City to Revisit Joining Alternative Power Effort
Novato City Council on Tuesday will get questions answered about the Marin Energy Authority, a joint-powers authority that provides 'green' power to homes via existing PG&E lines.
Photos
Pdfs
Three years after the Novato City Council opted not to join the upstart “green” energy company being formed in Marin County, the council plans to discuss it again Tuesday night.
The Marin Energy Authority was set up as an alternative to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and to provide power from renewable resources with a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The power, delivered by PG&E lines, comes in “light green” and “dark green” blends, with dark coming from 100 percent renewable resources.
Many environmentally conscious Novato residents expressed their displeasure when the council chose not to join the not-for-profit Marin Energy Authority in 2008. Council members cited uncertain fees and liabilities associated with joining the joint powers authority and said it was really bad timing to devote time to the issue when the council was forced to slice the city’s payroll and services.
On July 12 of this year, the council voted 3-2 to pay for a study to be done about the alternative energy company and whether it makes sense for Novato to join now that there is an amnesty period for new members to join free of charge until Nov. 7.
“MEA has put tremendous effort into creating a valuable clean energy alternative that the people demand,” Dick Collins, MEA board of directors member, said in a statement. “We’ve built it and now they can come.”
The town of Ross voted on Sept. 15 to join Marin Energy Authority, leaving only Novato, Corte Madera and Larkspur as the only municipalities not giving their residents the option of buying the “green” power. Any new member of the authority would give its residents the choice to opt out of the new provider and stick with PG&E.
If all the holdout municipalities were to join, Marin Energy Authority said there would be an increase of annual greenhouse gas reductions from 560,000 tons to 840,000 tons or more.
Fairfax Town Council member Lew Tremaine, another Marin Energy Authority board member, said the power company is renowned as a model throughout the state despite that it has only been providing power since May 2010.
“With more than a year of successful operating history, the fears of the unknown can be laid to rest,” he said in an MEA statement. “There is no reason for Marin cities and towns not to give their constituents the opportunity to choose a cleaner energy alternative.”
An independent analyst from MRW & Associates is to provide some information to the council on Tuesday. See the attachment for more details.
Annan Paterson
6:57 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Yes!
Sam Roth
7:58 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Does anybody know if utility bills have gone up for the people who have joined MEA?
Barbara Madrid
8:34 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Yes, of COURSE the bill has gone up. MEA power costs more. Take the time to read the MRW (consultant) report and check around on your own. There are too many hidden costs that may come up after we've joined.
Many of the "benefits" claimed by MEA are already available from PG&E, and have been for YEARS: net metering, feed-in tariff to allow local renewable generation, and energy rebates, among others. I would also caution that the green house gas reduction claims touted by MEA are grossly overstated, and were probably "bought" via RECS (renewable energy credits).
PG&E's plans for renewable large-scale projects are truly local projects, not power purchased from a foreign entity or via short-term contracts. MEA's promise of local generation has recently been dropped.
This issue is loaded with emotion for many people who simply do not understand the energy business and structure; people have been swayed by so-called experts, or quite simply, have a deep-seated hatred for PG&E based on recent events which have nothing to do with choice.
The facts are: this will cost EVERYONE much more, it will hurt seniors/those on fixed incomes, and if city accounts are included, will strain an already troubled budget. I would MUCH rather the city spend more on police/essentials, and not more for electricity--we can be green in many ways, and this is NOT the right choice for Novato.
David L
8:47 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Sam, to answer the question you have asked - no, utility bills have not gone up for people who went with the basic opinion offered by MEA. Ms. Madrid is lying to you. If you choose a mix that has even more renewable power it does cost more, but that's your decision, and that's what this is all about. If you want to stay with PG&E you can, but other people don't want you to have that choice. I encourage you and everyone to watch the council debate on TV tonight or online at any time, and then email or call the council and tell them what you think, whatever it is.
Greg Yates
8:23 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Joining still means individuals have a choice!
DMiller
9:11 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
David has it right. Well said!
Dr. Peter Joseph
10:56 am on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
I live in San Anselmo and attended the Ross City Council meeting about MEA. One of the objections was that a customer had to take an action to OPT OUT of MEA or they would automatically be enrolled. The objection had to do with their freedom of choice. Well, if that's what you really want, your town needs to join MEA, otherwise nobody has ANY choice other than the monopoly PG&E. Another objection was that MEA purchases some of it's green energy from a foreign company with involvement in French nuclear energy. Hello? Diablo Canyon, sitting on an EQ fault? As for the price difference, I haven't noticed any, but the graphs presented seemed to show MEA deep green being more expensive to the tune of a bottle of Chard from BevMo every month.
Marie Chan
3:20 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Thanks Dr. Joseph and David L. Folks have forgotten that the law allowing entities such as MEA to compete with PG&E followed the Enron debacle. This is not a recent event and has everything to do with choice. The "opt out" choice is stipulated by law to encourage competition. MEA did not mandate this procedure and cannot change it. MEA provides a minimum of 25% of its energy from renewable sources, but PG&E provides only 12-13% of renewables in its energy mix. MEA will pay fair market price for excess energy generated by private solar installations. PG&E does not.
