Within the Inflation Reduction Act are provisions to help rural electric co-ops in new ways.

Rural electricity generation often is structured as a cooperative nonprofit with member-owners, and any overpayment is returned to members. The structure meant co-ops were excluded from certain green-energy tax incentives available to for-profit producers.

The Inflation Reduction Act changed the model and includes direct-pay tax incentives for co-ops to deploy new energy technology. Additionally, the act includes a $9.7 billion grant and loan program for clean-energy systems, giving electric co-ops broad flexibility to make upgrades to their infrastructure.

Philip Fracica, director of programs for Renew Missouri, said as one of the most coal-dependent states in the country, Missouri stands to gain a lot from the program.

"Really, out of most of the co-ops in the country, I think we're at probably the best value proposition for this program, because we have really old plants," Fracica explained. "In replacing them with better, more affordable generation options such as renewable energy, which they don't have a large mix in that portfolio to diversify them, make them more resilient."

The plan offers individual co-ops up to $970 million to make upgrades.

Electric-cooperative members are often still paying off debts incurred decades ago during the construction of old power plants and infrastructure. Fracica pointed out the new grant and loan program allows co-ops to retire debt and offers forgivable loans to help build new generation capacity. He sees the approach as being better over the long term.

"Why don't we go to the root of this problem, which is the co-ops having all these debt payments tied to old fossil-fuel plants?" Fracica noted. "If we give them this money and forgive it and replace it with meaningful investments, we're going to be better stewards of our federal dollars to help folks in rural communities and also reduce energy costs."

The grant and loan program allows cooperatives the flexibility to use money and make the most sense locally. Options include making investments in new energy-generating technology including solar, wind or nuclear, as well as making efficiency upgrades to existing generation and transmission infrastructure, or adding battery storage, or carbon-capture systems.

While it is a large investment in moving to renewables, Fracica contended the overall need in America is much greater.

"We had asked for 10 times this funding amount originally," Fracica noted. "Because our data and research showed that we actually will need $100 billion if we wanted to get all of our rural-electric cooperatives in the United States off of fossil fuels."

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.

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.