INDIANAPOLIS - Indiana's energy-efficiency programs could be dismantled under legislation now at the Statehouse. The Demand Side Management program relies on both large and small users of electricity, but Senate Bill 340 would allow the large industrial users to opt out. The measure was written by Republican state Senator James Merritt and passed out of the Senate Utilities Committee last week.
According to Ethan Rogers, senior program manager for industry at the American Council on an Energy-Efficient Economy, energy-efficiency projects in the industrial setting yield the most savings, and without them, the programs will not achieve maximum efficiency.
"That means you're getting the more expensive energy-efficiency resources; you're not balancing that with lower cost energy-efficiency resources, and so your cost of what you're acquiring is higher than it needs to be," he said.
The programs have been in place for a couple of years, and Jodi Perras with the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign said Hoosiers already have saved enough to power 64,000 homes for a year. She said efficiency also reduces the need to construct costly new power plants.
"Ohio and Illinois are seeing great gains and energy-efficiency programs are keeping their electric rates lower, (but) meanwhile Indiana is stuck in the old mindset of, 'Let's let the utilities build as many power plants as they want and we'll all be fine,'" Perras declared.
Some industrial users have complained that they don't get as much benefit from the program as they pay into it, but Perras said there are other options to opting out, including a self-directed energy-efficiency program that would hold them accountable.
Kerwin Olson, the executive director of the Citizens Action Coalition, said energy efficiency works against rising costs by reducing electricity demand and lowering rate increases for everyone. And he said the state needs to look for ways to become more efficient.
"Energy efficiency is the cheapest resource and the cheapest kilowatt-hour of electricity that we can generate," he said. "It's a win for the economy in creating jobs, saving businesses money, and it's a win for homeowners in reducing the cost of energy and making their homes more comfortable."
A recent forecast from Purdue University found electricity use in the state will rise less than 1 percent annually through 2031, almost half the previous estimate, primarily because of increases in efficiency.
get more stories like this via email
Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek has signed into law the first set of statewide policies in the country supporting community-owned microgrids.
Microgrids are local, self-contained energy systems that use renewable energy sources, such as wind or solar power.
Dylan Kruse - president of Sustainable Northwest, a nonprofit involved in drafting the legislation - said microgrids can help mitigate the uptick in power outages caused by wildfires and extreme weather, especially in rural parts of the state.
"We're seeing an increased interest from small towns, from communities, from tribes," said Kruse, "saying 'look, if the lights go out, we need to have options so we can continue to provide emergency services, we can provide communications.'"
Microgrids can power critical facilities, such as hospitals or fire stations, operating either connected to the main grid or independently during emergencies.
Joshua Basofin - clean energy program director with Climate Solutions - said that while some microgrids are being developed in Oregon alongside utility companies, they are most valuable when communities reap the economic and resiliency benefits.
"When communities own those systems themselves," said Basofin, "they actually have the ability to control those microgrids as they need for their own purposes."
Oregon's new law requires the state Public Utility Commission to establish clear rules for the operation and ownership of community microgrids, which Kruse said he believes will expedite their construction.
He said while other states have considered moving in this direction, Oregon is the first to take this step.
"This legislation," said Kruse, "is the most ambitious, comprehensive legislation in the country of its kind."
get more stories like this via email
Rural Alaska power customers are likely to pay higher electricity rates as a result of the elimination of incentives to switch away from traditional fossil fuels.
The new Trump administration budget eliminated tax credits designed to encourage investment in wind and solar projects.
More than 90% of Alaska residents rely on power cooperatives for their electricity, which have made an effort in recent years to invest in wind and solar - especially in the most remote areas.
Alaska Energy blog author Erin McKittrick said rate payers will pay higher prices as a result of fewer alternative energy options.
"Renewable energy is holding out this promise to maybe keep rates down, but the way things are going we may not get that option, or if we get it, it might be more expensive than it is otherwise," said McKittrick. "So, everybody is going to see their rates go up."
U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-AK, tried to negotiate some alternative energy tax credits back into the bill for her state just prior to a final vote - but was not able to secure money for Alaska's indigenous whale hunters to buy equipment they rely on for subsistence hunting and fishing.
Beyond affecting larger power co-ops, McKittrick said the elimination of the tax incentives will also hurt small companies that install wind and solar power in Alaska's remote locations.
"They don't have this position where they have a huge portfolio of lots of things going on and they can handle uncertainty for one or another project," said McKittrick. "Whether they exist at all in the future is questionable I would think."
The League of Conservation Voters is working at the grassroots level in Alaska to find ways to keep wind and solar projects alive in the state as it tries to move away from a heavy dependence on diesel fuel and a dwindling supply of natural gas.
get more stories like this via email
More than $7 billion in Colorado's GDP and 9,600 jobs are projected to be lost under President Donald Trump's signature tax and spending bill which cuts incentives for clean energy, according to a new report by the nonpartisan think tank Energy Innovation.
Solar and wind capacity is expected to drop by 340 gigawatts, raising home energy costs by an extra $170 per year.
Margaret Kran-Annexstein, director of the Colorado chapter of the Sierra Club, said the new law reverses years of work transitioning to a clean energy economy.
"We have seen how investments in clean energy programs can attract more jobs, and can help people lower their electricity costs," Kran-Annexstein pointed out.
Trump campaigned on promises to end climate mitigation efforts and to bring down energy costs by increasing the use of fossil fuels. Republicans critical of clean energy tax credits have argued they amount to the government picking industry winners and losers. According to a separate industry analysis, just 30% of U.S. solar and 57% of wind projects are expected to survive under the new GOP law.
Oil and gas companies have benefited from taxpayer subsidies for decades and currently receive $170 billion a year. Kran-Annexstein noted efforts to boost clean energy, to slow climate change and reduce air pollution, pale by comparison.
"This bill is going to be giving polluters an additional $15 billion tax break, while gutting clean energy programs," Kran-Annexstein explained. "We need to be investing in solutions, and we also need to not be giving tax breaks to the companies that are causing these problems."
The new GOP law cuts more than $1 trillion from Medicaid and SNAP to finance Trump administration priorities including extending 2017 tax cuts. Kran-Annexstein worries ramping up fossil fuel production and limiting health coverage will produce dire consequences.
"If we're revoking people's access to health care, and we're going to be seeing increases in the amount of pollution, people are going to be sick and people are going to die," Kran-Annexstein contended.
Disclosure: The Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, and Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email