Energy “affordability” merits consideration as a priority for Clark Public Utilities only when all of the costs of generating power are taken into consideration. That has always been true, but only in my lifetime has it made it to some level of cultural awareness.
Even now, the true costs and horrendous risks of fossil fuel and nuclear energy generation (including the newest nuclear technology) are often ignored or minimized in the public conversation — as in Ann Donnelly’s recent opinion (“Utility must make reliability, affordability priorities,” The Columbian, April 6).
Arguments such as hers fail to factor in the highest priorities: The well-being of the human race and the health of the planet. Thus they build a skewed context in which important decisions are being made. This fits the historical orientation of Clark Public Utilities officials and commissioners, but lacks wisdom for the long term.
Yes, we need measures that provide for the most vulnerable among us — like Clark Public Utilities’ Operation Warm Heart — but maintaining artificially low rates for voting consumers is not a good long-term strategy.
