27
Wed, Nov

A Bad Diagnosis on DWP’s Clean-Energy Success

ARCHIVE

VOICES - I have worked for quite some time as a neighborhood council representative.  In recent years, LA’s neighborhood councils have played a key role in supporting some ground-breaking environmental ordinances, among which is literally getting LA off coal - in one instance by 2015 (Navajo Generating Station) and, in the other, no later than 2025 (with our partnership with the Utah-based Intermountain Power Project).  These policies have become increasingly important to the average Angeleno. 

 

This victory came not only as a result of the efforts by neighborhood councils (dozens passed resolutions in support), environmental groups, and other organizations, but also from the diligence and dedication of LADWP General Manager Ron Nichols and the carefully researched concurrence of the Rate Payer Advocate, Dr. Fred Pickel, someone who came with very distinguished credentials.  

His position was endorsed by the majority of LA voters in 2011 under Measure I.  He stood shoulder to-shoulder with Mr. Nichols at any number of Committee and Commission Meetings and before the LA City Council as a whole.  Due to our collective efforts and well-researched presentations, we were finally able to achieve an important goal. 

The immediate question was (and is), what will be our alternative energy sources? How can we use this opportunity to eliminate coal to create jobs and grow the economy here in LA? One key solution is the CLEAN LA Solar Program, also known as the Feed-In Tariff (FIT).  Without going into too much detail, it basically entails the following: 

Schools, businesses, warehouses, anyone with a large enough roof, will be able to send electricity generated from solar power projects to the power grid and, consequently, earn up to 17 cents per kilowatt hour. Based on a 20-year fixed contract, the price would ultimately be reduced to 13 cents.  

This program, if seen through, will be the largest in the nation. It is expected to generate $500 million in private investment and create 4,000 jobs for Angelenos. 

This program was vetted over the course of four long years, subjected to a rigorous review by UCLA, LADWP, the City Council, and many more expert groups. Countless hearings, workshops, and reviews produced a very successful program. Since the pilot program launched last year, many companies have relocated to LA, and more than half the selected projects are located in economically depressed areas.  Perhaps most importantly, countless Angelenos have been hired to fill the jobs for this program. 

Shockingly, however, now that Los Angeles is moving forward, Dr. Pickel has taken it upon himself to appear at various neighborhood council meetings throughout the City to ask for support for indefinite suspension of the solar program.  

While Dr. Pickel argues that this program will hurt economic development, let us keep in mind that, quite to the contrary, this is a program designed to invite investment in our community in particular and to bring companies back. The   FIT also attracts altogether new investors.  

At a time when our economy sorely needs an infusion of businesses that create jobs, what can possibly be the down-side to this program? What message will it send to other businesses if Los Angeles recruits business and then cancels the policy that brought them here in the first place? Why would any business ever trust Los Angeles? 

Green businesses that train the unemployed and underemployed for sustainable, career, living-wage jobs; a greener community whose water and air pollution are greatly reduced, saving millions of dollars in health costs and clean-up; lower energy costs and reduced consumption of our natural resources—these are all benefits of the CLEAN LA Solar program, and yet are only some of the advantages that are an integral part of it. 

So I ask the question, why is Dr. Pickel so focused on tearing down such a successful program? Is there a doctor in the house who can save him from his own misdiagnosis?  Who can treat his misguided conclusions and turn him back to the advocate who can actually support programs that will be to the benefit of us all?

 

(Rosemary Jenkins is a Democratic activist and chair of the Northeast Valley Green Coalition.)

-cw

 

 

 

 

CityWatch

Vol 11 Issue 62

Pub: Aug 2, 2013

 

Get The News In Your Email Inbox Mondays & Thursdays