When a utility sells something as abstract as wind energy credits, it must take great pains to ensure that it scrupulously honors the letter of the law, or in this case the program rules, as well as the spirit.
The public trust is at stake.
Unfortunately, Xcel Energy hasn’t met that standard in the way it has run its Windsource program.
Windsource started in 1998 as a way for environmentally conscious customers to pay a premium to support the development of Colorado wind energy.
Xcel sold credits in 2005 to 2007 for more green energy than it actually generated through Windsource, which gets power from Colorado wind farms.
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission staff is recommending that Xcel refund $1.5 million plus interest to Windsource customers.
The utility’s nearly 47,000 Windsource customers pay a separate rate, over and above their base electric rate, that typically works out to be about $10 more each month.
Xcel is balking at issuing refunds, saying it would be difficult to track down all of the customers who’ve come and gone and the individual refund would be so small it would hardly be worth it. A customer’s refund might amount to $1, said Mark Stutz, Xcel spokesman.
We’re sympathetic to the argument Xcel makes about refunds. It does seem like it would be a waste of resources.
But we have issues with the remedy that Xcel has proposed.
First a little background. Through its efforts to meet the state renewable energy standard, Xcel has generated or purchased considerable wind power. That is separate from the Windsource program.
And Xcel is ahead of schedule in meeting its state-mandated obligation to get 20 percent of power from renewable resources by 2020. And for that we laud them.
However, we’re not so keen on the settlement Xcel is proposing to rectify the Windsource over-collection. The utility has proposed using some of its company “profit” to pay for the wind resources already purchased as the company has been striving to meet the 20 percent mandate.
In essence, they would move the money from column A to column B, making the fix largely one of an accounting nature.
We understand the logic, but we do not agree.
Xcel needs to use the money to buy wind energy over and above what it has locked in as it makes plans to meet the 20 percent mandate, and over and above what it already generates through Windsource.
In essence, we think the over-collected money should result in a net increase of wind power purchased by the utility.
That would honor the spirit of the Windsource program and the good intentions of the people who have so generously supported it.
