We applaud Governor Quinn's veto of ratepayer bailouts for two risky, dirty coal plants. Governor Quinn has long been a champion for clean energy and for consumers, and the special interest legislation for Leucadia and Power Holdings were bad for both.
Regarding the Power Holdings legislation (SB 1927), Quinn said:
As we lead the way out of this historic recession, we must always be mindful of the effect our policies will have on the people of Illinois. Not only must new projects and policies be designed to improve our environment and expand our economy, they must also distribute burdens more proportionally among residential users and businesses and provide greater protections against cost overruns and higher energy prices. Unfortunately, the bill before me today falls short of these goals.
And regarding the Leucadia proposal (SB 3388), Quinn said:
Our priorities must be economic growth, consumer protection, environmental quality and a comprehensive approach to energy generation and efficiency. The bill before me today does not fully achieve these goals. This bill exposes citizens throughout Illinois to the long-term risks of fluctuating energy prices. To ensure greater consumer protection, consumers should be given full priority to access any reserve account and a more substantial financial commitment to the account should be made. By requiring utilities to enter substantially equal sourcing agreements, this bill also places the burden of higher energy costs on a small group of residential consumers.
Inadequate consumer protections and high energy costs will not create jobs in Illinois. Until I am satisfied that consumers are protected, burdens are shared, and jobs are created, I will not affix my signature to this bill.
There will be no easy answer that solves all our energy needs. The energy of the past must be developed cleaner and more efficiently, while we invest in the energy of the future.
Trying to turn coal into natural gas will raise heating bills and cause more air pollution - it just doesn't make sense. Illinois ratepayers can thank Governor Quinn for saving them from a big rate hike to bail out these two plants.
We expect these two coal plants to keep pushing for ratepayers to pay more to bail out their risky projects. We call on legislators to say no - especially in these economic times, we should focus on clean energy job creation strategies that have proven to work. We've created over 10,000 jobs in clean energy in recent years by encouraging competition (rather than special deals for individual companies), betting on proven technology like wind and solar, and protecting consumers. Thank you, Governor Quinn, for staying that course - it's clearly the best for our economy and our future.
We applaud Gov. Quinn's nomination of Illinois EPA Director Doug Scott as Chairman of the Illinois Commerce Commission. Illinois' air and water are cleaner today because of Doug Scott's work at IEPA, and he has been a champion for cleaner energy sources. His work on clean energy will be very important at the ICC, which can play an important role in helping Illinois save energy and moving to a cleaner energy future.
We are very disappointed that the Illinois Senate did not act to confirm Acting ICC Chairman Manuel Flores. Although the ICC did not act on Gov. Quinn's nomination of Flores for a full year, Flores made the most of his time at the ICC, where he fought to protect consumers and the environment. Flores fought to cut utility bills through energy conservation, showed the public the exorbitant costs of the proposed Taylorville coal plant, and was taking steps to make sure Illinois is ready for electric cars. If Flores' work for the public interest made him a target of powerful utilities, and cost him his job, then that is a shame. We call on the Senate to move quickly to confirm Doug Scott so he can get to work for the public with the full confidence that Illinois' leaders stand behind him.
Doug Scott leaves big shoes to fill at Illinois EPA. We may not have always agreed with every decision IEPA made during Scott's tenure, but he has always been fair, accessible, and committed to the public interest. We hope Governor Quinn will quickly nominate a new IEPA Director with a similarly strong commitment to protecting our land, air, and water, and moving Illinois to a cleaner energy future.
To hear the coal lobbyists in Springfield tell it, creating energy jobs in Illinois has to mean higher electric and gas bills, more pollution, and sweetheart deals for specific companies.
Meanwhile, in the real world, there's more good news about how our renewable energy goals are bringing good jobs to Illinois, without all the risk and costs of the Tenaska, Leucadia, or Power Holdings bills.
Illinois' commitment to wind is bringing 600 new jobs to Pike County this year - with more to come:
PITTSFIELD, Ill. -- A St. Louis wind energy company plans to develop a 150-megawatt wind farm in Pike County west of Pittsfield, with the total cost of the project expected to be between $250 million and $300 million. Trey Goede, CEO of Affinity Wind, confirmed that his company is planning a 36-megawatt wind farm, which could become operational in the fourth quarter of this year, and a 114-megawatt expansion in 2012. The company plans to construct 75 2-megawatt wind turbines. Affinity announced last week that it closed a joint venture agreement with Chicago-based Suzlon Wind Energy Corp., a subsidiary of Indian-based Suzlon Energy Limited. The two companies will develop the wind farm under the venture called Surity Wind, LLC. ....
