We are reproducing our questionnaire
with the responses of all candidates in alphabetical order
below each question.

There is strong consensus in the scientific community that Global Warming is a serious problem that is mostly caused by greenhouse pollution. Most of this pollution is energy-related, especially from burning fossil fuels. How will you make this part of your considerations as you set energy policy for Louisiana?

Mr. Kincade Carbon dioxide is a very serious, suffocating influence in our environment. Our very survival depends on clean air and water. A shift to renewable resources is the key.

Mr. Odinet Affordable energy will dictate the extent to which we can limit the use of fossil fuels. New construction of Energy Generating Plants should be limited to those fuels that will result in minimum pollution to the extent that EPA will approve the same.

Mr. Schwegmann Solar, wind, and hydro are certainly clean but can be expensive in the state of La.  Natural gas is in abundance and is relatively safe and clean. I will explore a more vertical corporate structure, whereby our electric utilities should have greater control over their supply of fuel and not be solely at the mercy of suppliers.

Mr. Skrmetta It will always be a consideration in the determination of policy along with all applicable scientific theory. I want to work to develop a comprehensive energy policy that will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and there by reducing emissions.

Leading climate scientists in the USA including NASA's Dr. James E. Hansen claim that we must institute a moratorium on any new electricity generation capacity that uses coal or coal-like fuels without effective carbon capture and storage. What is your position on this question?

Mr. Kincade Louisiana sits on a huge deposit of natural gas. There is a 118 year supply of natural gas. Coal should be a small player in Louisiana. West Virginia and Kentucky are powered by coal. I do believe in clean coal technology which would be harmonious with Dr. James Hansen.

Mr. Odinet Effective carbon capture and storage should be mandated on all units proposed to be built, and the same should be investigated for all existing plants presently in use.

Mr. Schwegmann I have not read about Dr. Hansen's position, but I would enjoy learning from him. If the EPA standards are weak concerning emissions from coal fired plants, then this is a major concern.

Mr. Skrmetta I believe that there is technology that would allow for the use of coal as a fuel for the generation of electricity. It will be my goal that any generation system using coal for fuel would have to pass all federal restrictions on emissions in order to be licensed in Louisiana. This would include effective carbon capture and storage systems. I also have great confidence in our nations scientific ingenuity that will have continuing improvement in managing emissions for recovery for fuel use and conversion to less harmful emissions.

Will you support diversifying the ways we get our electricity to include clean renewables like large scale wind and varieties of solar power? What will you do in this regard?

Mr. Kincade It is vital that we diversify. We should follow the Florida model that embraces 20% of its energy from renewable resources. California has a 30% target, but Louisiana is Louisiana so I would think achieving 5% a year over 4 years would be a great triumph. The future belongs to energy technology . Instead of "drill, baby ,drill", the mantra should be ," Innovate, Baby , Innovate."

Mr. Odinet I would work with the commission members: to bring solar and wind to the forefront. It would be a struggle to avoid the net cost in regards to billing along with entergy’s charges. I have been exposed to wind basics.

Mr. Schwegmann Absolutely, assuming the price tag is affordable. Let us not forget  that La. rate payers are struggling to pay their bills as we speak.

Mr. Skrmetta Yes.
I will encourage transferability of state and federal consumer tax credits to allow for energy providers to implement supplemental wind and solar technologies for the benefit of the homeowner with the goal of a net metering plan that will reduce the costs of energy to the consumer and allow for a reduction in the use of fossil fuels with a stated goal of 30% conversion. At the current prices it is too expensive for consumers to pay for this type of energy and energy providers are better suited to put these systems into use.

What conditions would you require for new nuclear plant development in Louisiana, and why? What will you do to prevent or encourage new nuclear power in Louisiana?

Mr. Kincade A nuclear plant takes 10 years to build and costs more than $10 billion. There is always the issue of nuclear waste and cost overruns . Yucca Mountain can only take so much toxic goo. A cost benefit analysis would have to be done here.

Mr. Odinet I am of the opinion that nuclear power is the solution; I would recommend economic study of nuclear plant costs with the intent of acquiring a cooperative endeavor between state and federal government to finance construction.

Mr. Schwegmann Any new plants must have a cost cap. Let us not forget that we have not come up with a sure fire plan for the disposal of nuclear waist. Long term safety should be our primary concern.

Mr. Skrmetta I would require that new nuclear facilities be developed as an expansion of the current nuclear facilities in the State.  I would not encourage the development of new locations that are not traditional locations with all other conditions of State and Federal law to be followed by the energy provider. With any nuclear system safety is paramount to any issue. Effective waste storage plans must pass federal and state review.
I will encourage the development of new nuclear power to decrease our dependency on fossil fuels, reducing greenhouse gases and to avoid market-volatile fuel surcharges that are often encountered from fossil based technologies.

Many people believe that market speculators have driven the price of gasoline up. Do you think that this is a problem in natural gas markets? What will you do to protect us from sharks like these in natural gas markets?

Mr. Kincade I do believe in free enterprise and free markets. Free enterprise is the engine that pulls and pays the freight of government. Speculators will always be with us. During the Civil War, Abe Lincloln used to curse the speculators on Wall Street. Not much has changed. We can escape the shark bite by shifting into solar energy.

Mr. Odinet Power could be managed by an authority that would administer the sale of the same to distribution companies who would be required to market power at affordable rates to the citizens.

