April 17, 2008

We Had Better Move Ahead Without Bush

It's a good thing no one in Oregon is waiting for President George W. Bush to save us from global warming. President Bush spoke Wednesday about his plan to reduce greenhouse gases which cause global warming, starting in 2025, allowing a peak in usage 17 years from now. This statement contrasts with leading scientists' estimate that by 2025, we need to have already made emissions reductions in the 20-30% range if we are to avoid the direst consequences of our fossil fuel usage. Some of those consequences are expected to include increased severe weather events (drought, fires, hurricanes, flooding, etc.), as well as decreased snowpack and water supply, disruption of food supply, and rise in sea levels.

The Climate Institute offers the following explanation of a rise in sea levels: "The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects an increase of temperature ranging between 1.1 and 6.40 C over the next century, necessarily entailing a reduction of the amount of ice. As a result, sea levels could rise 10 to 23 inches by 2100... In addition, the IPCC suggests that by 2080, sea level rise could convert as much as 33 percent of the world's coastal wetlands to open water (IPCC 2007)." Because many of the world's largest cities, including American cities such as New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Miami, Seattle, Boston, and even Portland, are either directly on the coastline or connected via river channel, a significant sea level change would indicate large population dislocation.

Whether such impacts and dislocations occur depends greatly on what we do in the next 2 decades, the very years the Bush Administration would like to allow business as usual, with climbing emissions: "Unmitigated climate change would, in the long term, be likely to exceed the capacity of natural, managed and human systems to adapt... Early mitigation actions would avoid further locking in carbon intensive infrastructure and reduce climate change and associated adaptation needs... Many impacts can be reduced, delayed or avoided by mitigation. Mitigation efforts and investments over the next two to three decades will have a large impact on opportunities to achieve lower stabilisation levels. Delayed emission reductions significantly constrain the opportunities to achieve lower stabilisation levels and increase the risk of more severe climate change impacts." ( IPCC 2007, p. 19.)

Offering no specific policies or regulatory regimes leading to greenhouse gas emissions, and instead speaking of "accelerating the development and deployment of new technologies," Bush's speech comes just weeks before Congress expects to debate climate change legislation which would introduce real mandatory emissions reductions. While we found Bush's lack of action regarding global warming extremely disappointing, we find this charade meant to resemble genuine action even more so. Perhaps we are supposed to take heart that the President finally sees climate change as a problem; however, it is discouraging that having recognized the problem, the President doesn't actually want to do anything about it.

Meanwhile, back in Oregon, utilities are working hard to incorporate carbon-neutral power sources such as wind and solar so that they can meet the Renewable Energy Standard passed by the Oregon Legislature in 2007. Under the RES, 25% of Oregon's electricity will come from new renewable sources by the year 2025, the same year Bush would only begin to make a reduction in emissions. In addition, Oregon has the highest percentage nationwide of voluntary participants in the renewable energy programs offered to residential customers by Portland General Electric and PacifiCorp. Not to mention the fact that Oregon's Public Utility Commission has rejected the last several utility requests to build new coal plants (the highest-emissions electrical power source), rejections for which CUB led the charge.

CUB continues to advocate for actions and policies which would mitigate the worst effects of climate change in Oregon. We are working with the Western Climate Initiative to craft a realistic and meaningful limit on carbon emissions, a so-called "cap-and-trade regime." (Another member of the WCI, British Columbia, has already instituted a carbon tax to reduce its own emissions.) It is clear to us, as it does not seem to be clear to the Bush Administration, that an earlier start on reducing greenhouse gas emissions is not only helpful, it is essential.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 02:09 PM | Comments (0)

March 12, 2008

A Specific Response to Global Warming: Let's Take a Look at Cap-and-Trade

The environmental community may have its differences, but one thing that is gaining universal agreement is that we need to reduce our carbon emissions to address the rising waters and rising threats of global warming. So how do we do this? Three commonly discussed mechanisms include a cap-and-trade regime, a straight carbon tax, or direct carbon regulation (without the ability to trade emissions credits). Of these three, the one being discussed by the Western Climate Initiative -- and the one which has gained the most political traction -- is the cap-and-trade option. So next question: what is it?

