Ameren Missouri proposes $145 million efficiency plan
It’s a move that Ameren Missouri’s founders couldn’t have possibly imagined more than a century ago: Utility officials on Friday proposed spending $145 million over three years to reduce electricity use.
The filing comes three months after Ameren made deep and widely criticized cuts to its existing efficiency programs, saying they penalized shareholders by not compensating the company for lost energy sales.
The program proposed on Friday would more than double what Ameren Missouri was spending on energy efficiency before the cuts, and promises to save its customers 800 million kilowatt-hours a year, an amount of equal to the energy use of 60,000 homes.
Of course, energy efficiency programs aren’t free — and Ameren wants ratepayers to finance them. From 2013 through the end of 2015, Ameren would collect the cost of implementing the plan through a surcharge on customer bills that would equal a rate increase of a little more than 3 percent, said Warren Wood, the utility’s vice president of legislative and regulatory affairs.
But all of Ameren’s 1.2 million customers will benefit from a reduction in energy use, Wood said.
“This filing aligns the business interests of the utilities and their customers,” he said.
The Public Service Commission has 120 days to review Ameren’s proposal. If approved, it would take effect in January 2013.
The plan is the first filed by St. Louis-based Ameren under the Missouri Energy Efficiency Investment Act. The law, signed by Gov. Jay Nixon in 2009, was designed to encourage reductions in energy use by allowing utilities to earn the same profit on energy efficiency investments that they do on investments in power plants, poles and wires. The PSC, utilities and other groups have spent the past two years debating rules to implement the law.
Ameren spent $70 million on efficiency from 2009 to 2011, helping customers save more than 550 million kilowatt-hours. But the those efforts led to $26.4 million in losses, according to Wood. That amount will grow to $60 million by 2014 — the reason why Ameren killed many of the rebates and other incentives at the end of September to the chagrin of energy efficiency advocates.
Wood explained the problem like this: Every time a customer pays their electric bill, some of the money is used to pay for variable costs like coal and other fuel used to run power plants. Another piece goes to cover fixed costs like poles, wires and substations — infrastructure that’s needed regardless of how many electrons flow through the grid.
When electricity demand declines, so does revenue, including that portion that goes to cover fixed costs. Friday’s proposal would compensate Ameren for that lost revenue while still producing tangible benefits for consumers, he said.
Efficiency and consumer advocates hadn’t read through all of the hundreds of pages that Ameren filed as of Friday afternoon.
While they would welcome an increase in efficiency spending in Ameren’s plan, they said they need to analyze the details before endorsing or opposing the plan.
“Are they seeking to be overcompensated (for efficiency investments)? Are they overreaching?” asked Lewis Mills Jr., Missouri’s Public Counsel. “That’s my biggest concern.”
Rebecca Stanfield of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Chicago office said it’s time for Ameren, regulators, and consumer and environmental groups to make energy efficiency work in Missouri.
“We’ve had three years of positioning and brinksmanship on this issue,” she said. “All of the parties need to recognize that there’s tremendous value in what can be created with these programs. Lets look at the big picture of what we could achieve if they are successful.”
No one disputes that energy efficiency must be a significant part of the state’s energy policy. That includes Ameren, which has identified efficiency as the cheapest way to meet energy demand in the future.
Missouri has long been dependent on relatively cheap coal to meet its electricity needs. But prices for the fuel and cost of hauling it from mines in Wyoming have been increasing. And new environmental regulations aimed at cutting back on air and water pollution from coal-fired power plants are certain to lead to further increases.
The state also continues to lag behind most others when it comes to policies to reduce energy use. The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy ranks Missouri 44th in the nation for energy efficiency.
In Illinois, meanwhile, utilities are increasing spending on energy efficiency programs. That includes Ameren’s sister utility, which sells electricity to customers across much of central and southern Illinois.
Ameren Illinois will spend $78 million this year on discounts and rebates for energy saving lighting and appliances to its 1.2 million electric customers and 800,000 gas customers.
One key difference is that Illinois has an energy efficiency standard. The law requires Ameren and the state’s other investor-owned utility, ComEd, to cut energy use by 25 percent from 2007 levels by 2025.
Without a mandate, Missouri utilities must be willing to aggressively push efficiency programs on their own. How to get them do that has been a contentious issue.
Mills, the main advocate for consumers on utility issues, realizes some Ameren customers may chafe at the idea of seeing bills go up, at least initially, to pay for energy efficiency programs.
But energy efficiency can benefit all consumers — even those who don’t take advantage of rebates and other incentives — by lowering statewide energy use, Mills said. That can help utilities defer or avoid building new power plants or running more expensive plants when electricity demand spikes.
“While it looks like rates are going to be going up,” he said, “they’re going to be going up more if we don’t do this.”