Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: I really do not understand US Rep. Mary Miller
Next Post: Once again, with feeling
Posted in:
A potential energy deal lawmakers were expected to take up in the Illinois Senate on Tuesday has stalled.
The Senate was called into session to take up an energy deal Gov. J.B. Pritzker wanted to subsidize nuclear energy and lay out a path toward more renewables over the next few decades.
During a Senate committee Tuesday, state Sen. Bill Cunningham, D-Chicago, said the good news is there was broad agreement on major provisions of the bills, including increasing investments in renewable energy and subsidizing nuclear energy with the goal of having 100% renewable energy sources by 2050.
But, he said the bad news is there’s a difference among stakeholders about whether to order coal-fired plants closed in 2035 or 2045.
“I don’t believe it’s a gigantic gulf,” Cunningham said. “I believe that it is a difference that can be corrected. I don’t think the two parties are too far apart but they are far apart right now and unfortunately, because of that the work of the working group has stalled.”
* Capitol News Illinois…
[The energy bill] contains goals of putting the state on a path to 40 percent renewable energy by 2030 through an increased fee on ratepayer bills; encouraging adoption of electric vehicles through rebates and incentives; and getting the state to 100 percent carbon-free energy by 2050. It also strengthens several ethics measures for public utilities.
It also provides several ratepayer subsidies for the development of renewable energy and preserving the profitability of nuclear energy.
That includes, but is not limited to, $694 million in subsidies to three nuclear plants owned by energy giant Exelon at a cost of about 80 cents on the average monthly ratepayer bill; an added $1.22 to an average bill to fund new renewable development; 86 cents for an expanded low-income weatherization program; about 18 cents per month to incentivize the transition of closed or closing coal plants to solar facilities; and another 9 cents per month for the conversion of coal sites to battery storage.
* Pantagraph…
After adjournment, Senate President Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, made a statement similar to one he made June 1 after the Senate failed to call an energy bill for a vote ahead of the regular session adjournment.
“There are still some points of contention between two critical constituencies — between labor and the environmental activists — I believe they’re going to be continuing to meet as early as this evening to try to work out those differences and the Senate stands ready, willing and able to return as soon as an agreement is reached,” he said Tuesday.
Harmon did not say how many Democratic lawmakers peeled support from the proposed energy package, but noted he was “confident that the bill as proposed would not have passed today,” if brought for a floor vote.
Still, he said he is also “confident” an energy bill will pass this summer.
* Sun-Times…
A spokesman from Exelon said in a statement the company is “disappointed” a bill didn’t come up for a vote and “absent quick passage of legislation, Exelon has no choice but to proceed with retiring Byron in September and Dresden in November, as previously announced.”
In a statement, the Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition said they were disappointed the Senate was heading home without a deal.
“Thousands of union workers and solar installers may now lose their jobs, while the climate crisis worsens and Black and Brown communities continue to struggle,” the statement reads in part. “We are deeply disappointed the Senate adjourned without taking action on a carbon-free energy future, but stand ready to enact the Governor’s plan as soon as possible.”
* WTTW…
“I think everybody has digested the fact that coal is going to have to go offline in 2035 unless some significant technology improvements become available and affordable and I think people are coming to terms with that,” Harmon said. “Really the conversations over the last 36 hours have revolved around this newfound emphasis on the pace of decarbonization in the natural gas space.”
The holdup now, Harmon said, is over the elimination of another fossil fuel. Environmentalists want natural gas capped until it’d be gone in Illinois come 2045, a deadline that labor organizations contend is a job-killer.
Meanwhile, Illinois’ burgeoning solar industry is standing at a so-called cliff, as the lack of an omnibus energy law means structural and financial problems with an existing law meant to prop up renewable energy via state-backed credits remains unfixed.
* Tribune…
The lack of accord this spring on a plan that aims to set the state on a path to Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s goal of 100% carbon-free energy by 2050 was seen as a sign of a growing disconnect between the legislature and the Democratic governor.