The purpose of cap-and-trade is to reduce greenhouse gas pollution, the most common pollutant being carbon dioxide. And although carbon emissions do occur in nature, human emissions of carbon dioxide have increased astronomically in the past 150 years, due to fossil fuel use in our vehicles, our businesses, and our homes. A cap-and-trade would put a cap on greenhouse gas emissions that result from the burning of fossil fuels, at some agreed-upon level, and then gradually reduce that cap until we reach a sustainable level of carbon emissions that does not endanger the ecosystems we rely on. The State of Oregon has set a goal for itself of reducing carbon emissions to 80% of 1990 levels by the year 2050. As of yet, this goal has no teeth. But the legal enforcement of some carbon reduction goal cannot be far off, if the message of scientists, the interest of political leaders, and the level of general public awareness, are all taken as indications.

Two big issues arise when discussing a cap-and-trade regime:

1) Where, meaning in what sectors of the economy, do we apply it? CUB believes strongly that any effective carbon reduction plan will have to be applied to all affected sectors: the transportation sector; the big industrial sector; and the utility sector. To be even more specific, here are the numbers: 40% of our nation's carbon dioxide emissions comes from the electricity sector (meaning electric utilities); another 33% comes from the transportation sector; 17% is produced by industrial processes; and an additional 10% from residential and commercial sources. A cap-and-trade could be rather easily applied to the utility sector, because it operates within a relatively finite and mostly regulated system, which would allow for implementation of another layer of regulation without having to recreate the wheel or start from scratch. That said, we think cap-and-trade or complementary regulations must encompass all major sectors, because of the potential for bleeding into one another. For example, if only electricity generation were carbon-regulated, people could just choose to install natural gas for heating rather than electricity; this avoids carbon-regulation cost for the individual, but also avoids carbon reduction in the larger economy. Similarly, a societal shift to plug-in hybrid vehicles is simply moving emissions from one sector (transportation) to another (utility). So CUB thinks carbon regulation must be applied across all major economic sectors.

2) Where do the credits start out? Credits, or allowances, can be auctioned off by the government to companies in the various sectors, and then government can use that money to fund clean energy research and development, and building large renewable projects. State or federal regulatory agencies (depending upon who passed the carbon regulation laws) would provide oversight and assess stiff penalties for not meeting carbon reduction goals or keeping emissions within the allowances purchased. A potential problem that arises in this scenario is that the government could conceivably spend the money on tax cuts, military spending, health care, education, or some other preferred government priority, and then we would be not very much closer to a solution on the energy front. But ideally (from a global warming perspective) government would turn around and invest the money gained from carbon allowances in energy efficiency, conservation, and renewables, which will directly address the problem.

Auctioning allowances is expected to work well in certain sectors, where government is either responsible for the infrastructure that shapes emissions levels (such as transportation), or where government is able to shift the clean energy investment from one sector to another, when emissions reductions may not be directly possible (such as in the case of an industrial plant that cannot be retrofitted to reduce emissions). The scenario goes something like this: A manufacturing company is required to meet declining carbon emissions standards, but there's nothing they can do -- there is no retrofit for their plant to reduce carbon. So they go to the carbon credit market and purchase the credits they need to meet the standards. That money is then invested by the government elsewhere to clean the system. Company management raises the cost of their product enough to cover the cost of the credits, passing that cost along to their customers, and other parts of the economy become more efficient. The system becomes greener and the entire ecosystem becomes one step more stable.

Giving allowances for free to industrial companies opens up a potential problem, what we will call (tongue in cheek) the windfall pitfall. This would be a scenario where government gives allowances for free to the company, they are able to retrofit their operations relatively inexpensively to reduce emissions; however, they still pass along a higher cost to customers, letting shareholders reap the benefits of the free allowances when they are sold to other emitters. This is specifically a pitfall associated with giving allowances to unregulated, for-profit companies, and would not apply to regulated utilities, since regulators examine costs and profits closely and would not allow such a corporate windfall to occur (because we won't let them!).

Regulated utilities are a unique entity, combining a system of existing regulatory oversight with ever-changing resource portfolios offering many opportunities for direct emissions reduction. Regulated utilities have numerous ways to reduce emissions, such as energy efficiency, distributed generation, or replacing dirty generation with clean energy. For example, an electric utility company would mostly likely meet its goal by shutting down coal plants, a carbon-intensive power source. If a company were to shut down a coal plant and be 10% under 2005 levels, when only 5% under was required, they could sell those unneeded credits and invest the money in a replacement. Each year, the idea goes, the cap would reduce emissions even more and the system would become greener.

