More Top Picks Beta Blockers For The Heart What They Do And Side Effects
player ready...The editorial about reining in utility spending (“A governor clamps down on utilities to boost affordability. No, not ours,” May 7) was welcome commentary. But there’s one area to explore further: Utilities are not just raising rates. They also want to undermine competition.
Across PJM Interconnection, the nation’s largest competitive wholesale-electricity market, which serves Illinois and 12 other states, utilities like Exelon are pushing policymakers to weaken decades of competition by allowing them to re-monopolize generation with guaranteed returns on investment.
Utilities can already own and operate power generation in regions with competitive markets, provided they do so through a competitive subsidiary. Changing that system to give utilities guaranteed returns on generation investments, like they already have when they build transmission and distribution infrastructure, would only increase risks for ratepayers across the region.
In a competitive market, compensation is not automatically guaranteed to independent power providers that risk their bid not being chosen in the marketplace if it’s not priced competitively. And if the provider fails or faces construction delays or the forecast electricity demand never materializes, no risk is passed on to consumers. This stands in contrast to Plant Vogtle and V.C. Summer. Under the monopoly model favored by utilities, both plant projects suffered billions of dollars in cost overruns and delays — yet utilities still collected returns and passed costs to their captive ratepayers.
Returning to a monopoly system for generation would substantially raise risks for consumers, without providing any clear benefits. That’s exactly why in Maryland and New Jersey, consumer advocates — the people who protect ratepayers from unfair practices and high bills — have said it’s a bad idea.
Utilities are projecting massive increases in power demand, but if they were confident in those projections, they would have every incentive to be the first ones to build generation through a competitive affiliate. Instead, stricter requirements have revealed that those huge projections might not always be accurate. For example, power company AEP Ohio’s forecast dropped from 30 gigawatts to 5.7 gigawatts after regulators in the state enforced stricter requirements on forecasts.
Ohio’s reforms, through HB15, also serve as a model for other states: strengthening competition and attracting investment, all while ensuring pricing transparency in rate cases.
Governors across PJM states, including JB Pritzker, Wes Moore and Josh Shapiro, can help protect affordability for customers by preserving competition and stopping utility efforts to collect guaranteed returns on power plants.
— Todd Snitchler, president and CEO, Electric Power Supply Association
Data center bills aimed at costs
Contrary to the May 7 editorial claiming proposed Illinois data-center legislation would not affect affordability, these bills address a chief cause of increasing utility costs in our state. The concentrated demand of data centers heavily impacts the power grid, causing capacity-related spikes in customer bills. Demand from data centers has also necessitated that we build out the energy infrastructure, the cost of which again has been passed on to consumers.
The impact of data centers on utility bills is expected to continue as the demand for computing power grows with the rise in artificial intelligence. The POWER Act (Protecting Our Water, Energy, and Ratepayers Act, SB4016/HB5513), legislation under consideration in Springfield, would mandate that data centers take responsibility for their own power costs instead of passing them on to residential customers. The act additionally would incentivize data centers to use renewable energy and batteries, decreasing dependence on more costly traditional energy sources.
Illinois residents should not have to subsidize the energy needs of data centers. If we want to lower utility bills, we must hold data centers accountable for their own expenses.
The POWER Act does exactly that.
— Sharon Stolz, Chicago
Making Archer, Kedzie safer for all
The May 1 editorial “A sensible compromise on Archer Avenue takes more than bike activists into account” incorrectly frames the Southwest Side traffic safety project on Archer and Kedzie avenues in Brighton Park as primarily an effort to accommodate people who ride bikes.
In fact, the project aims to improve safety for everyone who uses the street on what are two of the most dangerous corridors in the neighborhood.
Chicago Department of Transportation data shows that the parts of Archer and Kedzie receiving improvements are together responsible for 43% of all injuries and 36% of all fatalities on Brighton Park’s roadways between 2018 and 2022. This translates to 575 people injured and five people killed.
The data makes it clear: These are unsafe roadways that urgently require improvements to prevent serious injuries and fatalities.
Thankfully, Chicago knows how to address unsafe streets through infrastructure enhancements that make the road safer for everyone, largely by reducing excessive speeding by drivers.
CDOT has collected an impressive amount of data highlighting the dramatic impact its traffic safety projects have had on serious injuries and fatalities. Since 2021, Chicago has recorded a 30% decline in fatal traffic crashes.
How was this impressive feat accomplished? By targeting the highest-crash corridors, like Kedzie and Archer avenues, and redesigning streets to discourage speeding and reckless driving.
More Top Picks Best Lighted Reading Glasses
One project on Kedzie on the Northwest Side reduced by 90% the number of drivers exceeding 30 mph. This is accomplished primarily by narrowing travel lanes for cars, which encourages drivers to move at safer speeds.
And guess what? When you right-size car travel lanes, you end up with extra space to make improvements for people walking, biking and using transit. Pedestrian refuge islands, bus stop improvements and, yes, protected bike lanes create a safer and more comfortable place for people not in a car.
And in a neighborhood like Brighton Park, where more than half of residents have limited or no access to a car, this means increased safe access to jobs, education, healthcare and other resources.
By focusing solely on the project’s new protected bike lanes, the editorial board entirely misses the lifesaving purpose of the Archer and Kedzie Avenue project, which is to create a safe street for all.
— Jim Merrell, managing director of advocacy, Active Transportation Alliance
Way to encourage CTA ridership
The city of Chicago should turn the vacant land at 9500 South State Street into a safe, secure and free parking lot. The parking lot should be free for CTA riders, which would encourage people to use the CTA.
City employees and aldermen should encourage residents to use the CTA.
— Marc Sims, Chicago
Commissioner’s laughable claim
I laughed when I read that Cook County Board of Review Commissioner Samantha Steele said she wouldn’t have been prosecuted if she were anyone else (“Steele claims mistreatment after ruling,” May 8). I don’t think she would have been found not guilty if she were anyone else.
Was her driver’s license suspended as required by state law for failure to submit to a Breathalyzer? Also, isn’t it a gross conflict of interest for a Board of Review member to have a tax consulting business?
Kudos to the electorate for getting rid of her.
— Richard Prince, Chicago
Note to readers
In honor of our “Chicago 2050” op-ed series, we’d like to hear from you about your hopes for what Chicago will be like in 25 years. (Sincere thoughts only.) Send a letter of no more than 400 words to [email protected]. Be sure to include your full name and your city/town.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].