Mainly the Senate, but yeah.
…Adding… Crain’s…
Don’t bet against a deal. Too many interests have too much at stake, including the unions that Mitchell noted were in line to secure many more jobs in newer industries than the coal-fired and nuclear power ones they’re trying to save now if the bill becomes law.
But, so far, no one that the enviros or the unions will listen to has been able to tell either to stand down.
I disagree in part. The enviros have moved a lot. Labor is being labor, however.
*** UPDATE *** An important comment…
There seems to be a massive knowledge disconnect here. This is about decarbonizing the electric sector. This has literally zero to do with how you heat your home if you use natural gas. Zero.
Natural gas will continue to flow into your homes for home heating and cooking, etc.
Too many of y’all are way overreacting based on false information.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 9:38 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: I really do not understand US Rep. Mary Miller
Next Post: Once again, with feeling
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
10 years? They couldn’t compromise on 2040??
Surely there is more to it than that….
And how do we heat homes in 2046 if no gas? Electric??? With no nukes??
Comment by Fav Human Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 9:53 am
If labor is down and there are no more than a couple GOP nuke town votes, the bill can’t pass, especially if it needs 36 and 71. Isn’t just that simple or am I missing something?
Comment by Telly Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 9:58 am
===And how do we heat homes in 2046 if no gas? ===
Your question really ought to be “how will our species continue to thrive if we continue to pollute our atmosphere with CO2 adding to a horrific feedback loop of climate change which poses the threat of causing a runaway green house effect?” or “Will the mass extinctions caused by human pollution create a threat to our ecosystem that will cause the collapse of our civilization and potentially the extinction of our species?”
Those are better questions than “How will I heat my home in 2046?”
You got 25 years to figure it out, bud. If how you heat your home is really your top priority in this conversation you are lucky to be ignorantly unaware of the peril our species is in as we continue to happily pollute our own environment in spite of having decades of knowledge about this problem.
Comment by Candy Dogood Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:03 am
=== If how you heat your home is really your top priority in this conversation you are lucky to be ignorantly unaware of the peril our species is in as we continue to happily pollute our own environment in spite of having decades of knowledge about this problem. ===
Whoa, not heating hones means people die. Lots of people. Climate change is a problem but that does not mean we can ignore everything else. And as the one saying we must stop all fossil fuel use immediately, we’ll, provide an alternative that will work.
And if one of your alternatives is not lots more nuclear, then you’re not really serious about fixing the problem.
Comment by Alan Medsker Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:14 am
===And as the one saying we must stop all fossil fuel use immediately===
Nobody is saying that. Stop arguing like a child or go back to Facebook.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:16 am
There are electric HVAC and water heating options on the market now. In many places geothermal is already an excellent home heating tool now, and getting easier/cheaper. Home heating in 2045 is not an issue that should be stalling this discussion.
Comment by JM Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:26 am
Candy Dogood - Those are fair questions, but in reality it seems like most Americans care and ask more questions like Fav Human’s question.
Unfortunately, I know plenty of people who claim to care about climate change, but when they are informed about the somewhat minor inconveniences they may face to combat it, they stop caring pretty quick.
Comment by Illinana Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:26 am
I’m still trying to figure out how the Senate is responsible for this fumble. The working group was progressing along with bill language all throughout Memorial Day Weekend and it looked close to being a deal.
Then the Governor meets with Excelon & releases last minute bill language late on the 31st which represented “a significant departure from the framework” of the working group as described by Senate President Harmon on 6/2 in his press conference.
It was the Governor with the Excelon meeting, the new bill language, the insistence on an unrealistic decarbonization deadline, and the hundreds of millions more given to Excelon.
Governor’s own, and he should own this fumble instead of trying to spin it onto others.
Comment by SKI Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:32 am
“And how do we heat homes in 2046 if no gas? Electric??? With no nukes??”