That is why CUB prefers a cap-and-trade design that auctions allowances generally, but gives free allowances to regulated utilities. Regulators will prevent corporate windfalls and can see that the value of the allowances is invested for the benefit of customers and the climate. Also, CUB recommends giving credits to regulated utilities rather than auctioning them off, because it seems to better meet CUB's two major criteria for a carbon regulation scheme, which are: 1) effectiveness; and 2) affordability. One benefit of giving emissions credits to utility companies is that that is where the investment in clean energy has traditionally happened and needs to continue to happen, at an increasingly fast rate. It seems to be the most effective route. Equally important, giving emissions credits to regulated utilities would make the greening of the system more affordable for customers. If the utility has to buy credits to begin with, it will make it harder for customers, on whose shoulders the cost of regulation will be falling, to pay for the new investment in cleaner energy sources. Electricity is a necessary service in today's world and people of all income levels must pay for its use; we want to make sure that lower-income people are not "priced out" of being able to use the heat and appliances they rely on in daily life.

Ownership of the credits will be a sticky problem to solve under some scenarios. CUB feels strongly that customers have invested in the system that exists now, and customers should receive the benefits when the dirty power sources in use currently are retired and credits sold. As a general principle, we feel that carbon credits should go to whoever is going to be building a new clean system, and customers will be footing the bill for their utilities' investments.

We chose to focus in this article on cap-and-trade, because of the political traction it has gained in recent months. While cap-and-trade has advanced significantly further politically than a carbon tax, there are many who would prefer to enact a carbon tax. We agree that it is appropriate and necessary to compare these two carbon reduction options, but we hope that these discussions can happen in a way that is not damaging to either option. We need to enact one or the other within a relatively short time frame, to start turning the temperature down.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 02:28 PM | Comments (4)

November 28, 2007

CUB Monitors Additional Energy Efficiency Investments

Oregon's landmark Renewable Energy Standard, passed earlier this year, contains a provision allowing for additional electric utility revenues to be collected from customers to fund energy efficiency and low-income weatherization programs. PacifiCorp and PGE have just made Advice Filings with the Public Utility Commission; both utilities are requesting permission to make additional investments in energy efficiency, PacifiCorp an additional $8.5 million and PGE an additional $16.7 million. The additional investment is great, since the cheapest, greenest power is the power you don't have to produce.

Both utilities have requested keeping a certain amount of money to facilitate enrollment in energy efficiency programs managed by the Energy Trust of Oregon, and the low-income weatherization programs managed by the State's Community Action Partnership organizations. This makes sense, due to the fact that most customers have regular contact with their utility but don't necessarily know about all the great programs they might be eligible for to save energy. Account managers and customer service representatives at PGE and PacifiCorp can help connect residential and business customers with programs that will both save them money and reduce our overall energy usage. PGE, however, has requested an amount beyond what we feel is necessary to achieve energy efficiency goals.

PGE is asking to retain a greater share of the increased funds for purposes that, we believe, stretch the parameters of the law. PGE plans to spend part of the increased funding on initiatives related to conservation; however, PGE has not explained how these initiatives are cost-effective. For example, PGE is designing a curriculum to teach public school students about energy. While energy education is a laudable activity, PGE provides no analysis that this reduces usage in a cost-effective manner. Just as we opposed the Legislature giving money to OMSI from the 3% "public purpose" funds designated to obtain real energy savings goals, we also object to PGE's lack of focus in this current filing.

Furthermore, PGE claims that a reduction in energy usage cuts into their revenues to pay for fixed costs of the system (i.e., poles and wires), and that the Commission should therefore approve a "lost revenue recovery mechanism" to reimburse them 4 cents for each kilowatt hour (kwh) of power which is not produced due to energy savings (the current price per kwh is about 8 cents). To which our response is a great big "WHOA!" Even assuming that PGE's theory is correct, and that they are losing money due to energy usage reduction, our analysis is that the amount lost would be no more than about 2 cents/kwh.

