Laserfiche WebLink
<br />002257 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />THE $ TRIBUNE <br /> <br />!lEl.EN K. COPl..EY. ~ ood ~!!'4i1NW iJaud <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />.JV. <br />fi A CopJqNrrnpopor <br /> <br />NEIL !dORGAIl. Edillr <br />IlllBEIIT II. WTI'TY. Depoty Edlw <br />WALT MlLLEIl. Abup"Edittr <br />IlAl.PB 1lENIlErI', Qjcf EdiUwW Writ6 <br /> <br />. <br />: San Diego, California, Wednesday, Marcl128, 1JlM <br />. , <br /> <br />Page B-IO <br /> <br />. Telephone 299-3131 <br /> <br />The great energy giveaway <br /> <br />THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, while running <br />a record deficit of nearly $200 billion a year, is <br />preparing to renew "sweetheart" contracts to sell <br />Hoover Dam electric power for peanuts. <br />That's great for =y consumer.! of electricity in <br />the Hoover Dam marketing area, but not for San <br />Diegans. Our power costs are among the highest in <br />the nation, but we cannot participate in the govern- <br />ment giveaway. If we could, we could save $10 to <br />$:>0 million a year, which would help with the high <br />utility bills. <br />,: Hoover Dam power sells for less than hall a cent <br />a kilowatt hour. The San Diego Gas and Electric Co. <br />is paying siJ: cents a kilowatt hour for the electrici- <br />ty it is buying in Ariznna and New Mexico to bring <br />here over the company's new transmission tine to <br />the east. <br />, Why can't San Diegans share in the benefits of <br />low-cost federal power? Politics is a big part of the <br />answer. The utilities which contr:lcted for Hoover <br />power in the 19~Os got a great bargain, and San <br />Diego Gas and Electric wasn't one of them. The 50- <br />year contr:lcts are expiring in 1987, and the contrac- <br />tors claim the right of renewal Legislation is being <br />pushed in Congress, by Sell. James McClure, R.Ida.. <br />and Rep, Morris Ud.111, D-Ariz.. to give them 30 <br />years more at the trough. <br /> <br />The Environmental Defense Fund says this under- <br />pricing of federal hydropower is unfair and merely <br />encourages consumption, increasing demands for <br />coal and nuclear power. We agree. <br />, Fairness demands that Hoover's electricity be <br />auctioned off to the highest bidder. <br />The old pork.barrellaws for the distribution of <br />public power are out of date. There is no good rea- <br />son for Uncle Sam to take less than top dollar for <br />the energy generated by the Colorado River. Wby <br />should customer.! served by municipal electric sys- <br />tems in Los Angeles, Glendale and Pasadena have <br />a= to low-cost power that is denied to us, mere- <br />ly because we are served by a private power com. <br />,pany? They don't own Hoover Dam. The Colorado <br />River !lclongs to all of us. <br />Federal officials say they aren't in the business of <br />making a profit from the sale of power. But they <br />aren't generating energy just for the fun of it. And <br />energy is worth far more now than it was worth in <br />1937. It is the preferred users who are making giant <br />profits, at the expense of the feder:il treasury and <br />all of us. <br />Congress should not act hastily to perpetuate this <br />giveaway of public money for another 30 years. The <br />entire structure of federal power pricing needs to <br />be brought up to tbte. <br /> <br />. <br />