• Research Report

    A Wind Power Primer: Emission reduction negligible for land-intensive, unreliable, noisy, ugly bird-killing turbines

    posted March 9, 2008 by Daren Bakst
    Wind power is generated through large groups of massive industrial wind turbines, sometimes as tall as 50-story skyscrapers. Like the wind itself, wind power is intermittent and extremely unreliable. The wind must be strong enough, but not too strong, to generate power. So wind cannot be used for baseload generation nor to meet peak demand. For example, to avoid a blackout, a Texas grid manager recently had to cut off electricity to some customers, in large part due to a sudden drop in wind power.
  • Press Release

    Coast Law needed to block wind turbines

    posted March 9, 2008
    RALEIGH – North Carolina needs a “Coast Law” to protect residents from wind turbines that ruin local landscapes, harm wildlife, and pose potential health risks, all while providing an unreliable…
  • Research Report

    Electric Shock: North Carolinians would be required to pay for electricity in other states

    posted August 5, 2007 by Daren Bakst
    The legislature passed a law, SB 3, which would require North Carolinians to pay for electricity used by out-of-state residents. SB 3, which is the new, hastily drafted energy bill, was touted as requiring utilities to provide at least 7.5% of their electricity from renewable resources. However, North Carolinians likely will not be the recipient of a significant amount of this electricity.
  • Research Report

    Renewable Energy At All Costs: Legislation ignores the will of the public and would have unintended consequences

    posted July 8, 2007 by Daren Bakst
    The Senate has passed a major electricity bill that includes something called a renewable energy and energy efficiency portfolio standard (REPS). The REPS consists of two separate requirements: A renewable portfolio standard that requires utilities to provide customers 7.5 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, and energy efficiency measures that require a 5 percent reduction in energy use.
  • Press Release

    New energy mandate would ignore customer demands

    posted July 8, 2007
    RALEIGH – New energy mandates could drive up North Carolina’s regionally high electricity rates, even though consumers have shown little interest in paying more for renewable energy sources. That’s the…
  • Research Report

    Consumer Protection Blackout: Why the Public Staff Should Be Reformed

    posted March 5, 2007 by Daren Bakst
    The Public Staff is an independent government agency whose role is to represent the interests of electricity consumers before the Utilities Commission. However, as recent examples demonstrate, the Public Staff is acting more like an environmental advocate than a consumer advocate. The Public Staff has recommended a major new tax on consumers, possibly as large as $181 million annually. The Public Staff also has expressed support for wind power plants even though it would mean higher costs and an unreliable means of electricity for consumers. The agency needs major reforms so consumer interests are truly protected, including term limits on the executive director of the Public Staff.
  • Press Release

    Consumer advocate needs reform

    posted March 5, 2007
    RALEIGH – A state government agency has failed its duty by not representing N.C. electricity customers’ interests. That’s the key criticism of the Public Staff in a new John Locke…
  • Press Release

    Proposed tax hurts consumers, helps environmental groups

    posted November 29, 2006
    RALEIGH – North Carolina electricity customers could pay an extra $181 million a year, thanks to the efforts of a consumer advocate that’s supposed to represent customers’ interests. That’s according…
  • Research Report

    Smokes, Booze … and Electricity? A new sin tax on electricity could be on its way

    posted November 29, 2006 by Daren Bakst
    The North Carolina Public Utilities Commission is considering charging an extra fee, separate from existing rates, to electric utility customers. This extra charge will help support what is called a “public benefits fund.” The fund would support programs that have nothing to do with the supply of electricity. Consumers would be required to pay the “fee” if they want to receive electricity, and the more electricity they use, the higher their fee will become. To environmental extremists and other proponents of this extra fee, the use of electricity, which allows us to warm our homes and function in modern society, is a “sin” and needs to be reduced.

electricity by Author