LIPA to Raise Rates

One month after it was hammered by customers over its hurricane response, the power authority said it's increasing how much customers will pay for power.

The Long Island Power Authority said higher fuel costs are forcing it to install a 2 percent rate hike starting in October.

The charge isn't much. The average customer will pay about $3 more per month.

But the announcement came only one month after Hurricane Irene knocked many Long Island residents off-line for a week. Power-starved customers were infuriated by their inability to reach LIPA, which tried to communicate with customers through Twitter. The response on the social media site wasn't always friendly. In fact, it was far from it.

LIPA said the latest increase does not take into account the $176 million it cost to restore service in the wake of Hurricane Irene. Some good news: The federal government is expected to reimburse LIPA for 75 percent of that cost.

Occam's Hammer October 01, 2011 at 01:56 AM
I thought that the government seizure of LILCO and transferring it to LIPA was supposed to result in lower rates? When are these lower rates going to materialize. All that did was prevent us from participating in programs that allow us to buy power from other power companies.
Shlomo_Jackson October 01, 2011 at 02:28 AM
. Well, Duh.... . Of course this country would have been better off without the Affirmative Action Marxist in the White House.. .
Mark Wilson October 01, 2011 at 11:34 AM
ALL of the Democrat Progressive "energy policies" are based upon a FAKE SCIENCE. AND we are finding out every day, now, "solar power' is just another Democrat word for "SLUSH FUND". Like everything else Democrat Progressives grasp as an "issue", they CORRUPT with semantics and GREED.
Mark Wilson October 01, 2011 at 11:35 AM
Shlomo, as you say, DUH YES !
Susan October 06, 2011 at 06:35 AM
And how much was gas 6 months before that? Over $4.30 a gallon. When our oilmen Bush and Chaney were appointed it was closer to $1.50 a gallon. A few months ago oil was running about $80/barrel and the price of gas was about $4/gallon. In 2008 a barrel of oil was about $150/barrel and we were paying about $4/gallon. There is no coorelation, it's all about greed and speculation. We need to put an end to oil speculation and prices will go back down. That being said I drive an economical car, keep my place heated no higher than 65 in the winter (I wear layers and have a lot of blankets) and use fans to supplement the summer a/c so I can keep it at 77 degrees in the house and still be comfortable
Frank Mercuri October 06, 2011 at 02:27 PM
New York collects 49.5 cents/gallon in taxes. The fed get 18.7 /gallon. New York is the second highest with connecticut as No.1. Oil prices are dictated by OPAC. Oil companies have to pay the price /barrel establishedf. I suggest looking at the oil prices on the commoduties market. The taxes will always be the same even if it went to one dollar a gallon.
Mary Beth October 06, 2011 at 02:45 PM
Mr. Wilson, I bet you blamed Obama when your toilet got backed up.
Fred Stewart October 06, 2011 at 03:10 PM
Fuel costs have been rising steadily forever. Just because you got a 50cent reduction and are now paying $3.50 for a gallon of gas doesn't mean the prices will keep dropping...they always go up in the summer, and with the amount of fossil fuel in the world depleting (regardless of how much untapped oil there may be in alaska or the gulf of mexico, or natural gas/fracking, it's still depleting). The scary part is that you, the consumer, isn't outraged that the price is as high as it is, with Exxon-Mobile and BP making record profits. Let's see how long till someone responds that I'm a commie-libtard...
Fred Stewart October 06, 2011 at 03:20 PM
mark, When President Bush took office on January 20, 2001, the national average gas price was $1.46 per gallon. Six and a half years later, on August 27, 2007, the national average gas price had jumped to $2.76, roughly 89% higher. Compounded annually, this represents about a 10% jump each year Bush has been in office. 89%...that seems like a lot.
Bill Alderman October 06, 2011 at 03:30 PM
The Billyman HATES "Democrat Progressive Energy Policies"
Fred Stewart October 06, 2011 at 03:32 PM
any rational person can't help but give oil credit. it runs the world. Winston Churchill knew he couldn't win the war w/o a commanding presence in Mesopotamia/(Iraq). Also incontravertable, are these few considerations. 1. Up until some recent technologies and still, most plastics do not ever biodgrade. 2. Fossil fuels DO, incontravertably, pollute our environment. 3. There is only so much oil in the ground. What will we do when it's gone, if we don't invest in new technology now? (Nuclear power, if safe, would be nice, but since it's conception, it's been relatively dangerous...) IF you think Chernobyl and Fukushima can't happen here, you're wrong! They already have.
James M. October 06, 2011 at 03:35 PM
You do know talking about yourself in the third person is a sign of pending insanity. Without those policies you hate so much the demand for fuel would be much much higher and therefore prices would be much much higher.
Bill Alderman October 06, 2011 at 03:52 PM
The Billyman can't see how a bad policy and higher prices would increase demand
