22 Jun ENOUGH, Already!

Austin Energy is proposing a multi-tiered rate structure that rewards conservation and charges a premium for high-volume use. It sure seems reasonable to me. Several other cities already have such rate structures in place.

The average household uses about 1,100 kilowatt hours of electricity per month. Austin Energy's plan would make the first 500 kilowatt hours dirt-cheap (3.3 cents per kWh in the summer, and even crazy-cheaper in the winter at 1.8 cents), the next 500 less cheap but still modestly priced at 8 cents per kWh (just 5.6 cents in winter!), and so on — there are five tiers. The uppermost tier, anything above 2,500 kWh, would be billed at 11.4 cents (summer rate) and 9.6 cents (winter rate). 

Predictably, some people are complaining that it's just not faaaaaaaiiiiir.

Really, folks?

How much electricity is enough? Is 500 or 1,000 kWh per month at the insanely cheap rates cited above, really not enough for us?

By the way, did you know that consumers in Germany pay about 23 cents per kWh for electricity? And in the UK I think it's about 20 cents. So, what are we whining about? 

Some people are putting forth the argument that Austin Energy's proposed multi-tiered rate structure penalizes the poor. Their reasoning is that poorer people live in less-well-insulated houses and such, which increases their energy consumption.

But I think this is a bogus argument. I think the people hardest-hit by the proposed multi-tier structure will not be the class of people constantly having to choose between keeping the lights on and buying groceries, but well-heeled suburbanites living in big houses. People with bloated dwellings with lots of appliances, and cavernous space to heat and cool. People who spend their weekends blowing leaves around their yards with big noisy machines. And these people just don't wanna pay more! And because the squeaky wheel gets the grease, I'm afraid we may miss out on the chance to have a multi-tiered structure that rewards conservation.

Have you ever been poor? As in, choosing between keeping the lights/heat on and putting food on the table? Probably at least a few of us reading this have. I think it's safe to say that those folks are not the ones who would be brutalized by the 11.4 cents/kWh rate at the top tier. Poor households simply don't use 2,500 kWh of electricity a month – they just don't! I'm sure there are exceptions, but for the most part, it would be really hard for a household of modest means to use that much electricity even if it tried.

Granted, poor insulation in low-income dwellings is a problem. At the extreme, people living in RVs and mobile homes take a big hit because those structures have little or no insulation. I've heard of people in 16-foot trailers having $100 electric bills. 

But the solution isn't to make unlimited electricity available at insanely cheap rates that contribute to pollution by failing to reward conservation. The solution is to add smaller houses to the mix of housing option. And insulate houses better. And educate people. And also, to remind ourselves that most of the seven billion people in the world have little or no electricity at all. Can't we make do with modest consumption? How much is enough?

Personally, I've lived on about 90 kWh per month by choice since around 2007, without sacrificing much of anything. That is NINETY. (Actually it's probably closer to 50 kWh per month a lot of the time.) So I know first-hand that 1,000 kilowatt hours of electricity per month is ENOUGH! It really is. Nobody needs 2,500 kilowatt hours per month — and if you think you do, then you surely have the money to pay extra for it. 

I realize that some will find this an outrageous statement, but I think a healthy measure of outrage is called for here. I almost wish we had a coal plant in our backyards, so the cost of our electricity consumption would be more in our faces.

Austin likes to think of itself as green. But I don't think we're walking our talk. The national average electricity consumption is about 1,100 kWh per month. We ought to be able to do as well as this, or better. And it doesn't seem unreasonable to charge a premium to those who don't want to moderate their consumption.