Is JEA gambling with our financial future?

The medical risks of JEA's current and proposed coal-fired power plants have already been heavily discussed on Mercury Falling. But what about the financial risks? As your read the below clip from today's issue of The Wall Street Journal, keep in mind that since JEA is city-owned, every resident of Jacksonville is, in essence, an "investor."

Cuomo Subpoenas Five Energy Firms
New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is investigating five energy companies to determine whether plans to create coal-fired power plants present an undisclosed financial risk to investors. Mr. Cuomo sent subpoenas seeking internal documents to AES Corp., Dominion Resources Inc., Dynegy Inc., Peabody Energy Corp., and Xcel Energy Inc. The attorney general's office suggested the companies could take a hit if federal lawmakers tighten controls on coal-fired plants, which emit carbon dioxide, among pollutants scientists have linked to global warming.

Does JEA have money to burn?

Well, it might be healthier for Jacksonville than all the coal it burns. But seriously, according to the September 4th issue of Folioweekly, in an article entitled "Bill of Goods," JEA has collected $208 million more than it needed from customers. This, in spite of the fact that JEA promised it would lower rates if fuel prices dropped. The math was done by Bruce Strauss, current retiree and former investigator for the IRS.

What could JEA do with all this filthy lucre? Well, for one, how about clean up its filthy coal plants? Or invest more in renewable energy, from solar, wind, or tidal sources? That way, the cost of "fuel" will never go up, and JEA will no longer have to raise our rates so much, as it does every time coal prices skyrocket.

But wait mystery lovers, there's more. Is there a nefarious plot behind all this extra loot? Folioweekly suggests the city may be looking to sell JEA, and the extra money could help the sale price. That, according to Art Shad, chairman of the City Council's Finance Committee would be a bad idea. According to Folioweekly..."Shad's concern is that profits from the company would go to shareholders outside the area. Shareholders would also want to see a profit and would increase utility rates in order to increase dividends." Bottom line is, if JEA is city-owned, its number one priority is to us, the residents of Jacksonville (although you couldn't tell that from its action, specifically emitting so much toxic mercury).

The high, hidden costs of low-down, dirty coal

Is your JEA bill getting higher and higher every month? Well, that big number followed by a dollar sign is only telling part of the story of the true cost of Jacksonville's coal-fired power plants. Here is a key excerpt from a recent article in The Washington Post:

"According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, a scientific advocacy group, annual emissions from a typical coal plant include 10,000 tons of sulfur dioxide, the major cause of acid rain; 10,200 tons of nitrogen oxide, a major contributor to smog; 500 tons of small particles, which cause lung damage and other respiratory problems; 225 pounds of arsenic; 114 pounds of lead; and many other toxic heavy metals, including 170 pounds of mercury, which can cause birth defects, brain damage and other ailments."

And that's just the local coasts of coal. From coalminers' lives to destroyed streams and forests in Appalachia, coal is expensive indeed. Click here to read Jeff Goodell's full article about measuring the true coast of coal, "King Coal: What It Costs Us."