Affinity Wind estimated that more than $44 million would be spent locally during construction and $3 million annually once completed, with approximately 600 jobs created. More than $1 million in property taxes would be generated along with lease payments toward landowners. Goede said his idea has been received well in Pike County. "We have had landowners committed from day one, and they have provided their allegiance to the project and partnership to the project very early on," he said. "We are adding more landowners as we speak."
Of course, these jobs aren't the result of a special interest "Affinity bill", or "Suzlon bill". They are the result of our Renewable Portfolio Standard, which, unlike the Tenaska, Leucadia, and Power Holdings bills, keeps utility bills low, invites competition, and invests in proven technology.
Clearly, the fastest, cheapest, cleanest way to create clean energy jobs for Illinois is to stay the course, and continue to prioritize renewables and energy conservation.
With the race to be Chicago's next mayor heating up, one major issue that has been a hallmark of Mayor Richard Daley's time in office has received little attention so far - what is to become of Mayor Daley's goal of being the greenest city in America, if not the world, after he steps down in May.
Daley's passion for the environment is well known, and has brought major changes that will benefit Chicagoans for generations to come. His efforts have reached far beyond median planters and other beautification efforts - the changes you don't see every day have been less visible, but much more significant. Across city government, public servants have been tasked with being smarter about how they use energy, and cutting the waste they create. Building codes and permitting processes have led the private sector to change how they build homes and businesses in Chicago.
Chicago's leadership has been important beyond our city or state boundaries. During the Bush Administration, when national action to confront climate change or move to cleaner energy wasn't even seriously discussed, Daley was an early leader in a nationwide movement of mayors who pledged not to wait for a change in Washington to fight global warming. Chicago and other "cool cities" started showing America what fighting climate change looked like, and it looked like cleaner air, reduced government costs, better, smarter buildings, and many more bright ideas.
Daley's vision for greening Chicago has been revolutionary, but it has not yet been fully realized. Chicago is still home to two very old coal-fired power plants without modern pollution controls. Most Chicagoans don't have access to convenient, weekly recycling service. The Chicago River is much cleaner, but still suffers from outdated sewage treatment practices. The artificial connection between Lake Michigan and the Des Plaines/Illinois River has been great for sending Chicago's sewage southwest to Peoria, St. Louis, and the Gulf of Mexico, but it has opened the door to Great Lakes invasive species. Our park system is wonderful, but more than ever our kids need access to safe, healthy, outdoor experiences in their neighborhoods.
Whether Chicago meets these challenges, and reaps the health and job creation benefits of doing so, depends in large part on its next mayor, and whether he or she brings passion and commitment to doing so. That's why Sierra Club and other Chicago environmental organizations have prepared a platform of the major issues facing the next mayor.
Sierra Club is actively meeting candidates for Mayor and City Council, identifying those who have the ideas and commitment to make Chicago the greenest city on the planet. Soon we will announce our endorsements of the candidates we recommend to all the Chicagoans who want the "city that works" to be the city that leads America and the world to a smarter, cleaner future.
As the clock winds down on the lame duck Illinois General Assembly, two out-of-state coal companies are asking to put Illinois ratepayers and businesses on the hook for a bailout of their risky, incredibly expensive projects. The two companies, Tenaska and Leucadia, each have custom-drafted bills they are pressuring the Illinois Senate to approve this week, hoping that Springfield won't look at them like the private market has - like overpriced, risky experiments not worth the gamble.
Both Tenaska and Leucadia offer something Illinois already has in abundance - electricity and natural gas. We already generate more electricity than we consume, so we export power out of state (keeping the nuclear waste and most of the pollution here.) Not only do we not need their product, but they want us to pay at least double the market price for it. Why are we even considering this proposition? Hey, remember, this is Springfield.
Tenaska is looking for money to build their coal plant in Taylorville, southwest of Springfield. Tenaska would finance their project by socking it to the state's largest electric customers - stores, businesses, local governments, hospitals, colleges, and others. For example, CTA riders, University of Illinois students, hospital patients, and local taxpayers would all be asked to pay more. On our electric bill at home, we'll also be chipping in an annual 2% increase to add to the subsidy.
Leucadia wants to build a plant to turn coal and hazardous oil refinery waste into the natural gas we use to heat our homes. Unlike Tenaska, Leucadia proposes to protect businesses from their rate hike, turning to homes and apartments to bear their costs. Some gas bills would go up over $100 per year.
