[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

Re: E-M:/ Consumers Energy Mailing

Enviro-Mich message from David Allen <dallen@nmu.edu>


Mike Huth enclosed a Consumer's Energy blurb against the proposed EPA
regulations (shown below).  I add that Detroit Edison sent out a similar
message to shareholders.  To think that customer utility bills and
shareholder stock dividends are being used to run a campaign for increased
health risk offends me deeply - and I have so notified DE.

Dave Allen

At 10:33 AM 10/8/97 -0500, MIKE HUTH wrote:
>In my most recent electric bill from Consumers Energy (SW Michigan), the
>following card was inserted, the backside listing all Senate and
>Congressional contacts.  I have copied the wording verbatim:
>"New EPA Rules Would Cost You $1000 A Year
>Michigan's air quality has improved dramatically, thanks in part to hundreds
>of millions of dollars Consumers Energy and many other Michigan
>businesses have spent on pollution controls.
>Now the Environmental Protection Agency has issued new air quality
>standards that even the EPA's own scientific review board doesn't agree
>will result in proven health benefits.
>President Clinton's own Council of Economics Advisors and others have
>estimated that just one of the EPA's new regulations will cost up to $60
>billion per year.  In Michigan, the cost to each household would be more
>than $1000 per year, which would result from the following:
>- Significantly increased utility bills
>- Loss of federal highway funds used to repair state roads
>- Reduced state jobs, by stopping growth of existing industries
>- Costly controls on most businesses including gas stations, dry cleaners
>and fast food restaurants
>- Personal lifestyle changes such as controls on household products,
>mandated car pooling and auto emission testing, and requiring expensive,
>reformulated gasoline.
>That's why the Michigan State Senate and House of Representatives, the
>US Conference of Mayors, 27 state governors, and the US chamber of
>Commerce oppose EPA's action.
>Congress has the opportunity to stop these onerous new EPA rules.  If you
>would like to encourage your elected representatives in Washington to
>oppose these new regulations, please note the list of Senators and
>members of Congress on the reverse side."
>I am not an expert in clean air or the extent of the new EPA rules, but on
>face, this seems a rather over stated case.  I live in the Chicago area, and
>several years ago, an organization named CUB (Citizens Utility Board) won
>the right to enclose opposing information (usually regarding rates and
>policies) right in the envelope with the electric bill.  Perhaps with
>deregulation (loss of monopoly), this will no longer be the case, but it
>would be nice if a balancing piece from the enviro-side was available with
>this card.
---snip ---

ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"