FLORIDA'S DIRTY SECRET

         A Report Card

                 on

Florida's Electric Utilities

A Project of the Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation (LEAF) co-sponsored by the Florida Consumer Action Network Project for an Energy Efficient Florida August 1997

Purpose

"Things that are measured tend to improve."  John Kenneth Galbraith

Florida's Dirty Secret reports on the energy sources and air pollution emissions of Florida's largest electric utilities. It is based on the utilities' own reports to the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The report is a project of the Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation and co-sponsored by the Florida Consumer Action Network and Project for an Energy Efficient Florida.

This report will:
 
    alert consumers to the varying environmental and health impacts of energy sources used by their  electric utilities.

    make consumers aware that energy efficiency and clean renewable resources could be cost-effectively substituted for some polluting generation.

give consumers the opportunity to make informed comments to their utilities and to the PSC about the need for more sustainable energy choices.

Performance Grade

Overall, performance is unsatisfactory and needs improvement.

Major Conclusions
 
   Electric generation is a major source of local and regional air pollution.

Nationally, electric power plants contribute 66% of all sulfur dioxide (acid rain and smog), 29% of all nitrogen oxides (smog and soot) and 36% of all carbon dioxide (global warming gas). They also contribute significant amounts of toxic air pollutants such as mercury and arsenic. In Florida, nearly half the energy we use is for electric generation. The power plants that make Florida's electricity are almost totally dependent on non-renewable fossil fuels (coal, gas and oil) and nuclear power. Some pollution travels hundreds of miles while other pollution falls close to home.
 
   Environmental health costs are not considered.

In reviewing utility proposals for new power plants and their alternatives (e.g. solar), the PSC does not calculate or consider the environmental/health costs and benefits of utility proposals or alternatives. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection reviews proposed pollution control technologies for permitting purposes, but cannot consider alternatives that may have relatively fewer impacts. This results in more fossil-fueled power plants being approved.
 
Most pollution is from a small number of large utilities.

The report includes the four largest utilities: Florida Power & Light (FPL), Florida Power Corp. (FPC), Gulf Power (Gulf), and Tampa Electric (Tampa); two large municipal utilities: Jacksonville Electric Authority (Jksnvl) and Orlando Utilities (Orlnd); two smaller municipal utilities: Gainesville (Gnsvl) and Lakeland (Lklnd); and one cooperative (customer-owned) utility: Seminole (Smnl) to show the range of both energy sources and pollution profiles. Total emissions are reported in total tons per year for each utility.
 
  Pollution rates vary significantly.

Pollution rate means the pounds of pollution emitted for each megawatt of electricity produced. (A megawatt hour is the amount of electricity the average home uses in about two months.) The highest rates of pollution are many times more than the lowest. Much of the difference is due to: (1) what pollution control equipment is required for each plant -- older plants exempted from the Clean Air Act can emit 10 times more than newer plants, and (2) what fuel is burned -- coal is generally the dirtiest burning fuel.
 
Competition in the electric industry has major implications.

Differences in the level of air quality regulations that different power plants must meet creates an unlevel playing field for utilities. Utilities with newer plants and better pollution equipment may not be able to generate as cheaply as older, more polluting plants. Comparable standards for all are required. If customers can choose their electric supplier, they may wish to choose "green" power over dirty power sources.
 
    Utility "conservation " programs save little to no energy.

Larger utilities have a legal obligation to help customers save energy cost-effectively. But their own reports show Florida utilities are saving only the tiniest fraction of energy. The PSC adds to this problem by standards that promote power plants and discourage energy efficiency programs costing less.
 
    Utilities make only token use of clean renewable energy.

Renewable resources like solar energy are not used by Florida's utilities, with very small exceptions. PSC cost standards contribute to the obstacles to solar technologies, Florida's primary home-grown renewable fuel.
 
    Utility disclosure of air emissions data is useful to consumers.

While Florida's consumers do not have a choice in their electric service provider now, they will likely have that choice in the future. Even now, consumers have a right to know how their electric supply may be affecting their health and environment. Informed consumers can demand improvements in utility performance and state energy policy.

Environmental Impacts

Emissions from fossil-fueled power plants (coal, oil and gas) contribute significantly to public health and environmental problems. In addition to the air pollution on which this report focuses, power plants also consume significant quantities of water and contribute, both directly and indirectly, to water pollution.

Nuclear fuel poses health safety risks and disposal is unresolved.
 