But we don't believe that PGE's theory is correct. Due to continual load growth (the Oregonian reported just today on a steady stream of people moving to the Portland area - 102,000 last year), we actually think that PGE is not losing money, that those fixed costs are being paid for quite adequately out of customer revenues.

PGE always has the option of filing a rate case to request a rate hike, if they are indeed losing revenues that should be covering fixed costs. That would require analysis of a great many numbers that PGE has not, in this filing, put on the table. We currently have no evidence to support PGE's argument that they need an additional incentive to invest additional money in energy efficiency.

Most importantly, Oregon's Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) process, which occurs through the PUC as well, already requires utilities to make the "least cost" and "least risk" investments. And the rising cost of fossil fuels and inevitability of carbon regulation costs makes energy efficiency more and more cost-effective all the time. This means that Oregon's utilities should be doing more energy efficiency, even without extra incentives (that may or may not be justified).

Utilities have always had a bit of a conflict of interest in doing effective energy efficiency. And our experience throughout much of the 1980s and 1990s was that utilities would often try to maximize the public relations benefit to the company of energy efficiency programs, rather than maximizing the actual energy savings. That's why it was such an important policy step to create an independent non-profit with the mission of getting the biggest bang for the consumer's buck in savings from energy efficiency. The Energy Trust has been averaging a savings of about 25 average megawatts of electricity every year for the past 3 years (and with a lower overhead cost than the utilities used to have to provide the same service). Pretty impressive.

We happily support the utilities upping their investments in these programs that help clean the system and lower rates for everyone. We just want to make sure it's done right.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 04:41 PM | Comments (0)

October 03, 2007

CUB Helps Redesign Energy Efficiency Program

Sometimes it takes a few years to work the kinks out of a new program, and it looks as though the OLIEE Program (Oregon Low-Income Energy Efficiency Program) will now be able to hit its stride. The OLIEE Program was first negotiated in a regulatory agreement under the aegis of the Public Utility Commission back in 2002 to help low-income natural gas customers weatherize their homes and make gains in energy efficiency. The public purpose funds that pay for the OLIEE project are collected in bills by NW Natural from natural gas ratepayers, and services are delivered primarily by the social service agencies that make up the Community Action Partnership of Oregon or CAPO (formerly known as Community Action Directors of Oregon).

In order to receive weatherization from the community action agencies, a household must be at or below 60% of the state median income level. Last year, 300 houses across Oregon had their homes weatherized under OLIEE, and that's nothing to sneeze at. But the consensus among those who started the program and monitor it, a group that includes CUB, NW Natural and CAPO, was that we could do better.

There were difficulties with the process, such as the fact that the agencies that managed the program were required to front the money for weatherization and energy efficiency projects from their limited budgets, receiving reimbursement after a process that could last several months. Also, the program was intended to mirror the highly effective weatherization and energy efficiency projects for electricity customers, but did not, which made the two programs more difficult to juggle.

So, about a year ago, conversations began around what could be done to redesign the program for maximum effectiveness. Sitting at the table were the original program designers, along with individual service agencies such as Clackamas County Social Services, Lane County Human Services Commission, and the Community Action Agency of Marion and Polk Counties. And after many rounds of negotiation, the new OLIEE Program was rolled out September 1st, a 3-year pilot program that aims to serve 400 households this year, 525 next year, and 600 the following year. How to achieve these increases in numbers? The answer is pretty simple.

First, the program will begin to mirror more fully the weatherization and energy efficiency programs for electricity customers. This removes layers of complexity from the process and allows agency staff to administer weatherization programs that do not differ significantly from one another. Second, the funds for the weatherization/energy efficiency projects will be paid upfront, allowing agencies to both streamline the process and solidify their financial basis. Finally, the revamped guidelines will allow agencies to pursue a "whole house approach" that takes into account health and safety measures that might undermine the weatherization steps being taken. For example, under the old guidelines tasks were compartmentalized, and a weatherization project might consist of insulating under the roof and within the walls, but a hole in a window or an ill-hung door letting in cold air would have to be paid for with other funds, increasing the program's complexity and time required. Under the new guidelines, the house as a whole is evaluated and weatherized, achieving the intended energy savings with less wasted time.

