Failed PNM/Avangrid merger is chance for energy democracy
Rob Black, the president and CEO of the New Mexico Chamber of Commerce wrote in his piece (“Lessons from the Avangrid merger failure,” My View, Jan. 8) that we, New Energy Economy, spread misrepresentations to derail the Avangrid merger. Black is welcome to examine the evidence presented himself — it is all part of the public record — and will find that every piece of evidence and testimony we presented came from verifiable and reputable sources that proved conclusively that the merger was not in the public interest.
He writes that “as a state we cannot let one vocal fringe group derail what’s good for the state,” but he forgets that it was not New Energy Economy that derailed the merger but Avangrid’s own track record of terrible customer service, high rates and violations in every place where it operates that convinced the hearing examiner, a utility expert (which Black is not), and the Public Regulation Commission to unanimously reject the merger.
During Supreme Court oral arguments in the case, the chief justice herself referred to the “mountain of evidence” against Avangrid. I believe the corporation pulled out because it was afraid of a scathing New Mexico Supreme Court opinion detailing a track record of malfeasance and corporate predation, not because the process was too slow (typical spin that doesn’t accept responsibility for past actions).
Black concludes that in the case of potential business deals “it’s the state’s job to make the approval practices easier,” but we strongly disagree. Especially when the deal in question is a takeover of an essential service that every single New Mexican, including the 17% of New Mexicans who live below the poverty line, must pay for each month. New Mexicans below the poverty line already pay up to 16% of their income on energy, compared to just 3% average in most states. It is these vulnerable New Mexicans the state is bound to protect from poor service, high rates and exploitation, a role the New Mexico Chamber of Commerce apparently doesn’t appreciate.
Rather than criticizing New Energy Economy for protecting families and businesses from high-priced utility costs and poor electric service, which is what the chamber should also be concerned about because electric service is central to our economy, Black avoids the evidence, relies on ideological talking points, and blindly advocates for less regulation and monopoly oversight. Regulation is the public’s protection. His position is grossly irresponsible and is a very dangerous proposition for the New Mexico we love.
We agree with Black on this one point — with abundant solar and wind, New Mexico should be leading the nation in renewable energy production. That leadership, however, does not require that our grid be taken over by a Spanish corporation. It makes sense that the chamber views public ownership of energy as a scary bogeyman, but in fact, community ownership of energy exists in numerous forms all over the United States and in New Mexico, and reliably serves 1 in 7 American families with lower-cost energy and higher renewable penetration (including the only 100% renewable-powered localities) than investor-owned utilities. This would be good for business, the environment and our grandchildren.
Energy democracy can take the form of a state-owned grid, like Nebraska, or look like decentralized community ownership of generation, such as municipal utilities, community choice aggregation (local choice), tribal ownership, community solar projects, widespread rooftop solar adoption or micro-grids. The Washington Post recently profiled a community in Florida where every home was built with battery and storage — and pays no electricity bills! Now that’s the kind of leadership we can get behind.