PORTLAND, Ore. - Natural gas has been hailed as a potential "bridge fuel" for the country as it transitions from coal and oil to renewable energy. However, a spokeswoman for a Northwest environmental research group says the news media often overlooks natural gas's dirty secret.

Natural gas often is described as "burning cleaner than coal or oil," said Anna Fahey, director of strategic communications for the Sightline Institute. While it's true that natural gas releases half as much carbon dioxide as coal at combustion and far less particulate matter than coal or oil, Fahey said the bigger issue is methane, which traps 86 times as much heat in the atmosphere as does carbon dioxide.

"The problem is that you don't even have to burn natural gas," she said. "It doesn't need to be combusted to be a potent greenhouse gas, because the bulk of it is methane, and methane leaks at every stage of the gas's life."

Fahey cited a recent Associated Press story about a proposed liquefied natural-gas pipeline and export facility at Jordan Cove on the southern Oregon coast that described natural gas as "cleaner burning and more efficient." However, it didn't include the effects of methane. She also noted that 70 percent of natural gas in the United States is fracked.

Fahey said money spent on infrastructure such as the Jordan Cove pipeline could lock the nation into decades of using natural gas, when that money could be used to build infrastructure for clean fuel sources such as wind or solar.

"Natural gas, or what we like to call fracked methane gas now, is actually stalling progress on the real fuels of the future and the ones that are going to transition us off fossil fuels." she said.

According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, the gas industry was responsible for more emissions than the coal industry for the first time last year.

An article by Fahey is online at sightline.org.


get more stories like this via email

Advancing clean energy sources can be a tricky topic in oil-producing states like North Dakota.

But a nonpartisan analysis says the facts are clear about what causes electric bills to climb, and renewables aren't among them.

This month, a report from the independent think tank Energy Innovation says one third of U.S. households had to forego basic necessities to pay energy bills last year.

As the nation scales up the transition to sources like wind and solar power, those opposed to clean energy rebates and other climate policies say the movement is harming consumers - with higher costs to keep the lights on.

But report author Brendan Pierpont - director of electricity modeling for Energy Innovation - said the facts show otherwise.

"Nationally, we found big drivers of rising rates are climate change impacts, and extreme weather - and fossil fuel costs," said Pierpont, "like volatile natural gas prices, and utility investment in aging, expensive coal plants."

Gov. Doug Burgum has increasingly become a staunch supporter of oil and gas production, but North Dakota has been a top ten state for wind energy generation.

The report says states with significant clean energy growth have not generally experienced rate hikes above inflation.

Between 2010 and 2023, North Dakota was in the middle of the pack for rate increases, but still below the national average.

Those who oversee the power grid warn that the rapid push toward renewables could create reliability issues in the short term, especially with rising electricity demand from places like big data centers.

Grid improvement projects are taking shape, also affecting energy bills. But Pierpont suggested not enough of them are designed to expand transmission lines.

"It's only a pretty small portion of the total transmission and distribution pie that is expanding the grid," said Pierpont, "either to meet rising demand or to integrate new resources, like wind and solar."

Pierpoint said those cleaner sources are becoming much cheaper, and if utilities and grid operators focus more on larger projects that get them online, they'll offset the factors pushing electricity bills higher.

In 2022, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator approved a $10 billion transmission plan to accommodate growth in renewables. North Dakota falls under the MISO map.




get more stories like this via email

Construction could begin in Minnesota later this year in the final phase of one of the nation's largest solar energy developments, after state regulators greenlighted a key permit.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission on Thursday approved the site permit requested by Xcel Energy. The utility is moving forward with plans to replace the Sherco coal plant site in Becker, about halfway between St. Cloud and Minneapolis. Two other solar arrays that are part of the development have already been approved, and construction began last year.

Katie Sieben, chair of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, summarized the significance of approving the third phase.

"It's certainly a very important project for Minnesota and the upper Midwest," Sieben pointed out.

Once fully operational, the company said the combined solar capacity would generate enough electricity to power more than 150,000 homes each year, on average. Regional utilities are under pressure to meet the state's goal of carbon-free electricity by 2040. Concerns from nearby landowners were brought up before the vote, such as the need to maintain vegetation around the site for aesthetic purposes.

Officials tied to the project stressed they are committed to long-term monitoring of plants and trees, in addition to special permit conditions.

Charles Sutton, representative for North Central States Regional Council of Carpenters and International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49, called in to the meeting and noted the positive impact construction is having on the local workforce.

"We appreciate the company's work," Sutton emphasized. "Continuing to partner with workers and ensuring that these projects are built by highly skilled workers that are local, and that are being paid family-sustaining wages and benefits."

Over the winter, Xcel closed the first generator of the Sherco coal plant. The remaining units will be phased out over the next five years. Xcel said it is also working with the state and local communities to bring new jobs and investments to areas affected by coal plant retirements.


get more stories like this via email

So far, states like Wisconsin have largely escaped the worst of the summer heat affecting much of the nation but a group of scientists wants regional residents to pay closer attention to patterns affected by climate change, including weather disasters.

Science Moms bills itself as a nonpartisan group of climate scientists who engage with everyday people, namely other moms, on the need to address the effects of a warming planet.

Tracey Holloway, professor of energy analysis and policy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a member of the group, said a key point right now is extreme weather events should not be written off as typical.

"A lot of the disasters that we're experiencing wouldn't have occurred if it hadn't been for climate change," Holloway contended. "It doesn't seem quite right to use the term 'natural disaster' anymore."

Science Moms has a new ad campaign in Wisconsin and other states, referring to climate-fueled events as "unnatural" disasters. Engagement efforts like theirs coincide with public polling showing many Americans are worried about this issue, acknowledging climate change is underway. In a Gallup poll, only 55% of respondents said they think it will pose a serious threat in their lifetime.

Holloway pointed out the Wisconsin Initiative on Climate Change Impacts is a good resource for skeptics to turn to, or for those who are curious about what the data said.

"We are getting warmer but the biggest change in our temperatures is coming in the winter," Holloway explained. "Our winters are getting especially warm."

Even when some winters bring a lot of cold and snow, Holloway noted the cold is not as extreme as in past years. As for rain, the Initiative pointed out in Wisconsin, average precipitation has increased by 17%, or about 5 inches, since 1950. The Science Moms group hopes presenting the information will spur more conversation about the effects, and how community members can relay their concerns to decision-makers.


get more stories like this via email