Sunday, August 10, 2008

Charlie Copeland's Conversion to Wind Power

Back in June, I was more interested in what legislators did than in what they said. I wasn't about to argue with anyone who was prepared to vote yes. But even then I had no intention of allowing the most determined opponents of wind power let themselves off the hook by claiming to have been on the right side all along.
Charlie Copeland and his apologists are hoping that voters will somehow forget his prolonged opposition to the Bluewater Wind project, despite the inconvenient and incontrovertible record to the contrary. I laid out some of that record of opposition after Copeland asserted that Matt Denn was "fabricating" information on the subject:
"I was in favor of the Bluewater Wind vote on the floor of the Senate, so I wish he would start from ground zero and get things right."
In other words, Copeland wants Matt Denn and everyone else in Delaware to forget what he did before that vote, and just remember that he was one of 62 legislators who voted yes when the compromise deal was put before them.
Dave Burris, who has returned to blogging, has posted numerous comments in defense of Copeland on DelawareLiberal and elsewhere. Dave offers up a variety of explanations for Copeland's previous opposition before the vote on June 25. Here's my favorite:
You’re all talking about a wind farm deal that did not happen. It was cast aside in favor of a better deal. The wind farm deal that did happen was 100% supported by Sen. Copeland.
The problem with that argument is that Charlie Copeland didn't just oppose the Bluewater PPA; he opposed any PPA. He opposed even requiring Delmarva Power to sit and negotiate a PPA:
"We ought to let private investors compete against one another to get us the best price point and price stability. I think the marketplace would do that better than some regulatory regime," Copeland said.
It was not a matter of preferring a new and improved PPA. Charlie Copeland said that the state should not require any PPA at all, and that Delaware should stick with the ill-fated experiment in deregulation. I'm still happy that he voted for the deal; I just wish he could be more honest about his previous public opposition to wind power in Delaware.

2 Comments:

Anonymous kavips said...

Would it be too much to characterize Copeland as someone who never met a corporation he didn't like?

I would have laughed before 06, but now, it looks more and more like he has assumed the mantle left by one Wayne Smith....

The difference between Smith and Copeland, was that Smith knew and understood history. He was smarter at picking his battles... Charlie, and forgive me if I sound too glib, is a cheerleader..."rah, rah, team," sort of like one we would expect were O'Donnell ever get elected to political office.....

2:05 PM, August 12, 2008  
Anonymous Dave said...

Kavips attacks Charlie because he didn't convert to the religion of wind at any cost. So it's a jihad against the unbeliever.

You, Tom, on the other hand, I expect more from. The final deal was structurally different from the original deal. Copeland's concerns about government intervention and cost burden were solved to his satisfaction by the new deal.

If the old deal was superior to the new deal, why is it that the new deal was the one that was signed?

7:34 AM, August 14, 2008  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home