What will Missouri Energy Future look like?

 

 

Over the last few years Missouri Sierra Club’s coordination with the National Coal Campaign has been instrumental in moving Missouri beyond coal and toward a tran¬sition to a clean energy future. In April 2008 Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. abandoned plans for a newly permitted coal plant in Norborne, Missouri.

 

And thanks to Sierra Club’s 2007 agreement with Kansas City Power and Light (KCPL), they are now the most progressive utility in the state with the deployment of wind investments and by reducing energy demand with the development of energy efficiency programs. KCPL has also championed climate change initiatives in the Kansas City region.

 

Passage of Proposition C, the Clean Energy Initiative moves us another step forward but there is still a lot of work to be done. Fifteen percent renewable energy by 2021 is an important first step but it doesn’t go far enough to achieve the 80% cut in greenhouse gas emissions scientists say is needed by 2050.

 

 

2009 presents some challenges and opportunities for Missouri’s clean energy future. Most importantly, AmerenUE’s plans to build a new nuclear plant in Fulton could undermine clean energy in Missouri for decades.

 

To advance their nuclear plans, Ameren is expected to ask the Missouri legislature to repeal the current No Construction Work In Progress (No-CWIP) law, passed by initiative petition in 1976 that prevents utilities from charging rate-payers for power plants before they are operational.

 

If Ameren gets CWIP, it will enable them to saddle rate-payers with the substantial financial risk associated with building a new nuclear power plant. Repeal of No-CWIP would allow Ameren to get rate increases to cover costs during the planning and construction of the nuclear plant. Rate-payers could be on the hook for billons even if the plant is never built or operational (see “This CWIP Isn’t Funny: Ameren seeks to shift risk of new nuke to ratepayers”, Missouri Sierran, Oct – Dec 2008, http://missouri.sierraclub.org/ SierranOnline.)

 

Sierra Club is opposed to nuclear power (see adjoining box on nuclear policy). However we believe the more important issue today is that Missouri should be investing in clean energy solutions and energy efficiency (demand reduction) before saddling the state with a very expensive $9 - $12 billon nuclear plant. Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute tells us that nuclear buys less solution per dollar than any other alternative to fossil fuels. If Ameren and state policy makers are focused on a huge new energy source, they will not be focused on efficiency which can reduce demand substantially and perhaps eliminate the need for more supply, and it will cost rate payers much less.

 

 

Ameren wouldn’t need to spend anywhere near $9-12 billion on efficiency to get the same bang for their (our) buck. Energy efficiency is the lowest cost energy source and the least utilized in Missouri.

 

According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), “energy efficiency and demand response are the lowest-cost resources available to meet this growing demand and the quickest to deploy for near-term impacts.” (see Estimates of Levelized Cost of New Energy Sources in Energizing Virginia: Efficiency First,http://www.aceee.org/pubs/E085.htm) The 2008 Energy Efficiency Scorecard from ACEEE ranks Missouri as 45th (http://www.aceee.org/pubs/e086_es.pdf.), indicating a huge economic opportunity for our state. And conservative Department of Energy (DOE) studies show that 80% of projected growth in electric demand could be offset by efficiency improvements alone.

 

Along with opposition to the repeal of No-CWIP, which is our first line of defense to stop the nuclear plant, Sierra Club will be working on several fronts to secure energy efficiency policies and incentives for utilities, businesses and individuals, and advancements toward a climate change mitigation policy. These efforts will focus on the Governor, the legislature, the Public Service Commission and energizing grassroots support for a truly clean energy policy agenda.

 

Since Missouri has no climate change action plan for reducing our global warming impact we are calling on Governor Nixon to take two immediate steps to establish climate change initiatives in Missouri:

 

Sign the Midwest Governors • Association Energy Security and Climate Stewardship Platform and Greenhouse Gas Accord that provides a regional strategy to achieve energy security and reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming. (http://www.midwesterngovernors.org/govenergynov.htm). Missouri is the only Midwest state not participating in a meaningful way.

 

Establish a Governor’s Action Team • on Energy and Climate Change and task it with creating a comprehensive Missouri Energy and Climate Change Action Plan to achieve or surpass the statewide targets for greenhouse gas reduction.

 

We will also be encouraging our Missouri congressional delegation to support the clean energy agenda expected to be advanced by the new President and new Congress. A green economy is a strong economy and clean energy and environmental protection are central to driving economic recovery.

 

 

(See full policy here:http://sierraclub.org/policy/conservation/nuc-power.aspx)

The Sierra Club opposes the licensing, construction and operation of new nuclear

reactors utilizing the fission process, pending:

 

Development of adequate national and global policies to curb energy overuse

and unnecessary economic growth. (this applies to MO, does it not)

Resolution of the significant safety problems inherent in reactor operation,

disposal of spent fuels, and possible diversion of nuclear materials capable of use in weapons manufacture.

Establishment of adequate regulatory machinery to guarantee adherence to

the foregoing conditions. The above resolution does not apply to research

reactors.