Archives

Some states offer a choice of electric providers. Pretty sure that regardless, power is coming from the same power plant, but hoping if customers switch to non fossil fuel sources, it would influence the generators built. I hope so - Texas is planning to build 17 conventional coal plants (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6110191). :( This is the defense from the Govenor (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-perry_17edi.ART.State.Edition1.3e8db17.html).

A website lists my current provider at the top, followed by my choices (http://www.powertochoose.com/electricchoice/compareresults.asp?zip=75067). I am considering going with Green Mountain Energy Company with a 12-month commitment to save 3%. A little surfing revealed some envirnomental groups claim Green Mountain is not all that green. I'll research this some more to see if switching makes a difference. I'd switch if they are not 100% green, but possibly reducing the demand for coal plants.

There is a lot I don't know at this point...

It's tough getting clean power -- of course the first reccomendation is to conserve (Energy-Star bulbs, A/C use, etc.).

Next, I would research who's the lesser expensive and see what their primary sources of power are from. I believe Natural Gas energy production facilities are the cleanest mass-market types.

EPA Link to Green Energy Sources (http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/locator/index.htm)

It looks like Reliant has a wind farm in Texas.

Then, if you can, buy into green credits somewhere off-grid, which is listed in the link above. Research the organization, of course, before investing.

RH77

Almost forgot...

It looks like TerraPass is a CMPG affilate at the top of the page :o

RH77

This is one of those mornings that got busy, but I intend to catch up and find out more.

I'm going to try to be brief and restrained, but I'd suprize a number of people if they knew what I was going thru as a result of Texas politics. To give you an idea, a number of the politicians in Austin are positioning themselves to the right of their ex-govenor GWB, leaving me to wonder why I guy like me that voted for Ronald Reagain is a "Republican In Name Only". :( :confused:

Anyway, Dallas has 20 ozone days a year, but 17 conventional coal plants will double the greenhouse gases emitted in Texas and increase the ozone days in Dallas, Houston, other places.

Hi Chuck:

___What did you finally do?

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I talked with the green guy at the gym and he uses Green Mountain for his provider.

Leaning strongly towards making the switch.

My local power company is starting to offer a "green choice" thing,
purchasable in $3 per 100 KWh increments per month. I've started
the process of asking them for a complete dump on where the money
goes; I expect that to be a long, painful process if I get anywhere
with it at all.
.
_H*

I use Green Moutain due to the fact that there is - to my knowledge - no " lesser of two evils " when it comes to power plant politics. They're all evil in some way.

( Aint I a stinker. )

I chose Greem Mountains' " 100% Wind plan", and just pretty much threw up my hands at doing anything more ( I live in an apartment .... so no solar option here. )
Supposedly the 100% wind plan does away with using biomass.

Whoever you choose, ask if they have a plan with 100% wind.

I'm in Texas too ( near Houston ) and used to live in Dallas.

I recently wrote to my state senator (Pat Jehlen) in Massachusetts about various energy related things. The relevant part of her response is

Sen. Morrissey's bill, An Act Requiring Retail Access to Competitive
Providers of Renewable Energy Generation Attributes, would require
utility companies to provide a green power customer choice program.
Some utility companies do currently offer green power programs to their
customers. The option requires that the customer pay an additional fee
for the renewable power.

So this should be available in Massachusetts sometime soon. I haven't looked at the details of the bill, so I'm not sure how they define green power. It will probably use the current definition, which I think includes wind, solar, biomass, and possibly burning garbage.

I would switch, but FP&L is the only provider here in Florida. In addition, they are currently building a coal plant the next county over, and a natural gas power plant on a tiny patch of protected everglades then building a pipeline directly through the preserve. It's really disgusting. FP&L doesn't give a **** about the environment or what their customers want because they have a monopoly. They provide whatever is the cheapest and their stock has doubled in the last year. Right now my power comes primarily from natural gas with a little bit of garbage power, but once this new coal plant goes up, I'll have alot of coal in my grid. They do offer a "green" option, but it isn't that green and is just another money making scheme that they devised. For an extra $0 per month, they'll supposedly "free-up" (ie- they're creating the power but not putting it into the grid) 1 kw of green energy either through biomass, solar or wind. I'm paying for this service, but I have no doubt in my mind that they're intentionally keeping this from the public and refusing to build more solar plants and wind farms. Otherwise, why would they want to build a coal plant in the everglades?

Looks like you can't go wrong as GMEC is cheaper and cleaner.

I pay $15 a month plus $0.07 a KWH. Your energy is nearly twice that! I almost wish mine was more so that greener options were more cost effective by comparison...

In response to the original post by Delta Flyer about the new coal fired power plants being built in Texas, I saw this one from Environmental Defense and a story in the NY Times. Sounds like a cool deal to me.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/26/business/26coal.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Every little step helps!

Hi Raguru:

___Just picked up a hit on the same from CNN/Money a few minutes ago also.

Record buyout for TXU.

Texas utility agrees to deal valued at record $45 billion with debt; agrees to scrap permits for 8 planned coal power plants. (http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/26/news/companies/txu/index.htm?postversion=2007022609)

The buyers moved to quiet potential critics of the deal right off the bat by agreeing to scrap plans for eight of 11 controversial coal-fired power plants that TXU had sought.
___Now I want to know what they will replace those 8 with?

___Good Luck

___Wayne

This is a suprizing development on shelfing the coal plants.

