Laserfiche WebLink
CITY NAN LEA D�0 <br />Government -controlled energy programs renwor g <br />JAN 2 8 019 <br />By Jim Phew /Riverside Press /Septemb f OFFICE <br />It's clear government -controlled energy, or Community Choice Aggregation, is not <br />delivering on its promises to provide greener and cheaper energy. CCAs are not <br />delivering on the fundamental need of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. <br />So why are we seeing more CCAs, aka Community Choice Energy, surface in California? <br />Why is the San Diego City Council considering forming what would be one of the largest <br />government -controlled energy programs in the state? And just who is behind this <br />scheme? <br />As San Diego's former mayor, Jerry Sanders, pointed out recently, government -controlled <br />energy programs are surfacing because cities are being forced to try and implement their <br />own Climate Action Plans. But CCAs fall well short of achieving the goal of these plans: <br />100 percent renewable energy. <br />More importantly, unless additional renewable energy resources are constructed, <br />California achieves no reduction in GHG emissions, only the appearance of such. <br />Marketing cannot change that reality. <br />The extreme environmentalists who lobbied for climate action plans are now pushing <br />CCAs onto cities, but they are not bankrolling the operations. If you follow the money it <br />leads to out-of-state oil and energy wholesalers, including Calpine and Shell, who are <br />helping to fund California's CCA movement. Shell was involved in gaming California's <br />electric market, along with Enron, 18 years ago. These wholesalers want a piece of the <br />Golden State's energy market and they're using CCAs as a Trojan horse to fatten their <br />bottom line. <br />Ultimately, the taxpayers are on the hook if these government -run <br />energy programs fail. <br />CCA's legal construct, a joint powers authority or JPA, claims to shield cities and <br />taxpayers from risk, but that's not the whole story. JPA agreement contracts contain <br />hooks that tie municipalities to the CCA. This assures energy wholesalers' profits while <br />ultimately leaving taxpayers holding the bag. <br />For example, California's first CCA (Marin Clean Energy) is creditworthy only because <br />taxpayers are on the hook if things go badly. <br />That's not according to me. That's according to Moody's: "The rating agency said that a <br />major rating consideration is Marin Clean Energy's key governing documents including <br />