icarumba October 06, 2011 at 04:10 PM
this is the result of one bad company- LILCO- turning into a govt monopoly- LIPA which was started with borrowed $$. with our traffic and population density,burying most of the system underground would take decades,cost billons and result in 20-30 of noise,dust,road closures,rodents galore. $3 a month here, $3 a month there adds up. oil is at $79a barrel. once again we see LIPA's poor planning. Did they lock in the best possible price? Do they take care of their infrastructure? The answer is obvious:NO. read a previous post- where the fellow from colorado pays 8 cents per kwh and has an underground network- if they can do it why cant we?
James M. October 06, 2011 at 04:46 PM
I don't sell solar cells. Interesting angle to try to discount my opinion. I worked in Real Estate management for 15 years and have gone over the numbers with engineers and the issue is not initial cost but the rate of inflation for energy. If you use current rates to calculate the savings it will be a loser 80% of the time. If factor in inflation and increasing energy rates it makes perfect sense and there is a huge cost savings in the last 5 years. What is you state license in? Have you ever taken an accounting class or finance class that deals with inflation and cost of money? When was the last time you had a qualified engineer run the numbers? There have been a number of advancements in the last five years. In twenty years when it is $10/kwh what are your cost savings? Have you installed alternative lighting in the halls or are you still using incandescent bulbs because they are cheaper?
Joseph October 06, 2011 at 05:02 PM
Yes. Lets cut down all the trees. They are a nuisance. I think the President should passing a law banning trees.
James M. October 06, 2011 at 05:05 PM
Oil is a disappearing commodity. You are promoting a failing policy that will only cause the failure of the US economy. Calling Green Energy a "Democratic Progressive" policy shows a true lack of knowledge of the subject and self-promoting short sightedness. Let me guess you voted for Bush and McCain and will vote for whoever the Republicans put on the podium because they are not a democrat. This type of ridiculous thinking is why the country is going down the tubes.
James M. October 06, 2011 at 05:06 PM
Not surprised
Eddie October 06, 2011 at 05:11 PM
I am a licensed Professional Engineer. I've run the numbers - believe me. Anything that would save me a buck in my buildings is looked at forward and back. I suppose you can make assumptions and investments based on what you project future fuel prices will be, and that is how salesmen sell this stuff to ill informed home owners. If I felt I was good at guessing future economics I wouldn't bother with any of this and I'd just buy futures options. They would pay me more and I wouldn't have to worry about solar panels ripping up my roofing. Right now, today, at these prices solar energy is a loser. Without significant tax credits - taken from other people's pockets, and without significant gains in the cost of utilities without accompanying gains in the cost of maintaining the solar installation, solar energy will only add costs for a building owner. And yes, as most folks who own and operate significant commercial ventures I'm fairly well versed in economics. I didn't get here with my good looks. We have studied and tried the "screw in" florescent replacement bulbs, and unfortunately the only ones we could find were Chinese crap that failed very quickly, negating any savings. Further, the hazard of abating mercury from a broken one is very costly in a commercial environment. We're hoping LEDs improve to a point where they are economic alternatives to incandescents.
James M. October 06, 2011 at 05:12 PM
Actually this is the result of NIMBY. The Shoreham had gone online electric rates would be pennies. The people decided they didn't want it and are still today paying the price of that decision.
James M. October 06, 2011 at 05:16 PM
So you are not taking inflation into account nor the rising cost of energy into your equations. You are not using florescent bulbs and you are complaining about energy prices rising when demand increases. Yeah you just proved my point thanks. Eddie you are the prototypical penny wise pound foolish business manager. Enjoy your failure.
Mark Wilson October 07, 2011 at 11:30 AM
"J. Marshall 1:05pm on Thursday, October 6, 2011 Oil is a disappearing commodity. You are promoting a failing policy that will only cause the failure of the US economy. Calling Green Energy a "Democratic Progressive" policy shows a true lack of knowledge of the subject and self-promoting short sightedness." "GREEN" policies are based upon proven FAKE, PHONY FRAUDULENT SCIENCE ! Read the headlines of how scientists and government entities have faked data for DECADES to promote their failed political ideologies, all over the world. http://www.prisonplanet.com/ipcc-scientists-caught-producing-false-data-to-push-global-warming.html Democrat Progressives in this country have used this fake data and FEAR to forward their political agenda and their personal pocketbooks, like ALGORE has. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html This country and the World, have PLENTY of natural resources to exploit for our personal comfort, and profit. "GREEN" is also being proven to be a license to steal money from Tax Payers, and get them kicked back into political "slush funds" created by the Federal, State and Local governments ! http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-07/solyndra-investigations-likely-to-hurt-green-jobs-not-obama.html Just read the recent headlines, if you dare !