There seems to be a massive knowledge disconnect here. This is about decarbonizing the electric sector. This has literally zero to do with how you heat your home if you use natural gas. Zero.
Natural gas will continue to flow into your homes for home heating and cooking, etc.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:33 am
There seems to be a massive knowledge disconnect here. This is about decarbonizing the electric sector.
My bad. I never though generating electricity via natural gas was a good idea. So this is a don’t care for me.
unions
I can understand their concern. They for sure see the jobs that are going away. But will the new ones really show up? And will they really be union?
Valid things for them to worry about.
Comment by Fav Human Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:39 am
=== Governor’s own===
Slow down, Speed Racer.
The co-equal branches have their own responsibilities and a bill needs to pass chambers to get to an ownership of signature.
You have a chamber with its leader with dubious ties with a CoS’s lobbying history and the leader himself not just looking at labor as an ally but seemingly being an advocate(?) for labor in this instance.
There’s also a family squabble within the party being played out between one chamber and the executive… and with an emissary for the governor being seen as less than helpful as well.
We all have jokingly made light of how the Senate is the forgotten chamber as of late, but this battle on the energy/enviro bill internally is as much a policy wonk battle as it’s a political posturing, one against the other.
The simple is “governors own” here, and that office owns a bit of it, but the chamber and its own look at things has the bigger slice of the pie
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:41 am
It is tiresome hearing carbon dioxide ignorantly referred to as a “pollutant” by folks expressing their climate hysteria as science. It is hard to take their claim that our species is “in peril” seriously. And really enough with the “clean energy” illusion. There is no such thing. There is always a tradeoff between energy needs and ecological consequences, no matter how you generate it. The more hysterical you get about, the less impressive your thinking becomes, and the less people are likely to take you seriously. Getting the tradeoff right is tricky. We need to reach the greatest energy potential while doing the least damage to the ecology and the economy. I am pretty sure the GA is the least likely entity to get that balance right, but Illinois gonna Illinois as they say.
Comment by Captain Obvious Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:43 am
===I am pretty sure the GA is the least likely entity to get that balance right===
So, who’s gonna do it? The state’s fairy godmother?
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:44 am
“There seems to be a massive knowledge disconnect here.”
Yes, and some of that springs from how the bills were merged together down to the wire. The public is a massive part of this, and having this last “skinny version” only be available to the public on Monday morning is not being open and transparent. Just maybe some of the public is interested as well as what this bill said and didn’t say. After all, members of the public make up the constituencies of all of the various stakeholders groups, and many times can inform them of things that may have been overlooked in the zeal to pass something BIG.
Comment by Anon221 Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:46 am
I don’t see why everyone is in such a huge rush to get an energy Bill done this week that clearly needs a lot more work to obtain the required votes to pass in both Chambers? The Legislature will return in September to do the Federal Map and has scheduled Session dates for October. I don’t see why they that can’t get this done later this year by having all of the parties meet and working out a compromise that involves organized labor, the green community and other interested parties.
Comment by Haley Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:50 am
=== I don’t see why they that can’t get this done later this year===
Solar cliff, for one. Exelon planning, for two. There’s more, but if you’re not seeing it, you’re not looking very hard.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:51 am
“You got 25 years to figure it out, bud.”
Sounds like the same logic/leadership that got Illinois into the Pension abyss, headed to insolvency
Comment by Disappointed Female Suburban Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 11:00 am
=== headed to insolvency===
Is that you IPI?
The idea that in 25 years to restructure and prepare for our energy needs AND labor and envious can’t find a place where jobs and organized labor will meet with these challenges is baffling.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 11:03 am
“It is tiresome hearing carbon dioxide ignorantly referred to as a “pollutant” by folks expressing their climate hysteria as science”
From the NOAA:
“Carbon dioxide levels today are higher than at any point in at least the past 800,000 years”
and
“Carbon dioxide concentrations are rising mostly because of the fossil fuels that people are burning for energy. Fossil fuels like coal and oil contain carbon.”
