Apr. 25th, 2009

webfarmer: (Default)
A lack of candor? From a nuclear utility? :)

CWIP Bill Died From A Lack of Candor - STLToday.com - 26 Apr 09

". . . on April 15, key advocacy groups, including those representing large industrial customers, told AmerenUE they would support CWIP repeal as long as consumer protections stayed in place. Other groups offered similar deals so that the utility could begin recovering its costs immediately. AmerenUE turned those offers down flat.

From the beginning, the new nuke plant was a long shot. Company President Tom Voss told legislators in February that even if AmerenUE got everything it asked for, the chance of building Callaway II was only about 25 percent. What the utility was asking for went way beyond CWIP.

SB 228 would have limited the ability of state regulators to 'disallow' — exclude from electric rates — wasteful spending during plant construction. Mr. Voss referred to that as 'regulatory certainty.' Ratepayers would have called it a very big bump in their bills.

History is instructive. After the first Callaway plant was completed, the Missouri Public Service Commission disallowed $384 million in construction costs. That amounted to about 54 percent of what the company wanted to include in rate hikes."

". . . the debate on SB 228 was marked by misleading claims and fuzzy math — and by AmerenUE's refusal to release important information to support its key assertion: That repealing CWIP would save ratepayers more than any other alternative. Utility experts for the state questioned that claim.

When opponents of SB 228 raised legitimate concerns, AmerenUE refused to address them. When consumer advocates offered compromises, the utility remained intransigent. That kind of behavior may — may — work in some corporate boardrooms, but not in a democracy."
webfarmer: (Default)
A lack of candor? From a nuclear utility? :)

CWIP Bill Died From A Lack of Candor - STLToday.com - 26 Apr 09

". . . on April 15, key advocacy groups, including those representing large industrial customers, told AmerenUE they would support CWIP repeal as long as consumer protections stayed in place. Other groups offered similar deals so that the utility could begin recovering its costs immediately. AmerenUE turned those offers down flat.

From the beginning, the new nuke plant was a long shot. Company President Tom Voss told legislators in February that even if AmerenUE got everything it asked for, the chance of building Callaway II was only about 25 percent. What the utility was asking for went way beyond CWIP.

SB 228 would have limited the ability of state regulators to 'disallow' — exclude from electric rates — wasteful spending during plant construction. Mr. Voss referred to that as 'regulatory certainty.' Ratepayers would have called it a very big bump in their bills.

History is instructive. After the first Callaway plant was completed, the Missouri Public Service Commission disallowed $384 million in construction costs. That amounted to about 54 percent of what the company wanted to include in rate hikes."

". . . the debate on SB 228 was marked by misleading claims and fuzzy math — and by AmerenUE's refusal to release important information to support its key assertion: That repealing CWIP would save ratepayers more than any other alternative. Utility experts for the state questioned that claim.

When opponents of SB 228 raised legitimate concerns, AmerenUE refused to address them. When consumer advocates offered compromises, the utility remained intransigent. That kind of behavior may — may — work in some corporate boardrooms, but not in a democracy."

Profile

webfarmer: (Default)
webfarmer

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 24th, 2017 03:43 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios