Case Studies

CASE STUDY: not in my backyard

A community is sharply divided by a utility company proposal to build an electric power generation plant on the edge of town. Some citizens object to the plant for environmental reasons, fearing that emissions from the coal-fired plant will pollute the air they breathe. Others say they don't object to the concept of a power plant, but they don't like the suggested site for aesthetic, traffic or community planning reasons. Still others say they realize a power plant might be needed - but wonder if it might be built in the next town down the road.

Option 1: The loudest voice wins

Local officials hold public hearings on the power plant proposal, which are attended primarily by people who object to the idea. Sketchy but unsettling testimony about air pollution, increased traffic, unsightly power lines and loss of property values drives the debate - and dominates news media coverage. Public sentiment begins to turn against the idea as utility officials find themselves virtually alone in arguing the plant is needed to sustain energy reliability in the region. Before long, embattled local officials come to believe the only responsive course is to reject the proposal to build the plant.

Option 2: Search for common ground

Local officials welcome public debate, but it takes place through an informed and interactive discussion. Using the Energy ED simulator, the community embarks on a comprehensive, fair and realistic analysis of its own electrical power consumption. The decision about whether or where to build the plant is aided by a wide array of information. Topics include historic and projected energy use for the community and the region, pros and cons of available technologies, efficiency opportunities, regional and global environmental considerations, land use and habitat impacts, infrastructure requirements and social issues. Citizens also take a hard look at their own energy consumption habits - and realize that increased demand for electricity begins at home. The utility retools its proposal so that community concerns are met, and the project moves ahead.

CASE STUDY: making the rate case

Faced with rapidly rising costs, an electric utility company requests a rate increase. The public utility commission, which must act on the request, is lobbied by citizen groups that oppose the rate hike. These groups question the utility's record on starting conservation programs and tapping alternative energy sources. They wonder why the lights flickered out last summer and they're still being asked to pay more. The citizen groups claim a rate hike could be reduced or avoided if the utility simply forced people to use less energy and managed itself more efficiently.

Option 1: hire more lawyers and slug it out

The utility digs in its heels and refuses to “go public” with their explanations for the requested rate hike. The utility reasons there are only a few opinions that matter - those of the regulators reviewing the rate case. The utility's image suffers because it fails to engage citizens with information that could answer their questions. The utility wins the rate case, but loses the public-relations war.

Option 2: educate, don’t litigate

As they pursue the rate hike with regulators, the utility also addresses consumer concerns about the cost, source and reliability of electrical power. With the help of the Energy ED simulator, the utility engages citizens in a conversation about the tough choices that come with keeping the lights on.

The utility asks consumers to consider their own habits and expectations. Are low energy rates compatible with high environmental stewardship? Are all energy sources equally reliable? In an age when so many consumer products come attached to a power cord, will people actually use less electrical power?

The utility wins the rate case, and also wins some new friends by using a realistic computerized simulator to conduct an honest conversation about energy choices.