Silly us. We should be listening to the political servants of polluters and not our government institutions and scientific entities.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 11:10 am
===I’m still trying to figure out how the Senate is responsible for this fumble===
“we support the governor”
“We also stand with the governor on de-carbonization targets that need to be in a final deal”
“The Illinois Senate will return to session on Tuesday, June 15 for the purpose of voting on clean energy legislation that Gov. JB Pritzker negotiated to set Illinois on a path to a nation-leading renewable energy plan.”
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 11:12 am
== It is tiresome hearing carbon dioxide ignorantly referred to as a “pollutant” by folks expressing their climate hysteria as science ==
Facebook >>>>>>
Comment by SWIL_Voter Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 11:33 am
==There seems to be a massive knowledge disconnect here. This is about decarbonizing the electric sector. This has literally zero to do with how you heat your home if you use natural gas. Zero.==
Factually true about the omnibus energy bill, but let’s not forget that the environmental groups attempted to stop efforts to provide home heating with Natural Gas to Pembroke Township.
Comment by JLW Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 12:27 pm
Captain Obvious needed to look up the definition of pollutant before his post.
Comment by Jibba Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 12:33 pm
===attempted to stop===
And failed miserably.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 12:36 pm
Thank you Rich. This narrative of enviro-blaming is waaay off. Significant and major concessions have been made on many fronts, even in the face of numerous new issues being thrown into the mix or brought to the fore throughout.
Comment by JM Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 12:46 pm
https://dieselnet.com/news/2007/04epa.php
Apr 03, 2007 · US Supreme Court decides CO2is a pollutant 3 April 2007 In one of the most important decisions in environmental law, the US Supreme Court has ruled that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a pollutant
Comment by very old soil Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 12:55 pm
Rich has it right, the Senate with Harmon in charge has to accept a lot of the blame on this hopefully temporary failure. When Harmon was elected Pres I commented on here about a bad situation I experienced with him in the past, and at this point, it appears things haven’t changed.
Comment by nadia Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 1:40 pm
Harmon’s meddling has finally caught up to him.
Comment by Opening Date Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 1:50 pm
“Harmon’s meddling has finally caught up to him.”
CPV and its $1.3 BILLION investment in Illinois would beg to differ. Facts are sometimes inconvenient to one’s preferred narrative.
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/utilities/why-senate-left-springfield-without-voting-big-energy-bill
“The fate of a $1.3 billion natural gas plant under construction in Grundy County is mainly what kept the Senate from acting yesterday on the most ambitious state energy bill in 25 years. Competitive Power Ventures, a Silver Spring, Md.-based power generator, threatened to pull the plug on a massive gas-fired facility it’s building in Morris if the bill as drafted yesterday was passed, the company confirmed today.”
Comment by But... Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 3:13 pm
=== The state’s fairy godmother? ===
I would never be able to financially recover from the amount I would give to charity to see our elected officials in their best fairy godmother costumes.
Comment by Candy Dogood Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 3:47 pm
Why the heck is nobody talking about next generation nuclear? Sigh.
Comment by Southsider Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 5:23 pm
- Southsider - Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 5:23 pm:
==Why the heck is nobody talking about next generation nuclear? Sigh.==
The Chinese are working on fusion reactors, and there is also Thorium reactors, safer then the nukes that exist now.
Comment by DuPage Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 5:40 pm
@- Fav Human - Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 10:39 am:
unions
==They for sure see the jobs that are going away. But will the new ones really show up? And will they really be union?===
The new jobs are not required to be union. They have to pay prevailing wage and value of pension and health insurance. Unless they changed something.
Comment by DuPage Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 5:49 pm
Phasing out natural gas in building use will be the next battle, which will make 100% renewable electricity look like child’s play.
PS - So-called next generation nuclear is a wishful pipe dream, decades from competitive commercialization.
Comment by VerySmallRocks Wednesday, Jun 16, 21 @ 6:59 pm