Supporters of speeding up the move to electric vehicles see investment by utilities as essential, but business groups say it will be hard for them to compete with utilities on providing charging stations for the public.
In its second plan on electric vehicles filed with regulators, Xcel Energy proposes spending $145 million to build a public charging network over the next three years in addition to offering rebates and other programs. Charge Ahead Partnership, a national coalition that includes retailers that want to build EV charging stations, opposes proposals by Xcel and other utilities to install and operate chargers.
Coalition spokesman Ryan McKinnon said regulated utilities like Xcel Energy would have an unfair advantage in the emerging market because they can use ratepayers’ money to invest in the infrastructure and they get a certain rate of return on their investments.
“We’re advocating for policies that will make it more of a level playing field for private business retailers, basically just letting the free market come in and be able to provide this service without having to compete with a monopoly,” McKinnon said.
The coalition also objects to utilities owning and operating chargers because the money will come from ratepayers, including low-income customers and people who don’t have EVs.
Will Toor, executive director of the Colorado Energy Office, said there’s plenty of room for investors who want to build the thousands of charging stations that will be needed to meet the state’s goals for electrifying transportation.
“I’m more concerned that between state, federal, utility and private sector investment, can we get enough investment to meet that need,” Toor said.
An updated EV plan released earlier this year by the Polis administration calls for 2.1 million cars and SUVs on Colorado roads by 2035 and 1,700 fast chargers and 5,800 slower public chargers.
An analysis by the International Council on Clean Transportation said that nearly $1 billion will have to be spent on charging infrastructure through this decade if Colorado wants to meet its goals.
The analysis suggested that Colorado will need nearly 5,000 fast-charging EV ports by the end of 2030, said Christian Williss, managing director for transportation at the energy office.
“Right now we’re at a little over 800,” Williss said. “It kind of takes an all-hands-on-deck approach.”
Not the right vehicle?
Ray Huff doesn’t think Xcel Energy and other investor-owned, regulated utilities are the right vehicles to build EV-charging networks. Huff is president of HJB Convenience Corp., a Lakewood-based convenience store operator. He said private businesses nationwide want to take advantage of state and federal incentives to start installing chargers but worry about competing with utilities.
“They want to charge me as a ratepayer for their buildout of the network and then get their 10% or 9% return on the money that they took from us,” Huff said. “I can’t do that as a private business person, why can they? Well, it’s because they have a monopoly.”
Public utilities are regulated but essentially operate as monopolies, providing service in certain geographical areas. In return, they get to recover the costs of building power plants, transmission lines and other expenses while making a certain amount of profit.
Both Xcel Energy and Black Hills Energy have submitted plans to the PUC for supporting the use of electric vehicles. Business and trade groups that object to utilities getting into the EV charging business have focused on Xcel Energy, Colorado’s largest electric utility.
Xcel has proposed building and operating up to 460 public fast chargers in its service territory from 2024-2026. That number is less than 10% of the more than 6,000 additional chargers needed to support the state’s goal of having 940,000 EVs on the road by 2030, Jack Ihle, Xcel’s regional vice president for regulatory policy, said in testimony to the PUC.
Ihle said that leaves more than 90% of the additional charging needed to be met by others. Xcel’s plan includes offering rebates for installing home EV chargers; rebates for vehicles; support for the electrification of commercial fleets; rates that encourage charging when demand on the grid is low; and public outreach.
“Transportation is the largest source of carbon emissions in the United States and our EV vision complements our net-zero carbon emissions goal for 2050,” Xcel spokeswoman Michelle Aguayo said in an email.
The goal is to provide everyone in communities served by Xcel “the benefits of electric transportation, whether they own an EV, use public transit or benefit from improved air quality,” Aguayo added.
Xcel Energy recovers its costs of electrification through a rider on customers’ bills. Aguayo said the new plan will increase the average residential electric bill by 77 cents a month.
However, Xcel’s large commercial and industrial customers will see average monthly increases of $15.
In the long run, Xcel customers will benefit from more electric vehicles tapping into the grid, said Travis Madsen, transportation program director for the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project. People charging at home usually plug in their cars at night or when demand is low and there’s excess capacity on the system.
“In effect, we’re using our electric system more efficiently. We’ve already invested in these power plants, the wires and the transformers and whatnot,” Madsen said.
Electric vehicle drivers are putting more money into the electric system, which will help lower everyone’s rates, Madsen said.
A study by Synapse Energy Economics said customers with EVs in three of the utility service areas with the most electric vehicles in the U.S. contributed more than $1.7 billion in net revenue between 2012 and 2021. The result has been “downward pressure” on electric rates, the study said.
Fueling competition or not?
Bill Levis, an AARP Colorado volunteer, has a different viewpoint. He testified against a 2019 law in part because it allowed utilities to cover the costs of building chargers by increasing the rate base, the basic rate customers pay. The law cleared the way for electric utilities to supply public charging stations and, with approval of the PUC, recover their costs.
Levis, the former head of what is now the Colorado Office of the Utility Consumer Advocate, said AARP Colorado remains opposed to utilities adding the expense to the rate base.
“Putting it in the rate base means that those on fixed incomes and lower income people who can’t afford EVs would end up paying for subsidized charging stations,” Levis said in an email.
In addition, because regulators authorize set rates of return for the investments that utilities make, it gives them an unfair advantage in the marketplace, Levis said.
“If Xcel is looking to get ratepayers to subsidize their own investment, it will distort markets to such a degree that retailers who today are strongly considering installing EV charger stations would abandon that effort,” said David Fialkov with the National Association of Truck Stop Operators.
The association has weighed in on utilities proposing to build and run EV chargers in other states. One of those states is Minnesota, where Xcel Energy is based and where it recently withdrew a transportation electrification plan.
Xcel withdrew a clean transportation plan in early June after it got a lower rate increase than it sought from the Minnesota Public Utility Commission. The Star Tribune in Minneapolis reported that Xcel had proposed building and owning 730 EV fast chargers in the state.
Xcel Energy spokeswoman Aguayo said the company is evaluating its next steps and will submit another transportation plan to Minnesota regulators in November.
The Minnesota Department of Commerce said in a document to the utilities commission that it’s encouraging Xcel to review how it can help develop the state’s EV infrastructure. The department said Xcel “has not shown that it can build, operate, and maintain even the limited number” of the fast-charging stations it has been approved to build.
Fialkov said his organization and businesses don’t oppose Xcel Energy and utilities building EV chargers “on their own dime” or in areas where private businesses might not be willing to build.
“A lot of companies are looking at applying for federal grants to install EV chargers and if Xcel continues down the path it’s intending to go on, those plans will be abandoned and Colorado will be left behind,” Fialkov said.
Get more business news by signing up for our Economy Now newsletter.
"electric" - Google News
June 29, 2023 at 07:00PM
https://ift.tt/YeR1piD
Xcel Energy’s $145 million bid to build electric vehicle chargers sparks opposition from private sector - The Denver Post
"electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3cDUtHi
https://ift.tt/1N8q7Kn
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Xcel Energys $145 million bid to build electric vehicle chargers sparks opposition from private sector - The Denver Post"
Post a Comment