    Nitrogen Oxides (NOx): -- NOx contributes to ground level ozone smog, a serious concern in climates like Florida. Ozone causes increased asthma attacks, coughing and respiratory illness. Smog can cause permanent lung damage. Ozone also harms agricultural crops and forests. Air deposition of NOx into coastal waters (e.g. Tampa Bay) increases algae blooms.

NOx also helps form breathable particles (particulate matter [PM] or "soot"). EPA currently regulates some PM and recently adopted regulations to control smaller particles. Scientific evidence shows serious health effects occur from breathing these smaller particles.

    Sulfur Dioxide (SO2): SO2 is the main cause of "acid rain" which damages lakes and streams   as well as forests. Acid rain damages vehicle paint and building materials too. SO2 also contributes to the formation of particulate matter which, when inhaled, is hazardous to human health.
 
    Carbon Dioxide (CO2): CO2 is the main contributor to global climate change or global warming. In 1995, a U.N. panel of 2500 of the world's top climate scientists agreed that global climate change is happening. Such changes will raise sea levels, increase infectious diseases and hurricanes, and damage ecosystems. Florida's low-lying areas, fragile ecosystem and population are at substantial risk.
 
    Mercury: Mercury is of great concern because its health impacts are devastating and because it stays in the environment and concentrates as it passes up the food chain. Many lakes in Florida are contaminated with mercury and eating fish from them is restricted. Eating fish with high levels of mercury is dangerous. Utilities in Florida emit about 3000 pounds of mercury per year according to the most recent data. The primary source is coal-fired plants.
 
    Nuclear Waste: Florida has three nuclear plants, totaling about 3700 megawatts. Florida Power & Light owns the St. Lucie and Turkey Point plants and Florida Power Corp. owns the Crystal River 3 plant that has been shut down since September 1996. These plants generate about 55 tons per year of high level nuclear waste that is stored on site. The long term problem of nuclear waste disposal make nuclear plants a worrisome and expensive energy choice.

Energy Sources - Today and Tomorrow

As Tables 1 and 2 clearly show, Florida is heavily dependent on coal to produce its electricity, with nuclear, oil and some natural gas for the remainder of the fuel mix. Coal is the biggest source of air pollution and a number of Florida's coal-burning plants were built before Clean Air Act requirements were put in place and are exempt from some standards. The pollution from those plants far exceeds pollution levels from even newer coal plants.

The tables also show that utilities plan only modest changes for the next ten years. Some utilities plan to add more natural gas power plants. Gas plants are cheaper and faster to build, are more efficient and are relatively cleaner than coal, oil or nuclear plants. Natural gas prices have been low in recent years, but may not stay low for the long term. If gas prices go up, those new plants could become more expensive to operate or they could switch to dirtier, cheaper fuel.

No utility reported any plan to add renewable energy sources through 2006. Some of the fuels utilities propose to use in the future, like orimulsion and petroleum coke, are dirtier, cheaper fuels. The use of orimulsion is very controversial and it has not been approved for use at this time. Petroleum coke is burned along with coal in some plants and may be subject to pollution limits.

Alternative energy sources, energy efficiency and renewables, are discussed in a separate section below. Table 1 What Does Your Utility Use to Make Electricity? (percentage of fuel sources for 1996)    

UTILITY	COAL	NUCLEAR	OIL	GAS	OTHER
FPL	8	32	22	36	0
FPC	80	11.5 ^	29	5	0
GNSVL	77	1.6 *	.9	20	0
GULF	99.5	0	^	.5	0
JKSNVL	84.4	0	10.8	4.8	0
LKLND	60	0	3	31	5.7 # =
ORLND	68.6	9.2 *	2	22	7 #
SEMNL	98.6	1.3	0	0	0
TAMPA	95.3	0	2	0	2.7 =

  Table 2 What Will Your Utility Use in Ten Years? (percentage of planned fuel sources for 2006)  
 
 

UTILITY	COAL	NUCLEAR	OIL	GAS	OTHER
FPL	7	27	12	45	7 $
FPC	42	19	12.6	25	0
GNSVL	73.8	3 *	0	22	^
GULF	93	0	^	6	0
JKSNVL	79.6	0	11.7	8.4	.2!
LKLND	73	0	.6	20	5.8 # =
ORLND	78	8 *	2	12	.1 #
SEMNL	74.4	.8	0	24.08	0
TAMPA	86.6	0	1.7	1	10 =

(Figured by megawatt hours produced only by the utility. Does not include power purchased/received from other sources.) > nuclear plant shutdown 9/96; * owns share of FPC nuclear unit; ^ too small to count; # municipal waste; = petroleum coke; $ projected use of orimulsion; ! landfill gas; : reported for 2005 by utility.