Mr. Schwegmann Delving into the purchasing practices  of our utilities will be one of my first priorities. It may be that antitrust laws are being violated in the area of natural gas markets.

Mr. Skrmetta Yes.
I will work with the federal delegation to have the commodities exchange traders operate under the more stringent rules of the stock market trades. This would limit the amount of margin trading and provide for less volatility in the market.

Much of the information in cases before the LPSC is kept secret. (One example is that the public has not been allowed to learn the amount of the rate increase that Entergy is asking for in their Little Gypsy project to convert the plant from natural gas to coal & coke.) Can you discuss your position on the secrecy issue?

Mr. Kincade I think that the truth is transparent and that the truth can withstand all inquiries and inspection. Let the sun shine in.

Mr. Odinet I would propose increased imports on liquid natural gas to keep the market saturated with gas in order to meet demands at reasonable prices.

Mr. Schwegmann You will find me totally open, candid, and transparent in my conduct,and will insist that our states utilities will conduct themselves in the same manner.

Mr. Skrmetta I believe in the free and open discussion of information that is an issue to the public.

In what ways do you think the LPSC can function better for the public and ratepayers? Is there sufficient transparency or too much closed door dealing with the regulated companies?

Mr. Kincade I believe in open doors and open minds. Open the closed doors and windows let the sunshine of truth in.

Mr. Odinet I would encourage transparency in all dealings with the public service commission. There should be no secrecy involve.

Mr. Schwegmann The best thing that can happen to protect the consumer is for John F. Schwegmann to serve on the commission. The La. PSC needs more members that are not controlled by the utilities. How can the consumer expect vigorous regulation when our elected regulators owe their jobs to the utility companies by accepting campaign funds from those they regulate?

Mr. Skrmetta I desire to make the process of complaints by consumers easier for folks to start. I want to try to resolve issues before they are set in motion in the administrative law process of the PSC.  I will hold periodic sessions is each of the twelve parishes within PSC District 1 that will serve to bring the consumer and the service provider together to resolve their issues within an atmosphere of discussion rather than litigation. I will also maintain District offices staffed with personnel whose duties will include assisting consumers with their complaints. I will take a hands on approach to conflict resolution.
There should be transparency in all dealings between the commission and regulated companies.

How will you balance the needs of the stockholders of the regulated companies and the ratepayers?

Mr. Kincade There needs to be a balance or equilibrium between the stockholders and ratepayers. My intuition tells me that we are being gouged by the utility companies. Entergy enjoys a $ 3 million a day net profit . Entergy also has a $500 million Hurricane Ike loss. The hurricane loss should be absorbed by Entergy and not the rate payers.

Mr. Odinet The rates should contain a reasonable profit for the regulated company, based on evidence of operating costs, including a motorization of the grid, power generation costs and overhead. A reasonable mark-up on the same should be allowed. The commission should be allowed to investigate the resulting input and final proposed rate.

Mr. Schwegmann This has always been tough,but let us not forget that an investment in a utility company is relatively a safe one. I am hard pressed to recall a utility in La. that has gone under, consequently a lower rate of return is customary.

Mr. Skrmetta I will approach each issue with the goal to ensure that consumers have the services they require at the lowest rates available while always taking into consideration that stockholders are entitled to a fair rate of return. No more and no less. This will be a balancing test that will be ever-present before the commission. The consumer is always paramount but we will need service providers to be able to stay in business to continue to provide services to our consumers.

Please explain CWIP in the language you would use to describe it to your constituents. What is your opinion with regard to using CWIP to have the ratepayers pay, from the beginning of a project, for power plant construction.

Mr. Kincade Construction Work in Progress surcharges are billed to rate payers for clean energy projects, namely nuclear plants. CWIP surcharges reduce volatility, high rates and pollution. If the rate payers pay from the beginning, then CWIP is really a pay as you go plan which makes sense and I am for it --assuming completion of the power plant is assured.

Mr. Odinet It would be explained as the (CWIP) Current Work in Progress is the concept of the ratepayer to pay for to cover part of the construction of the plant before it is completed. Power plant construction should be financed by the power companies. Rate payers should not pay at the outset of construction unless they would become part owner of the venture.

Mr. Schwegmann Ideally, I would like to hear all sides of the issue before committing myself on this issue, but if I had to vote today, I would vote against adding an additional financial burden on top of the consumer.

Mr. Skrmetta CWIP is a balance sheet accounting method in which the service provider maintains and manages (through an accounting process) to reflect costs incurred for capital equipment. The service provider will ensure that costs incurred for capital equipment purchases are properly accounted for (i.e., timely closing, asset identification, tagging, capitalization, and depreciation) in accordance with PSC requirements. This means that CWIP is an accounting method that would allow service providers to pass costs of new equipment along to the consumer during the construction phase of the project.
I personally do not have strong feelings one way or another about CWIP as, ultimately, the consumer will pay for this service. What is important is to determine which method of repayment for power plant construction will be at the lowest rate for consumers.
CWIP is common in projects developed by the federal government within the department of energy. But that does not necessarily mean that it is the best option for Louisiana consumers. The bottom line should be that the consumer has an affordable rate. I will say that if CWIP is used then there must also be large penalties to service providers to require them to complete a project on time so that any CWIP pass through costs are not unfair to the consumer.