Tina McMillan
9:37 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Marie
MEA took the lead from PGE by contracting with EnXco. According to Reve, "Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) will purchase the power generated under a 20-year power purchase agreement providing approximately 50,000 customers with clean electricity. EnXco Service Corporation will provide operations and maintenance services." According to MEA, "Our contract with EnXco is another step forward for Marin Energy Authority to increase the development of renewable energy closer to home. These new solar projects will boost the California economy while creating new clean energy supply for our customers. We're looking forward to adding even more local and regional renewable energy projects for Marin Clean Energy," said Damon Connolly, Marin Energy Authority Chairman and San Rafael Council Member."
So as far as I can see, PGE and MEA are purchasing energy from the same company, one wind and one solar but MEA draws salaries and pays consultants to purchase energy while PGE pays employees to build, maintain, plan and otherwise deliver energy throughout the grid. This is no competition. It is a means of making people feel better about the energy they use by calling it green and deep green. Feeling better will not reduce our carbon footprint.
Please review website: http://meatruth.org/Vision.html Marin Clean Energy Truth
Frank Keenan
4:21 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
I support alternative energy sources, but not MEA. I don't like their questionable tactics and misleading statements. For example, offering Novato an "amnesty" from a signup fee is pure hogwash, since MEA arbitrarily decides on who and what to charge. Amnesty is a forgiveness for a past wrongdoing; Novato has done nothing wrong here!
In the long term, MEA can only cost more than energy coming from a public utility. Their overhead is redundant and they do not have the buying power of a large entity like PG&E. While it sounds like a nice idea in the abstract, operationally it ultimately fails. It is far more effective to pressure CaPUC and PG&E to use more alternative resources
Bob Ratto
5:37 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Frank
Yes, amnesty was certainly an "interesting" choice of words, waiver of proposed fee would have been more grounded in reality. MEA is redundant, but I suppose the additional bureaucracy is somehow deemed acceptable, because it is cloaked in everyone's favorite color (Green). Solar is a great option for homeowners, and has come down dramatically in price over the past several years (just ask Solyndra)-ultimately, making a conscious decision to use less energy benefits the consumer a great deal. The PUC needs to perform effective oversight over PGE which will ultimately lead to a safer, better run utility.
David L
11:14 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Frank, you're overlooking one thing - when PG&E supplies your power you pay what it costs to provide the power, plus a profit for its shareholders that is GUARANTEED by the PUC in all but the most extreme cases. Even those light bulbs that you see subsidized in the stores are not there because PG&E care a damn about green power; it's because the state allowed it to capitalize and make a profit off the subsidies since it was more cost effective to replace incandescent bulbs than building more power plants. The MEA will do these things because it's right, not because some investor can suck come money out of the deal.
Tina McMillan
6:06 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
http://www.pacificsun.com/square/index.php?i=3&t=3618
MARIN ENERGY GOES OVER THE TOP
The Board unanamously voted to hire, through promotion, their Interim Executive Director as the Agency Director. The Board elected to bypass the usual Executive Search in offering to almost double the incumbant's salary on top of a $22,000 bonus "sign on" payment.
"The new Executive Director is, and should be, caught in the middle of this firestorm. She could, with one action, turn down this generous offer and agree to negotiate a lower, more reasonable salary. The question of a bonus, for "outstanding work", is always one of the possible ways to acknowledge performance above and beyond the expected."
David L
11:20 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
You're comments are so one-sided and dishonest that it seems clear you're a PG&E employee or contractor. Why don't you post a link to information on the salaries of PG&E execs? Here, I'll start it for you: CEO Peter Darbee $8.4 MILLION last year. http://people.forbes.com/profile/peter-a-darbee/63401
Tina McMillan
6:11 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
http://www.facebook.com/notes/marin-united-taxpayers-association/marin-energy-authority-excerpt-from-april-2011-muta-newsletter/214724215212042
Marin Energy Authority (excerpt from April 2011 MUTA Newsletter)
Marin Energy Authority
"The Marin Energy Authority (MEA) has not responded to MUTA letters (Oct. 14, 2010) sent to Dawn Weisz, the MEA CEO. It is remarkable that a CEO and eight directors (governing four employees), found no time to comply with the US Freedom of Information Act and provide information about those employees and Board members. We know from news reports that Marin Supervisors voted to double Weisz’ former salary to $198,000 a year, plus a $22,000 signing bonus, and a potential pay raise of $49,500 next year. Comparable municipal utilities (Alameda and Palo Alto) pay considerably less, even though both utilities have much larger operating responsibilities and considerably more employees.
MEA is doing very little and paying bureaucrats a lot of money. Is there something wrong with this picture?"
...
Bob Ratto
6:12 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
..and just a bit more...if you pay someone $200k a year to manage 4 people, you are not necessarily cost efficient.