Neither Tenaska or Leucadia have gotten their permits from the Illinois EPA. Neither has a plan in place to deal with the millions of tons of global warming pollution they will add to the air. Those are details they say they'll work out after we're all on the hook - for 30 years.
Proponents say all this cost and all this risk is the price we pay to see whether coal can ever be "clean." (No claims are made that future coal mining will be "clean", or in any way different from the practices that are destroying Illinois farmland and degrading water supplies.) For those who want to see Illinois experiment with coal gasification, the recent growth of Illinois' renewable energy sector is a better model. In jumpstarting our wind and solar industries, the legislature included some key safeguards. First, consumers are protected by a rate impact cap, which ensures that renewable technologies are developed aggressively without price impacts. Second, our renewable energy goals are met by an annual competitive bidding process, encouraging innovation and price competition in the market. Finally, our clean energy laws rely on proven technologies like wind, solar, and geothermal energy, and energy conservation - all ready to deploy without environmental risk.
Those smart safeguards for deploying new energy technologies have already created over 10,000 new jobs in Illinois, and more are in the pipeline. The Tenaska and Leucadia proposals ignore, and contradict, all of those principles. Instead of protecting against rate hikes, increases for every customer in the state, large and small, are hard wired into the two proposals. Instead of encouraging competition to meet a policy goal, these are truly special interest pieces of legislation - they're referred to around the Statehouse as the "Tenaska" and "Leucadia" bills for a reason. When politicians name winners in the marketplace, trouble often ensues. And rather than deploying proven technology, each of these projects are highly speculative, with the greatest uncertainties about whether or how they will deal with the millions of tons of new global warming pollution they will produce each year.
In recent years, the Illinois Senate has been getting a lot right in moving to a clean energy future. This week we'll see if they keep to a path that creates good jobs while protecting ratepayers, or whether they capitulate to big coal's feeding frenzy.
With state legislators in Springfield for a lame-duck veto session, two large corporations are making a power play for longterm, sweetheart deals that would bail out two risky projects that appear to be floundering due to their staggering cost and the massive increases in pollution they would create.
The out-of-state companies are seeking billions of dollars in subsidies from Illinois businesses and residential ratepayers. Each company is lobbying the lame-duck session for its own version of special interest legislation, althought the two proposals share a common principle - forcing Illinoisans to buy their product at far higher than market prices, at the same time increasing air pollution.
The Illinois House approved both bills Tuesday, and today they move to the Illinois Senate:
SB 2485 - Tenaska's $9 Billion Rate Hike Request
· This bill would force all Illinois electricity consumers to pay at least $286 million more for electricity annually.
· A wind farm the size of the Taylorville Energy Center would create up to 7500 job years in installation and manufacturing - at substantially lower cost. Source: Wind Manufacturing Supply Chain Report (2010— ELPC)
· While Tenaska claims they will be capturing a portion of their global warming pollution, this number is not reflecting their entire carbon footprint. (A significant portion of the CO2 will not be captured, but emitted by Tenaska’s customers.)
SB3388 - Ratepayer Subsidies For Leucadia's Dirty Gas:
· Getting natural gas from coal and hazardous refinery waste is far dirtier than the natural gas we use to heat our homes.
· Gas customers should not be locked in to buying gas for 30 years from a company that has not even applied for an IEPA permit.
· Leucadia claims they will capture 85% of their global warming pollution but this is only a portion of the total CO2 they will emit. A significant portion of the CO2 will not be captured, but emitted when Leucadia’s customers burn the gas.
Let's hope the Senate doesn't railroad these bailouts through - contact your State Senator today and urge them to vote no on bailouts for Tenaska and Leucadia.
As the results of Tuesday's election become final, it is clear that Illinois voters are not at all angry about at least one aspect of Illinois government - the major changes we've made in our energy policies in recent years to prioritize renewable energy like wind and solar power, and to get serious about energy conservation. Starting in 2007, Illinois enacted a series of major clean energy laws that have already created 10,000 new jobs in renewable energy, with thousands more on the way in the years ahead. Our gas and electric utilities are launching major new conservation programs to help homes and businesses cut costs and pollution by reducing energy use, and by 2025, 25% of our electricity must come from renewable sources.
