|
Manitoba Hydro. Last year this proposal received the support of 22
million shares, or 9.4% of the vote.
The proposal focuses on these key points:
For 25 years Manitoba Hydro has had significant negative environmental
and socioeconomic impacts on the Pimicikamak Cree Nation and other indigenous
peoples. These impacts are well documented and widely condemned. As
Manitoba Hydro's largest customer, Xcel is faced with legal, financial,
and reputational risks for contributing to these continuing problems.
Furthermore, Xcel is considering future contracts with Manitoba Hydro
that will compound these damages.
Meanwhile, Xcel's home state of Minnesota has passed legislative requirements
and guidelines giving preference to renewable energy. Large-scale hydro
projects such as Manitoba Hydro cause such extensive ecological and
social destruction that they do not qualify as renewable under the definitions
in Minnesota and in several other states.
Xcel's 12-state service territory contains abundant biomass resources
and the best wind energy potential in North America. Numerous studies
conclude that wind is cost-competitive with traditional fossil-fuel
generation and hydro imports.
Currently, Xcel gets only 4% of its energy from Manitoba Hydro and
2% of its energy supply from renewables. Minnesota state law has set
a goal for Xcel that 10% of its electric energy be generated from renewable
energy sources by 2015.
The proponents believe that legislative requirements and industry trends
support the financial viability of renewable energy as a particularly
suitable and compelling alternative for Xcel over more riskier energy
sources such as Manitoba Hydro. This proposal focuses on Xcel's future
power supplies, not current contracts.
Please see 'Shareholder's
Rebuttal' for a detailed response to Xcel's Opposition Statement.
|
