The Citizens Action Coalition takes exception to The Star's March 19 editorial, "Blackout threats." Not only does it insult democratic principles, it insults people across the state who are engaged in protecting their property and quality of life through legitimate legal means and grass-roots organizing against corporate arrogance.

This issue of merchant power plants is not one of subverting local interests for the greater good. It is an issue of subverting peoples' rights and interests for short-term profit motives.

By reading this editorial, one gets the idea that developers of merchant power plants have some grand benign design predicated on serving the public interest. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Merchant plants are being proposed by speculators hoping to cash in on perceived power shortages in the Midwest and Eastern U.S. CINCAP, the joint venture of Cinergy and Duke Power, admitted in testimony that it could not make enough profit over the next 20 years' life span of its proposed plant near New Castle if it couldn't complete construction this summer,

The merchant plant phenomenon is obviously a case of whoever builds first makes the most money. It is doubtful that Indiana will see much of a direct energy benefit from these plants. If public electric power needs happen to be served, it will occur only when the price for the developer is right.

What has hurt reliability of the electric system the most appears to be deregulation. A few years ago, Public Service Indiana (now Cinergy) took out an ad in The Star claiming that energy efficiency would save customers and the company money.

PSI stated, "Over the next 20 years or so, the savings on energy bills here in Indiana could add up to as much as $300 million. That's about $2 saved for every $1 the program will cost."

What happened? Deregulation. Since the early 1990s, most utility companies have steadily reduced investment in energy efficiency because, it was purported, they were "preparing" for deregulation. Deregulation gave them no more incentive to reduce electricity demand.

However, reducing demand through energy efficiency measures contributes significantly to system reliability. 

"Preparing" for deregulation also generally means that a utility is attempting, de facto, to maintain its monopoly status. That is, deregulation means that consolidation is the order of the day within the industry, not competition.

While NIPSCO was busy closing a deal to buy Columbia Gas for $6 billion, its transmission and distribution system in March collapsed in the eastern reaches of its territory. Lack of investment to maintain the system, reductions in the work force to "save" money and selling power out of state on the deregulated wholesale market were considered by some estimates to be the culprits.

Given the public's support for energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, it was no surprise that many of 47 testifiers (working people, young and old, etc.) at the field hearing conducted by the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission last month in New Castle urged the state to embrace those measures and technologies as an alternative to building more power plants.

These people understand, as do many others around the state, that the merchant power plant issue embodies many critical policy implications that can impact state energy policy for years to come.

These citizens, acting in everyone's best interest, have hardly earned the "Not in My Backyard" label attributed to them by The Star and merchant plant developers. Instead, they have begun a public revolt whose focus is affordable, reliable, clean power.

Smith, of Indianapolis, is environmental and utility policy coordinator for Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana.

Out-of-State Power Plant Developers Target Indiana
Go to Energy Issues Index

| CAC Home Page | Table of Contents | Issues Index |
| Contact CAC | Join CAC | CAC Newsletter | Resource Links |