With the backing of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger the California Public Utilities Commission has created a global warming think tank named the California Institute for Climate Solutions.

The Institute will be funded to the tune of $600 million which will come from a surcharge that one California utility estimated would add 12 cents per month to the average bill but PUC commission chairman Michael Peevey said would be more like 25 to 30 cents per month. The surcharge is not being evenly applied since it only affects the four utilities that commission oversees ,Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Co., Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric but not any government owned utilities from which some Californians receive power or water services.

Support for the project came from environmental groups that hope to receive a chunk of the Institute’s money and those that believe that greenhouse gas emissions are a threat to the state.  Opposition however was unusually strong and was led by consumer groups who questioned why a commission that was supposed to ensure that ratepayers were provided with affordable energy was sticking it to consumers for something that will be more academic in nature and of questionable benefit to them.

The Institute will collect roughly $60 million per year for ten years from consumers and is supposed to eventually find matching funds. This is unlikely to happen in my view since as time goes on many consumers will have forgotten about the surcharge and the PUC will probably keep it in place to keep funding the project  for eternity.  After all how many times has anyone seen a surcharge actually removed when it met its stated purpose?  We are talking about the government here.

According to the Los Angeles Times State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) back in February, he made it clear that he didn’t approve of the surcharge.

“I think it’s a singularly bad idea,” Perata told utilities commissioner Timothy Alan Simon during his confirmation hearing. “I don’t know if there’s anything that we can do about it during the budget, but if we can, I assure you I will.”

Why did the commission decide to hit the ratepayers? Peevey told the Times that because power companies account for one-third of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions and that the state Legislature isn’t likely to set aside funds for the institute while it faces a gaping budget deficit, he said.

“The imperative is so great . . . and we don’t have the luxury of waiting,” Peevey said. “That’s the bottom line.”

Yes the world will end if we don’t act know.  Do I hear Chicken Little?

If Peevey is so concerned about greenhouse gas emissions and if he wants to find alternative power sources that are clean, then why doesn’t he fund the development of nuclear power in the state.  It’s cheap and it’s clean. 

Oh yeah, I forgot its California.

 

Share This

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

About the author

4 Comments for Global Warming Think Tank Sticks It To Californians