riverside’s public utilities. He’s worked in the sector for more than 22 years. The Riverside Public Utilities group serves more than 300,000 residents with an annual budget of more than $500 million. He is a Certified Public Accountant and former finance director for San Diego County Water Authority. He was also city controller for Riverside before taking joining Riverside’s public utility.

As the energy industry changes rapidly, this hiring decision is critical. We will look forward to hearing more about these candidates in the coming days.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »