Where is the consumer perspective on Duke Energy's efficiency proposal in your Dec. 11 story "Utilities devise ways to induce users to save energy"?

Duke Energy proposes to charge residents for 90 percent of a fictional power plant that is never built as compensation for promoting efficiency. Sound expensive, nonsensical and opaque? That is because it is.

Saving energy should save residents money. But under Save-a-Watt, residents realize about 10 percent of their would-be-savings; Duke Energy pockets the other 90 percent.

Duke Energy's 90-for-me, 10-for-you split fails any reasonable definition of fair. That Duke Energy is promoting efficiency, which it is required to do by the new energy legislation, does not entitle the company to a windfall at customers' expense.

Energy efficiency requires planning, investment and adjustment by customers. Significant economic savings should be their reward. Energy efficiency charges should be related to real efficiency programs, not fictional power plants. (Unless -- would Duke Energy accept payment in fictional dollars?)

While generating efficiency is imperative and utilities must be fairly compensated, the charge to customers must also be fair, logical and clear. SAW fails these basic requirements. It is time the whole story is told.

Shana Becker

Advocate, N.C. Public Interest Research Group

Raleigh