Regulators Reject Perry's "Ludicrous" Plan to Bail Out
Coal and Nuclear Industries
Green groups and opponents of
nuclear energy welcomed a decision by federal regulators late Monday to reject
a "ludicrous" plan put forth by U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry that
would have forced taxpayers and ratepayers to bail out the struggling coal and
nuclear industries.
The decision by the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) comes after Perry last year submitted a contentious plan called
for subsidizing the nation's coal-fired and nuclear power plants that are no
longer economically viable on their own. According to Bloomberg,
"Consumers in more than a dozen states would have foot the bill, which
could have totaled billions."
"It's no surprise it was resoundingly rejected by even the industry-friendly commission, just as it's no surprise that Secretary Perry continues to demonstrate he has no idea what he's doing overseeing our nation’s energy infrastructure." —Janet Redman, Oil Change International
Though dominated by Trump-appointed commissioners, FERC said Perry's plan did not meet legal and statutory requirements.
Damon Moglen, ssenior strategic
advisor for Friends of the Earth, credited the tens of thousands of people
wrote to FERC demanding the agency reject Perry's "ludicrous
proposal" to bailout financially bankrupt and environmentally damaging
nuclear and coal projects.
"No matter how forceful
industry lobbying, the market factors simply dictate that nuclear and coal
power plants should be replaced by cheaper, cleaner, and safer solar and wind
power," Moglen said. "This is a good day for the public and a good
day for the cause of addressing catastrophic climate change."
Neil Waggoner, a campaigner with the
Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign in Ohio, agreed. "FERC made the right
decision," he said. "It does not make sense to force electric
customers to pay more to bail out old, dirty, uneconomic coal and nuclear
plants."
According to Janet Redmen, U.S.
policy director for Oil Change International, the agency's decision to reject
Perry's plan should have been an easy one. The proposal, she said, "was
nothing more than a massive bailout for the coal and nuclear industries.
It's no surprise it was resoundingly rejected by even the industry-friendly commission, just as it's no surprise that Secretary Perry continues to demonstrate he has no idea what he's doing overseeing our nation’s energy infrastructure."
It's no surprise it was resoundingly rejected by even the industry-friendly commission, just as it's no surprise that Secretary Perry continues to demonstrate he has no idea what he's doing overseeing our nation’s energy infrastructure."
While welcoming the decision, Redman
said that FERC—which has a long and troubling track record of
backing the interests of fossil fuel companies over the concerns of
environmental campaigners—has a long way to go in terms of helping the nation
steer a course towards a sustainable energy future that shuns fossil fuels and
nuclear power in favor of renewables.
"Well know FERC is really intent on setting a course for a brighter future when they actually start taking our climate crisis seriously," she said. "By ignoring the climate impacts of gas pipelines, export terminals, and other fossil fuel projects, FERC continues to hold us back while doing the industry’s bidding."
Monday's decision, Redman concluded,
"was the right one, but FERC needs to do a lot more to stand up to the
fossil fuel industry and safeguard our climate before they earn our
applause."