Editorial

Who’s the Cheshire Cat?

Posted

Alice in Wonderland had an easier time of understanding the riddles of the Mad Hatter than Rhode Islanders have of making sense of why most residential and small businesses will pay a whopping 14 percent more for electricity over the next year.

Consider this:

• There’s an abundance of natural gas, which is used to generate about 40 percent of the electricity consumed in New England, yet we’re being told the higher rates are tied to an inadequate supply of natural gas.

• The explanation is that existing pipelines don’t have the capacity to supply the generating plants and meet the winter heating demands of homes and businesses that take priority over electrical generation. And, we are told, the plants must as a result either switch to oil – which is more expensive – or shut down.

• But with gasoline prices taking a welcome nose dive, isn’t the cost of oil also dropping? Wouldn’t this put downward pressure on the cost of producing electricity? And besides, this has been a relatively mild winter so far, so even though pipeline capacity may be an issue, is it one now? It seems National Grid is paying premium prices for electricity based on a worst-case scenario, not existing conditions. Understandably, the utility has agreed to pay a price in anticipation of the use of electricity, and those costs are being passed on to us, the users. National Grid argues it doesn’t profit from the higher rates. But somebody does, especially if natural gas-fired plants can keep the generators spinning.

Then let’s look ahead. There are more inconsistencies.

• National Grid requested a 24-percent rate increase for the next six months. Traditionally, the cost of electricity goes down in the summer. However, to ease the burden, the Public Utilities Commission elected to spread the increase over a year – hence, a rate increase of 14 percent. So when National Grid contracts to buy power for the summer and the rate is lower, will that savings get passed on to the consumers? Just wondering.

• Longer range, what will become of the second major source of electrical generation – nuclear, at more than 30 percent? Those plants are aging (Vermont Yankee is closing), and there are mounting concerns of their safety following what happened in Japan. What’s the plan if they aren’t licensed or upgraded?

• At one point, Governor Lincoln Chafee talked about hydropower from Canada, but that didn’t go anywhere. And as for renewable energy, solar, wind power and wood-fired plants now account for less than 10 percent of the electricity generated. It’s not an immediate answer.

So, where does this leave us besides paying more for electricity? There’s mounting pressure to increase natural gas pipeline capacity. It seems to offer a solution and perhaps lower rates, too. Someone is smiling.

We’d do well to identify the Cheshire Cat. They’d know.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here