Illinois voters rewarded the key leaders in making these changes with victories this week, and also elected some exciting fresh faces who prioritized clean energy in their campaigns, and who are poised to bring new energy to Springfield. There were stark differences between the candidates on energy policy, and there was great risk that the plug would be pulled on Illinois' transition to a clean energy economy. Here's a brief rundown on some of the key races with major implications for Illinois energy policy:
-Governor Pat Quinn's victory over State Senator Bill Brady is hugely important to maintaining momentum for clean energy in Illinois and in the country. Quinn has made growing Illinois' clean energy a top priority, from implementing our renewable energy standard to maximize Illinois job creation, supporting key legislative actions, budgeting capital construction dollars for energy-efficient construction, switching the state capitol complex from coal to wind power, and appointing clean energy advocate Manny Flores to the Chair the Illinois Commerce Commission. Brady, on the other hand, was one of 13 State Senators to oppose Illinois' landmark clean energy law in 2007, and also opposed energy efficient building codes for new construction and funding for high-speed rail improvements. Brady also doesn't "accept the premise" that pollution is causing climate change, and voted to bar the state from taking any action to regulate global warming pollution. Sierra Club, organized labor, and local government leaders warned before the election that Brady threatened to short-circuit our clean energy economy. Sierra Club made 42,384 mail, 13,653 email, and 7,208 volunteer phone contacts to its members to educate them about the energy issues in the race and urge them to vote.
-In the Illinois Senate, four candidates highlighted their support for clean energy policies in their television advertising and campaign messages. Three of them won, including Michael Noland (D-Elgin), lead Senate sponsor of a new state law to jumpstart the Illinois solar energy industry. Noland appears to have defeated former State Sen. Steve Rauschenberger, who preceeded Noland in the Senate, in the era when subsidizing coal and nuclear power constituted Illinois' energy policy. Toi Hutchinson (D- Chicago Heights) also featured her support for renewable energy jobs in her campaign, and beat back a spirited challenge from tea party candidate Adam Baumgartner. Hutchinson is excited to get back to work on clean energy in Springfield. John Mulroe (D-Chicago) won a hotly contested race on Chicago's west side and near west suburbs, and sees new energy technologies as a key job creator for our state. Sierra Club sent full-time organizers to the Noland, Hutchinson, and Mulroe campaigns to educate Sierra Club members and swing voters about the choices for clean energy in these races. In these three battleground disricts, Sierra Club made 11,204 mail contacts, 2,940 live calls, and knocked on 1,914 doors to get these messages out. Unfortunately, Michael Bond (D-Grayslake), sponsor of Illinois' net metering law that allows homeowners and small businesses who install renewable energy systems to sell excess power back to the grid, was narrowly defeated by Lake Count Board chair Suzi Schmidt (R- Lake Villa). Schmidt did not run against clean energy policies, and in fact has, in the past, worked to protect open space in Lake County.
-In the Illinois House, suburban battleground seats were generally won by candidates who support clean energy and reduce global warming pollution. Incumbents who support clean energy like Fred Crespo (D-Streamwood), who passed legislation enabling local school district to team up to invest in wind power, Sara Feigenholtz (D-Chicago), who passed legislation to help condo owners install solar panels, and Karen May (D-Highland Park), Chair of the House Renewable Energy Committee, all beat back spirited challenges, as did Carol Sente (D-Vernon Hills), Keith Farnham (D-Elgin), Emily McAsey (D-Lockport), Mike Fortner (R-West Chicago), and Elaine Nekritz (D-Northfield). Several fresh faces will also bring a focus on environmental protection to the Illinois House, including Ann Williams (D-Chicago), Daniel Biss (D-Skokie), Michelle Mussman (D-Hoffman Estates), and Chris Nybo (R-Elmhurst.) In these races, Sierra Club contacted 9,104 swing voters and Sierra Club members.
-Attorney General Lisa Madigan, a key player in Illinois energy policy, cruised to re-election, and she will return as a strong advocate for the environment and clean energy.
Obviously, the success of these clean energy candidates for state office stands in stark contrast to the races for federal offices in Illinois, where clearly, larger forces contributed to the defeat of incumbents Debbie Halvorson (D-Crete), Bill Foster (D-Batavia), Phil Hare (D-Rock Island), and, apparently, Melissa Bean (D-Barrington). State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, who made clean energy a priority in his campaign, narrowly lost to Mark Kirk (R-Wilmette), who previously supported clean energy and climate legislation, but has most recently pledged to oppose limits on global warming pollution.
With little expected from the next Congress in the way of clean energy, states like Illinois may be nationally significant in advancing clean energy technologies and businesses. We've come a long way in recent years toward those goals, and Tuesday's election results are an indication that voters want that progress to continue.
