It is sad and ironic that the opportunity for good legislation on the interconnection of renewable energy to Rhode Island’s electricity-distribution system was squandered by utility lobbying and The Providence Journal’s one-sided coverage of one developer’s (Wind Energy Development LLC) alleged undue influence (“Favor to wind-project developer could cost electric rate payers,” June 12; “Republicans want provision that aids R.I. wind-power developer removed,” June 13; “{House Speaker Nicholas} Mattiello removes provision to benefit big donor, cost rate payers,” June 14; and “Wind power favor yanked” and the editorial “No favor to R.I. ratepayers,’’ both on June 15). I was quoted in one article and write to correct the record.
I sent this column to The Journal's editorial-page editor, Edward Achorn, but he declined to run it.
Interconnection legislation is needed and good for the people of Rhode Island. I explained that to the reporter but he neglected to report it. Our utility, National Grid, administers interconnection to protect its interest in the existing energy system, to the detriment of a new-energy economy that greatly benefits Rhode Island. The utility has a history of inflating interconnection costs and delaying interconnection to an extent that many good projects cannot withstand and others are severely overburdened.
The assertion that this bill was to benefit one developer is wrong; interconnection obstructs many good projects. Sadly, too many developers are scared to speak out, because the utility still controls too much of the fate of their projects. National Grid’s abuse of its discretion on interconnection was especially obvious in response to the proposed large Coventry wind project. National Grid refused to interconnect some turbines and sought to charge Wind Energy Development $13 million as part of the process of replacing much of Coventry’s antiquated poles and wires.
But interconnection problems are rampant in Rhode Island and across America. When our “regulated utility” is inadequately regulated, as it has been on interconnection, it is the General Assembly’s duty to protect Rhode Island’s interests through legislation. The interconnection bill put necessary parameters on utility control over interconnection. It was supported by the state Office of Energy Resources and passed the House of Representatives twice by nearly unanimous vote because it is good policy.
National Grid is not a benign steward of ratepayer interests; it is a corporation based in England. When its shareholders’ interests conflict with those of our ratepayers, it favors its shareholders. That is why, for instance, National Grid reported $8 million in annual profits for operating Rhode Island’s municipal streetlights all made while it refused to authorize conversion to more efficient LED fixtures that have much lower maintenance costs.
National Grid’s conflicting interest on local renewables was evident in its proposal to charge Wind Energy Development an access fee to use the distribution system that was put forth without even considering the General Assembly’s order that it first weigh the economic benefits of local generation. Unanimous opposition led National Grid to withdraw that access fee just before the state Public Utilities Commission hearing.
Studies consistently show that local renewables benefit all ratepayers by reducing the costs of energy, capacity, transmission, distribution, line-loss, operating risk, environmental, and other known and measurable costs of our energy system. A national expert presented this information at the State House on March 24, 2016; you can watch it on Capitol TV. The Journal’s reporting that an interconnection policy that fairly allocates responsibility for system upgrades benefitting all customers would cost us all and unduly subsidize renewables ignored that ratepayers already pay National Grid to maintain and improve its distribution system. Most importantly, it overlooks the savings that renewables produce for our energy system. The reporter that interviewed me chose to ignore all that.
National Grid spent at least $84,000 on lobbying this legislative session. Their reporting of their lobbying is unclear and it is hard to track their legislative contributions apparently made through their lobbyist’s Political Action Committee (PAC), “Advocacy Political Action.” Those of us regularly pushing for good energy legislation face the utility’s resistance, not so much in the hearings but late in the session from back rooms of the State House.
Last year, this interconnection law that unanimously passed the House was victim to the Senate’s early adjournment. This year, after very supportive hearings and near unanimous approval from the House, National Grid worked to strip it through the Senate. I deplore the impact of money in politics, but the U.S. Supreme Court’s free speech cases, like Citizens United, protect such spending to sway government action. For The Journal to deride influence sought by a renewable- energy developer awkwardly overlooks the massive influence such developers are up against. National Grid spends huge sums of ratepayer dollars on advertising, much of which is in The Journal. Such well-funded speech evidently earns greater protection.
At the end of this legislative session, strategic and poorly reported last-minute flame-throwing beat down a good bill. The utility still holds its strings on interconnection. Now that the dust has settled we can reflect on that. Much may be vested in our existing energy system, but our people are not well served by its exceptionally high cost, insecurity and other bad impacts. To change that, we need to correct the mechanics under which alternatives are delivered. Those of us who are passionate about Rhode Island’s energy future remain confident that justice ultimately will be served through policies that promote the public good, despite all the financial interests that obstruct them.
Seth Handy is a lawyer in Providence.
