The good news about the Senate energy legislation
approved last week is that it means both chambers and the governor have now
backed strong plans to help the Commonwealth break its dependency on fossil
fuels. The bad news is that one of the few substantive differences between the
chambers involves a hot-button issue that could derail a compromise if
legislators allow it: Cape Wind.
Massachusetts needs a new energy law to help meet its
deadline of cutting greenhouse gas emissions 25 percent by 2020. The state has
made great progress, shedding coal and oil-fired generators in favor of
cleaner-burning natural gas, but will not reach the goal without tapping
renewable energy sources faster.
On matters of substance, the House, Senate, and Governor
Baker agree far more than they disagree. While the Senate’s legislation is more
aggressive on hydropower than the House’s, and contains more support for wind
electricity than the House or the governor, any of the approaches would likely
result in more power coming from dams in Canada and wind turbines in northern
New England. Both would also provide incentives to develop an offshore wind
industry in Massachusetts, which could emerge as a major energy source in
coming decades.
The likely result of all three: more renewable energy. A
financial framework that allows transmission companies to build the power lines
needed to access those resources. Less demand for natural gas. Less greenhouse
gas entering the atmosphere.
The headline-grabbing difference involves Cape Wind, the
star-crossed wind power in Nantucket Sound that’s been controversial since it
was proposed more than a decade ago. Cape Wind would be an eligible power
supplier for long-term contracts with utilities under the Senate bill, but not
the House legislation.
More competition for the long-term contracts should lead to
a better result for ratepayers, which argues in favor of the Senate bill. It
seems possible, though, that it doesn’t really matter: The Cape Wind project
has suffered serious setbacks and appears to be going nowhere fast. A fight
over whether to kill a project that seems to be dying anyway is not worth
having.
Another stumbling block best avoided is an unnecessary
Senate measure to forbid utilities from charging ratepayers for natural
gas pipeline capacity. Despite the passion the issue arouses, the proposal
is premature, and legislators would be better off putting the pipeline issue
aside in this round of legislation. The Supreme Judicial Court is currently
considering a challenge to the legality of the so-called pipeline tax, and any
legislative action should wait for their ruling. Additional pipeline capacity
may bring down electricity prices for consumers but faces opposition from
environmentalists and industry.
Had the last decade worked out differently — if Cape Wind
hadn’t faced an organized opposition of well-heeled Cape Cod homeowners — it’s
possible the state would not be where it is now, forced to turn to Canadian
power to reach its climate goal and to new pipelines to keep prices down. But
that’s water under the bridge — or over the dam, if you prefer — and the goal
now should be to pass legislation that gives the Commonwealth a chance to reach
its targets.
No comments:
Post a Comment