The Energy Information Administration, who touts themselves as “Official Energy Statistics from the US Government”, released a rather astounding conclusion.  While most people have been scare-mongering by saying Waxman-Markey will practically bankrupt most lower income people through much higher energy prices, EIA says this is not true at all:

ACESA increases energy prices, but effects on electricity and natural gas bills of consumers are substantially mitigated through 2025 by the allocation of free allowances to regulated electricity and natural gas distribution companies.  Except for the ACESA No International/Limited Case, electricity prices in five of the six main ACESA cases range from 9.5 to 9.6 cents per kilowatthour in 2020, only 3 to 4 percent above the Reference Case level.⁶  Average impacts on electricity prices in 2030 are projected to be substantially greater, reflecting both higher allowance prices and the phase-out of the free allocation of allowances to distributors between 2025 and 2030.  By 2030, electricity prices in the ACESA Basic Case are 12.0 cents per kilowatthour, 19 percent above the Reference Case level, with a wider band of 11.1 cents to 17.8 cents (10 to 77 percent above the Reference Case level) across all six main policy cases.

According to them, the cost of energy will be 3 to 4 percent higher until about 2030.  At that point, it will jump to possibly 77% higher.  But, since we’ll be using substantially less electricity, the overall impact will be mitigated.  They even prove it by drawing a chart:

Sounds great to me.  In the meantime:

• Utility Duke Energy seeks 12.6 percent rate increase for North Carolina customers
• Duke Energy will ask South Carolina regulators to boost rates by an average 9.3 percent for residential customers that it says it needs to cover costs and provide a fair return for investors.
• Duke Energy Kentucky announced today it has filed a request with the Kentucky Public Service Commission seeking a rate increase for natural gas delivery service of approximately $17.5 million, or 14 percent on total gas revenues, to be effective in early 2010.
• Appalachian Power Company has proposed a new rate increase that could raise electricity bills by 18 percent.
• Vermont’s second largest electric utility is asking the Public Service Board for permission to raise rates 4.84 percent on Oct. 1.
• On May 15, 2009, National Grid filed a petition with the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) requesting an approximately $111 million increase in rates as of January 1, 2010. For residential customers, this is an 18% increase in distribution rates (5.5% for total bill).
• As Salt River Project officials try to sell a proposed 8.8 percent increase in electric rates, critics say the utility is avoiding a big question: Where will the money go?
• Kansas regulators on Friday approved a $32 million increase in electric rates for Westar Energy Inc., raising customers’ monthly bills for the third time this year.  The latest increase takes effect Monday and will help Westar pay for improvements on pollution-control equipment at its generating plants.
• Less than six months after it raised electric rates by $163 million, AmerenUE is going back to Missouri regulators in search of another, larger increase.  The St. Louis-based utility on Friday sought approval to boost rates by 18 percent, or $402 million, to help compensate for higher fuel prices, financing costs and reliability improvements.
• Allegheny Power, the electric delivery business of Allegheny Energy, Inc., submitted a request to the Public Service Commission of West Virginia for an interim rate adjustment of $82 million for the recovery of fuel and purchased power costs. Allegheny has requested that the adjustment be effective October 1, 2009.
• State regulators on Tuesday said Consumers Energy Co. can enact a $53.5 million rate increase over the next six months, as a rate case continues in which the utility sought $214.5 million.

Those are some of the increases since June 26, 2009.  That’s when Waxman-Markey passed.  This is where it gets beautiful.  EIA projects increases of 3 to 4 percent initially.  Before the report was even printed, rates have increased by as much as 26%.  Someone want to tell me exactly that margin of error is?  It’s got to be pretty bad.

Some people are suggesting EIA was more concerned with political issues than math.  I can’t see how that can not be disputed.  I mean, all EIA had to do was read the headlines to know that 20% is probably the baseline to start with.  It will only go up from there.

Meanwhile, the White House is still wanting to know who is spreading disinformation regarding health care.  And, if they think you’re spreading misinformation, they’re sending in the SEIU.  So, I guess if the EIA says it will be 3%, regardless if it’s already 20%, then it shall be 3%.  Where have we heard that logic before??  I doubt Nancy Pelosi’s truth commission will be looking into this one tho.

Tags: 1984, allegheny power, amerenue, appalachian power, big-brother, climate change, consumers energy, duke, eia, energy, energy information administration, global warming, kansas, kentucky, markey, Missouri, nancy pelosi, national grid, North Carolina, official energy statistics, ohio, public service commission, rate increase, salt river, SEIU, south-carolina, st. louis, truth commission, Utah, vermont, waxman, waxman-markey, West Virginia, westar, white house