Energy Commission Stands By Tesla, Ducks Public on CPR Debate

The California Energy Commission at its August 11 meeting refused to reconsider its approval of the Tesla power project, agreed to fund peak reduction measures, and later adjourned to a room that excluded the public from Webcasts and phone access to discuss the controversial California Performance Review (CPR). The sweeping CPR proposals submitted to the governor last week called for the commission to be folded into a newly created Energy Division within the state Infrastructure Department ( Circuit , August 6, 2004). Chris Davis, CEC spokesperson, said he did not know why access to the CPR session was limited. He said the move to a room without dial-up access was ?not meant to shut anybody out,? and a few members of the public were present. He added that the discussion focused on the commission?s need to present by August 13 an analysis of fiscal and other impacts of the proposals. Before moving to the closed room, the commission unanimously rejected a request to reconsider its approval in June of Florida Power & Light?s 1,220 MW Tesla Power Project. Concerns of plant critics have focused largely on an increase in windblown pollution in the San Joaquin Valley. A request to conduct a study of projected cumulative air-quality impacts of energy projects in the region in conjunction with Tesla was rejected on a 5-0 vote. The commission maintained that it has already conducted studies of cumulative impacts. Commissioner Jim Boyd said there is a need to work on the local level ?to better address cumulative impacts? of projects, but the CEC citing process is not the correct forum. ?These issues have been ignored for a long time,? he added. The commission endorsed ?in concept? the policy statement by Mike Peevey, California Public Utilities Commission president, endorsing a direct-access market for noncore customers. The CEC?s move came after commissioner Jackie Pfannensteil said she backed Peevey?s plan in theory but doesn?t feel ?close enough to it? to adopt specific recommendations. The proposal includes calling for a two-year notice period before customers switch to direct access to nonutility providers. Also at the meeting, $380,000 was approved to support state-mandated plans aiming to reduce peak energy consumption in existing residential and commercial buildings. ?Our performance in this area hasn?t lived up to the rhetoric and accomplishments in other areas of energy efficiency,? said commissioner John Geesman, referring to building retrofits.

Over 11K Stories!

| Independently Powered Energy News

Energy Commission Stands By Tesla, Ducks Public on CPR Debate

vdharadmin

Related Posts

PacifiCorp to Join ISO’s Proposed Expanded Day Ahead Market, Adding Regional Grid Momentum

Daily Energy Costs $100M in September

FERC Okays Utility Cybersecurity Incentives, Applauds CAISO for Avoiding Blackouts

State Should Accelerate Green Power, Says CEC Report