I'm confused. I received an email from the superb environmental group, Southern Appalachian Mountain Stewards, which said the following:This is our last chance this year to improve Virginia's commitment to energy efficiency!
Just yesterday, Governor Kaine offered an amendment to Northam's Senate Bill 1248 to include the 19% target we've been pushing for all year. The target will give utilities the goal of meeting 19% of our energy needs with efficiency by 2025, a goal recommended by Governor Kaine's Commission on Climate Change. The Governor also amended Delegate Pollard's bill, HB 2506, to further strengthen Virginia's commitment to energy efficiency.
We need your help to make one final push for efficiency! Remember that meeting the 19% goal would meet the same electricity demand as ten polluting coal-fired power plants.
This Thursday, activists from across Virginia will call their delegates to urge them to support Governor Kaine's amendments. Will you join them? Details below.
Sounds good, right? Except then I saw this in the Richmond Times-Dispatch:
One of the signature components of green-energy legislation pushed by Gov. Timothy M. Kaine -- reducing electricity consumption in Virginia 19 percent by 2025 -- started out as a mandate.So, we have one of the best environmental groups around encouraging people to push this legislation through, but we also have an article in the Times-Dispatch saying that this was watered down from a "mandate" to a "goal." I was confused by this, so I emailed a Democratic delegate who replied with a comment about not allowing the "perfect" to be the enemy of the "good." Which leaves me with the question, is a purely voluntary goal on energy efficiency good or not? Given the horrible track record of Dominion Power on environmental issues, I'm highly skeptical that asking them to do something without MANDATING it will accomplish anything.
Virginia lawmakers removed it when they unanimously passed Senate Bill 1248 last month.
Seeking compromise, Kaine has amended the legislation and reinstated the 19 percent reduction -- but only as a goal and not an order.
The reduction was the top recommendation of Kaine's Climate Change Commission.
For another environmentalist's perspective, I asked Miles Grant, candidate for House of Delegates in the 47th district, and he replied, "I wouldn't describe this as good or even acceptable. Efficiency and renewables get only voluntary goals while coal-fired power continues to get guaranteed billions."
I tend to agree with Miles. Anyone else have any thoughts on this? Thanks.