As noted above, what type of a message does the MEA's Board send to the hard working public management employees who manage millions and oversee hundreds of employees in some cases? MEA has four employees, does no billing, climbs no poles in rainstorms, and does not regularly deal with ratepayers. MEA, besides insulting county/city management staff, has just raised the bar for all other new management salary negotiations in the County.
Tina McMillan
6:14 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
http://meatruth.org/PDF/LTEPublicReaction.pdf
Public Reaction to Dawn Weisz’s Big Salary
Tom S Baker
7:20 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Are we in the Sauce early tonight ?
Tina McMillan
9:11 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
http://www.pge.com/about/community/contributions/
http://www.pge.com/about/environment/pge/cleanenergy/
I support PGE's efforts to create renewable, green energy for California. I support the employees of PGE who maintain and repair our power lines, who work to find renewable energy sources that actually change the power in our grid, who create and maintain local jobs, and who continue to provide every aspect of our energy other than the bill sent by MEA taking credit for greener energy that in reality is purchased at the expense of the health of other countries.
Tina McMillan
11:33 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
I have no desire to be forced to opt in to MEA's program. The energy delivered to my home by PGE is the same as the energy delivered to every MEA home; the only difference is the company from which MEA purchases their energy. MEA buys from Shell Oil. Shell Oil's reputation as a major polluter should eliminate them from any proposed "green" energy program based on consumers feeling greener rather than acting greener. MEA does not care what Shell Oil does in the world at large. They only want to promote themselves over PGE. The misleading information that has permeated the press as MEA has sought to build its reputation on the back of PGE, as the small local agency against the larger distant corporation, is at the heart of the hypocrisy. The irony of MEA purchasing energy from Shell Oil is tangible.
http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2009/05/25/climate-change-summit-hijacked-by-biggest-polluter-shell-critics-claim/
Tina McMillan
11:45 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
David L
I have been self employed for 22 years. I have no connection to PGE other than the energy they provide to my home and office. I just hate hypocrisy. I have followed MEA from the start and written editorials in the IJ. Marin insisted that this was the only approach. Sonoma County used a different method. They offered low cost loans so individuals as well as training to contractors and free home assessments for solar. Go to their website and take a look. http://www.sonomacountyenergy.org/
Marin could have done the same but our supervisors insisted that MEA was the only way to reduce our carbon footprint. Then they purchase energy on the open market from Shell Oil. It isn't right. You can't be high and mighty and then purchase from a large corporation, larger even than PGE that is being accused of being the biggest polluter in the world. My comments may be one sided but they are not dishonest. Check the links.
David L
11:55 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
If you're not dishonest, then you have trouble understanding even the most simple concepts. You just said in one of your earlier posts: "I have no desire to be forced to opt in to MEA's program." What in the world are you talking about? Right now everyone in Novato is FORCED to take power from PG&E, yet you make it sound as if joining MEA will force something on people for the first time. The TRUTH is that joining MEA will give us the freedom to choose power providers for the first time ever. So which is it - dishonest or ....?
David L
11:58 pm on Tuesday, September 27, 2011
And, as far as the Sonoma program, has it every occurred to you that it does nothing for people who live in apartments, condos, or rented homes, or private homes that don'e have the structure or location for solar.
THEY JUST VOTED YES TO MEA. THANK YOU COUNCIL
Edwin Drake
12:29 am on Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Flying from New York to San Francisco = 2.5 Tons of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, per http://planetgreen.discovery.com/travel-outdoors/cross-country-flight-carbon.html. So, 840,000 tons minus m 560,000 tons, (4th paragraph from bottom,) equals 280,000 tons. Divide that by 2.5 tons per trip and you get 112,000 one-way trips, or 56,000 round trips from San Francisco to the Big Apple. population of the three towns, Novato, Lrkspur, and Corte madera is around 74,000, give or take. (In the US there are probably at least 5,000 airplane trips per day, of various lengths, per http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061127045006AA0NreR). For fun go to http://www.whatsmycarbonfootprint.com/calculate.htm
Jerome J Ghigliotti Jr
10:32 am on Wednesday, September 28, 2011
"the [Novato city] council voted 3-2 to pay for a study to be done about the alternative energy company and whether it makes sense for Novato to join"
Why pay $50,000 to an Oakland consulting firm. If the council could not make a decision, it would have only cost $10,000 to have placed a referendum on this November's ballot. Is anyone listening? Ask the people, it is OUR government.
TAKE BACK GOVERNMENT, JEROME J. GHIGLIOTTI, JR. FOR CITY COUNCIL
(BTW, that is what my yellow and black signs say.)
Tina McMillan
11:17 am on Wednesday, September 28, 2011
David L
No matter how you package it, PGE does all the work while MEA has a full slate of customers handed to them on a silver platter. The rationale behind "opt out" is that most people won't take the time to choose. We'll find out the financial risks over the next five to ten years. In that time PGE will continue to build renewable energy in California. Eventually they will have a "deep green" option making MEA redundant.
.