Pollution Profiles The following tables and graphs show the total tons of pollution produced (how much) and the pounds per megawatt hour (how dirty) produced for each utility. EPA requires that utilities report this information. Most power plants have limits on SO2 and NOx, but there are no limits on CO2. Particulate matter (soot) is also regulated, usually through limits on NOx emissions.

The biggest polluters in total tons are Tampa Electric for SO2, Florida Power Corp. for NOx and Florida Power & Light for CO2. Companies with the dirtiest pollution rate, on a pounds per megawatt hour basis, are: Tampa Electric for SO2 and NOx, and Lakeland for CO2. FPL has the most nuclear power.
 
  Table 3 Pollution from Electric Utilities 1996 Air Emissions and Nuclear Waste (in total tons)  
 

 

* Graph 1

* Graph 2

* Graph 3 Table 4 Air Pollution from Electric Utilities - 1996 (in lbs per megawatt hour of electricity produced)  
 

Based on preliminary emissions data from EPA and utility-reported generation data for 1996. The performance standard on the last line is considered a reasonable target rate for existing fossil-fueled sources that is roughly comparable to the average required for new sources of air pollution. CO2 is not regulated, so no standard exists.

* Graph 4

* Graph 5

* Graph 6

More Environmentally
Sustainable Alternatives Energy Efficiency

The following chart and graph show that energy efficiency supplies only a tiny fraction of Florida's electric service needs. Even if utility efforts double over 10 years as planned, efficiency would still be a very minor part of utility services to customers. Graph 8 shows that less than 1% of all utility energy services were provided to customers by utility energy efficiency programs in 1996. In Gulf Power's case, the shifting of energy use to lower use (non-peak) times resulted in more energy being used.

Graph 7 ( To be added )

* Graph 8

The Florida Energy Efficiency & Conservation Act (FEECA) directs the PSC to require utilities to implement programs to increase energy efficiency. However, the PSC standard for approving expenses for utility energy efficiency programs is far stricter than the standard for approving new power plants. Clearly, current PSC standards and utility efforts are falling far short of FEECA goals. The PSC will hold hearings in 1998 on revisions to utility energy efficiency plans and goals. The public voice needs to be heard.

Florida utilities could reduce the need for more power plants by helping their customers become more energy efficient. A 1993 state-sponsored study showed that Florida could reduce its dependence on power plants by two-thirds through energy efficiency efforts that would cost less overall than power plants. Even though results would be smaller today because generation costs are lower, the study's basic findings are sound.

Energy efficiency doesn't mean sacrifice. It means doing the same job using less energy. For example, new and more efficient refrigerators cost less to run because they keep food cold using less electricity. Although many people might want to buy a new refrigerator, fewer people know it would save them money over several years, and even fewer are able to pay for it now. Utility energy efficiency programs could help overcome barriers like these by educating consumers, offering rebates, loans or similar programs to encourage customers to save energy and money.

The PSC requires utilities to offer energy conservation programs for customers, but current programs aim more at "load management" (shifting energy use from high [peak] use times to low use times) than energy efficiency (reducing customer energy use). Programs also cannot be designed in a way that would cause average rates to go up, even if average bills would go down. This is a stricter standard than is used to decide on new power plants, so efficiency programs are discriminated against in favor of power plants.

Utilities also lose money on energy efficiency programs because customers who use efficient products buy less electricity. Utilities want to sell power and make money, so efficiency obligations are not enthusiastically carried out.

Clean Renewable Resources

Florida has an abundance of only one energy resource -- SUNSHINE! All other fuels (oil, gas, coal, nuclear materials) must be imported from other states and countries. Florida has a multi-billion dollar "trade deficit" in fuel that depletes the economic development and environmental health of our state. Increased use of solar technologies to produce electricity could reduce its damaging effects and create job opportunities for Florida.

Solar electricity (photovoltaics or PV) is a reality and could be used far more than it is now in Florida. It appears to cost more than fossil fuels until the hidden environmental and health costs of pollution are considered. Right now, the PSC doesn't consider those costs when it decides on power plants. Another renewable fuel is biomass (plant and wood waste) that could be used in some parts of Florida that are near agricultural and forested areas. Biomass may be cheaper than fossil fuels now, can be used with them in power plants, and results in lower net levels of pollution.