Mark Wilson October 07, 2011 at 03:42 PM
Lets go into the WAYBACK MACHINE, JMarshall, the senior and very "Liberal Conscience of the LEFT" Gov. Mario Cuomo "deep sixed" not only Shoreham, BUT the nuclear power industry in this Country FOR DECADES ! AND HE DID THIS WITHOUT THE APPROVAL of the NYS Legislature ! It was an agreement between Cuomo and LILCO and for the price of $1.00 from LILCO ! http://www.nytimes.com/1989/03/01/nyregion/cuomo-and-lilco-sign-a-new-accord-to-shut-shoreham.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm The people had NOTHING to do with the decision !
Greg Martinez October 07, 2011 at 04:23 PM
We need to let the energy industries "drill-baby-drill" for oil, use coal, build oil refineries, and nuclear power plants. BTW, if a couple of caribou die prematurely from the installation of some pipelines we can barbecue them and give the meat to the foodless. Actually, I have heard there have been studies that Carabou in Alaska like the heat of pipeline and it increases carabou love.
James M. October 07, 2011 at 06:26 PM
It had the support of Suffolk County Executive and many others. IT was one of those win lose deals. Some people were happy and some people upset. I don't believe any Governor on their own would kill a project without the support of a lot of people Here's an excerpt from the article: The Governor's action today was praised by many politicians on Long Island who had feared being associated with the rate increases inherent in closing the plant. The Suffolk County Executive, Patrick G. Halpin, applauded Mr. Cuomo for making ''the tough decisions in order to assure the health and safety of the people of Suffolk County.'' 'A Hard Look' All of Long Island did not greet the plan warmly. ''We want to take a hard look at this, but if it's the same proposition with a different suit on, we'll oppose it,'' said John V. N. Klein, chairman of the Long Island Association, the region's largest business group.
James M. October 07, 2011 at 06:27 PM
"Carabou Love"? Really?
Mark Wilson October 07, 2011 at 07:05 PM
JMarshall, I guess it depends on what you want to interpret that statement you quoted above... First, there is NO reference to what Cuomo thought or didn't think in your quotes. Second, don't presume because LILCO is a public authority and it is called same, it doesn't necessarily mean that "the public" has ANY substanitive input into it's operation OR that "the public" supports whatever LILCO mandates. The only thing the public has any "power" in relation to LILCO is in having the privilege to pay it's rates and it's rate hikes ! This history has a different take on Mario and the establishment of LILCO...go to the middle of the page, starting with paragraph the words "Governor Cuomo's mobilization.." Page 224 http://books.google.com/books?id=DJkZgWKZaCUC&pg=PA224&lpg=PA224&dq=mario+cuomo+nuclear+power&source=bl&ots=iLWdoBGPTY&sig=y5M-TsDuIi6eEilDtJQoPu0X9KY&hl=en&ei=qUqPTtz3J4ro0QHsmIxD&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&r
Frank Mercuri October 07, 2011 at 08:52 PM
Since I am getting e-mails on this subject, which i delete most of the times, i have to repond to this last comment. LILCO ( Keyspan, national Grid ) is a utility where the public has no say so in what they do. LIPA is an authority which the public has little to say in what they do. so where does this leave one? Simply that rates will be going up and we will ahve to pay because of no competition. The notion that LIPA was established to keep rates down was a notion that was false. LIPA's cair and the board are govenor appointed. Its a stacked deck. We will always loose until we get real solid competition like cheaper oil( which we can drill for, coal which we can mine plenty of, and nuclear which works wonders elswhere. The poblem with Shoreham was that it was reaked with poor quality and the fact that no valid emergency system was put in place. The coruption continues by having rate payers pay for something they do not receive as a benifit .
James M. October 07, 2011 at 09:08 PM
http://books.google.com/books?id=mwsAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA24&dq=SHoreham+Public+Outcry&hl=en&ei=iGmPTpfHCaL00gHyw8kn&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false Here's an article that states that one of the contributing factors was the Lloyd Harbor Study group that didn't like. Mark. Drop it. I can find articles that say it was the public and you can find articles that say it was Cuomo's fault. The reality is it doesn't matter who was responsible for killing it, just that it died and we are still paying it.
Mark Wilson October 08, 2011 at 12:37 PM
Tax Payers are at the mercy of a public authority, that was set up to be looted by politicians and political appointees. ANOTHER personal ATM Machine of Tax Payer Dollars ! When it comes to MONEY, THIS is where "bipartisanship" is genuine between Pols !


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something