One thing I don't understand about TXU - utilities in Texas charge more than other states, so why can't they make a profit?

Before I get a little personal and winded, Texas leads the nation on new toll road construction. Coupled with being historically one of the leanest spending states even before the GOP took control in 2000, the attempt to put new coal plants on the fast track is not suprizing.

I generally refrain from these discussions, but I've really been displeased with Texas politics sine 2000. Ironically that's when GWB left to become President and Republicans had a majority in Austin for the first time since Reconstruction. One of only eight states without an income tax, Texas went from surplus in 2000 (boom) to 10 billion in the red in 2002 (recession). Instead of being honest and acknowledging 2002 was a hard year economically, the GOP was on a witch hunt to blame for the deficit. Politicians were contesting to be the baddest budget hawk. The six month session was the hardest - nobody could agree where the "fat" was. There was not that much waste. Politicians in Texas are afraid of suggesting a state income tax as it would drive away business and be political sucide.

Anyway, the 2002 session, clearly more conservative than any when GWB was Govenor agreed on a budget to address the 10 billion shortfall. All that needed to be done to get the approval of the State Comtroller. Well, "Grandmaw" Carol Strayhorn turned it down for the 1st time in the Texas history, forcing a special session over a $186 million "rainy day" fund. She had been denouncing the most conservative session in Texas ever as "Republicans in Name Only" - in the special session, they removed her power to repeat this. She would run for governor in 2006 as an independent attempting to court Democrats after doing this. She ran on education, yet tried to shut my workplace down. My employer supports local education districts and gets nearly all their revenues from them, even though it's a state institution. The review under the Sunset Law quickly concluded we are more effective/less expensive than using contractors or private enterprise. My workplace is trying very hard to keep districts from leaving us - not because we overcharge or underdeliver, but because of what Austin might do. Every general election since 1976 I've voted GOP, yet in 2002, my workplace was mislabeled "the problem" and thrown under the bus.

Some of this is just politicians looking out for themselves - does not matter which party they belong to as long as they appear to be doing something. The general public will assume shutting down instutions is a good thing...until well after it's done and the band aids cost more and do less. The conservative Govenor that signed off on putting the coal plants on the fast track had praised Reagan when he died, yet was a solid Democrat back when he was President. People are putting themselves over principals.

I don't intend to make a habit of posts like this.

My power company has a "GreenTeam" where you can buy 68% wind/32% reclaimed landfill gas for a small premium on your electricity rate.

I had been putting this off, as this winter I was getting reduced rates.

Last night as I was leaving Half Price Books, a representative from Green Mountain Energy was outside. He was not aware I had been considering for six months. They had a plan that locks the rates for 12 months and I choose it, figuring it will go up during the summer.

Hi Chuck:

___A few months late but I saw this item over at the NREL and thought you would enjoy the writeup?

NREL Ranks Leading Utility Green Power Programs.

Pricing programs give consumers clean power choices. (http://www.nrel.gov/news/press/2007/506.html)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/American_Wind_Turbine.jpg NREL - April 3, 2007

Green Energy choices are making an impact to the tune of 2,500 MW’s of renewable energy production.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) today released its annual ranking of leading utility green power programs. Under these voluntary programs, consumers can choose to help support additional electricity production from renewable resources such as solar and wind. More than 600 utilities across the United States offer these programs.

Using information provided by utilities, NREL develops “Top 10” rankings of utility programs in the following categories: total sales of renewable energy to program participants, total number of customer participants, customer participation rate and the lowest price premium charged for a green pricing service using new renewable resources.

Ranked by renewable energy sales, the green power program of Austin (Texas) Energy is first in the nation, followed by Portland General Electric, Florida Power & Light, PacifiCorp and Xcel Energy. (To view charts of utility rankings, visit Top Ten Utility Green Power Programs (http://www.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/resources/tables/topten.shtml)).

Ranked by customer participation rates, the top utilities are City of Palo Alto (Calif.) Utilities, Lenox (Iowa) Municipal Utilities, Montezuma (Iowa) Municipal Light & Power, Portland General Electric, and Sacramento Municipal Utility District. (See attached tables for additional rankings).

“Utility green power sales continue to show strong growth across the country,” said Lori Bird, senior energy analyst at NREL. “These utilities are the national leaders.”

Customer choice programs are proving to be a powerful stimulus for growth in renewable energy supply. In 2006, total utility green power sales exceeded 3.5 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh), about a 30% increase over 2005. More than 500,000 customers are participating in utility programs nationwide, up more than 10% from 2005.

Utility green pricing programs are one segment of a larger green power marketing industry that counts Fortune 500 companies, government agencies and colleges and universities among its customers, and helps support more than 2,500 MW of renewable electricity generation capacity.

NREL analysts attribute the success of many programs to persistence in marketing and creative marketing strategies, including in some cases, utility partnerships with independent green power marketers.

In addition, the rate premium that customers pay for green power continues to drop. “Higher prices for conventional energy sources, as well as increasing environmental concerns, are focusing greater attention on renewable energy options,” said Blair Swezey, NREL principal analyst.

NREL performs analyses of green power market trends and is funded by DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy's primary national laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development. NREL is operated for DOE by Midwest Research Institute and Battelle.

For further information contact NREL Public Relations at (303) 275-4090.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

A good read. :)

Suprized Green Mountain Energy is not listed in the Top 10.