One Florida utility, Gainesville, built a small solar PV power system (10 kilowatts), in part with money contributed by Gainesville customers who volunteered to pay for the system to support a transition to renewable energy. This voluntary payment strategy is called "green pricing". Another green pricing option is Gulf Power's Solar for Schools. Customer contributions are put toward a variety of solar technologies added to local schools; the school gets the free energy and the students learn about solar resources. Florida Power & Light and Tallahassee Electric are planning green pricing programs their customers can sign on to voluntarily. Lakeland is researching an innovative idea involving solar heating energy.

Utilities generally have not supported solar technologies because they lose money when customers use less electricity. If renewable resources are going to succeed, Florida needs more than the symbolic efforts utilities have done so far. The PSC must value renewables differently than it does now and must create incentives for electric utilities to use more renewable resources.

What You Can Do

    Become more informed about your own options for energy efficiency -- at minimum, request an energy audit and follow up on recommendations. Contact the Florida Energy Extension Service near you for more recommendations.

    Tell your utility that you want more energy efficiency program offerings for yourself and your neighbors.

    Tell your utility you are concerned about the damage power plant pollution causes and that you want it to invest in clean renewable resources. Ask whether it plans to offer a green pricing program.

    Participate in utility green pricing programs if offered. K Tell the PSC you want it to require a higher level of utility energy efficiency programs and more utility investments in clean renewable resources like solar power and you don't want a double standard for energy efficiency and power plants.

    Tell the PSC you want utilities to report regularly on their energy sources and pollution to customers on bills or bill stuffers.

    Let local authorities know they should lead by example. This means highlighting energy efficiency and renewables in public buildings and purchasing decisions. Ask for an energy policy as part of your local comprehensive plan. Tell the Department of Community Affairs to create a model energy element for local comprehensive plans.

How to Contact the PSC and Utilities
Included in this Report

Julia L. Johnson, Chair
Florida Public Service Comm.
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.                                                                     
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850
(850) 413-6044

Bev DeMello, Director
Consumer Affairs
Florida Public Service Comm.
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850
(850) 413-6100
1-800-342-3552 
 
James L. Broadhead, CEO 
Florida Power & Light
P.O. Box 14000
North Palm Beach, FL 33408
561-694-4606
                                                                                                           
Joseph Richardson, CEO
Florida Power Corp.
P.O. Box 33028
 St. Petersburg, FL 33733
(813)866-5151
 
Michael Kurtz, General Manager 
Gainesville Regional Utilities     
P.O. Box 147117
Gainesville, FL 32614
(352) 334-2811

Travis Bowden, CEO
Gulf Power Co.
500 Bayfront Parkway
Pensacola, FL 32501
(850) 444-6111

 Walter Bussells, CEO
Jacksonville Electric Auth. 
21 West Church Street
Jacksonville, FL 32202
(904) 632-6000

Robert Siegel, Managing Dir.
Lakeland Elec. & Water Util.
501 E. Lemon Street
Lakeland, FL 33801
(941) 499-6300

Robert Haven, CEO
Orlando Utilities Comm.
500 S. Orange Avenue
Orlando, FL 32801
(407) 423-9100

Richard J. Midulla, Exec. VP
Seminole Electric Cooperative
P.O. Box 272000
Tampa, FL 33688
(813) 963-0994

Timothy Guzzle, CEO
Tampa Electric Co.
702 N. Franklin Street
Tampa, FL 33602
  Printed on recycled paper
For additional information about this report or other energy issues, contact:

 
LEAF
1115 North Gadsden Street
Tallahassee, FL 32303-6327
(850) 681-2591 (phone)
(850) 224-1275 (fax)
leafeap@igc.apc.org (Energy Advocacy Program)

A publication of the Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, Inc. LEAF),
1115 North Gadsden Street, Tallahassee, FL 32303-6327;
(850) 681-2591; (850) 224-1275 (fax);
leaf@igc.apc.org (e-mail);
leafeap@igc.apc.org (Energy Program e-mail).

LEAF is a charitable, public interest environmental law firm that
protects people's health and land, air, and water from pollution.
Founded in 1979, LEAF provides its services free of charge to
citizens and grassroots organizations in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.

An Environmental Fund for Florida Agency An Environmental Fund
for Georgia Agency LEAF gratefully acknowledges the Energy Foundation
and the Joyce Mertz-Gilmore Foundation whose support made this report
card possible.