The benefit to the families and individuals, many of them elderly, who receive benefits under OLIEE are obvious. Natural gas prices have increased along with the rest of the fossil fuel market and low-income Oregonians whose homes are weatherized will potentially avoid shut-offs in cases of severe financial distress, will save hundreds -- perhaps thousands -- of dollars on their gas bills, and be more comfortable besides. The value doesn't stop there, though; increasing the number of homes in our region who can reduce their energy usage also reduces demand on the system as a whole, keeping rates down.

Whether we're talking about global warming, rising rates, or diminishing oil and gas supplies, there are many good reasons to make sure that our use of fossil fuels is as efficient as it possibly can be, and the revamped OLIEE program takes us several steps in that direction. Remember: energy efficiency is the cheapest way to "acquire" new energy. Successful energy efficiency is a win for everybody.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 09:48 AM | Comments (0)

September 26, 2007

CUB Fighting Global Warming on Numerous Fronts

Ten years ago, global warming was a topic that came up for discussion only rarely, and in a controversial way. Today the topic pervades news reports and has affected many aspects of the work that CUB does on behalf of utility customers. Yes, we advocate for clean energy because we want to mitigate the damage to our rapidly changing climate systems, but also, CUB works on global warming issues in various ways so that customers will not be paying the price for bad resource choices on their utility bills.

We filed testimony in a case about 10 days ago, a least cost plan for PacifiCorp, in which we argued strongly against the inclusion of any new pulverized coal in the resource plan: Because the plan is concerned with "least cost," CUB is concerned with what the true cost of coal power will be, and because it involves a number of uncertain components (such as the future costs of carbon regulation on either state or national levels), we conclude that "we are not convinced that the true costs of a new pulverized coal plant have been included in the model." We recommended that the Public Utility Commission not approve the PacifiCorp plan that included new pulverized coal as a part of its resource plan.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, we are filing today a final round of comments in UM 1302 (as a part of a group that also includes NW Energy Coalition, Renewable Northwest Project, and Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon), which examines how the Commission should integrate the expectation of future carbon regulation into utility resource planning in general. "Planning for risk and uncertainty is a key objective of the Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) process, and a thorough analysis of the risk of future CO2 regulation should be an integral part of any utility's planning. We are, therefore, very pleased with the high level of agreement from all parties in this Docket that a more rigorous analysis of carbon risks is acceptable and necessary..." We then go on to clarify points and disagree with some other parties' changes or interpretation of the details. However, the basic consensus remains: Utilities need to include future carbon regulation as a factor in resource planning, the sooner the better.

Legislatively, we have of course been working for more than a year on the creation and passage of a Renewable Energy Standard that will reduce Oregon greenhouse gas emissions associated with electricity production. The RES did pass the 2007 Oregon Legislature and was signed into law by Governor Kulongoski. Our standard is among the most stringent in the country (so far), requiring 25% renewable energy by the year 2025. The rulemaking at the Public Utility Commission to implement this new law is beginning and CUB is involved in that, too.

Few people would have foreseen that global warming would arise as a major issue in utility customer advocacy a decade ago. Certainly, it was not a topic on many people's agendas back in the late 1980s when the CUB Bear Facts Newsletter ran an article on it: "The summer of 1988 may come to be known as the 'first greenhouse summer,' as many fear this summer's droughts are only the beginning of the environmental disasters global warming could set off. Electric energy production is intimately tied to this problem since electric utilities are the source of about a third of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States. Carbon dioxide is the biggest offender of the handful of 'greenhouse gases.'" The article, by Clay Martin, went on to say, "Measures can be taken now to minimize future warming. The cheapest, fastest and safest of these measures is more efficient energy use... Though greater energy efficiency is the first step in reducing output of greenhouse gases, it won't be enough. Conversion to less carbon-intensive fuels like natural gas will also be necessary." We would add today that renewable sources that emit no greenhouse gases, such as wind, solar, geothermal and perhaps in the future wave power, are all gaining prominence.

However unlikely it was to hear a prime time discussion of global warming 15 or 20 years ago, it has since become quite common. Times change and the issue of global warming has not only become a mainstream political, environmental and economic issue, it has also become a major force in energy discussions and a priority issue for CUB: Protecting the planet by limiting emissions of greenhouse gases is the only way to protect customers from paying high carbon premiums on their utility bills in the coming decade.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 03:59 PM | Comments (0)

September 07, 2007

Go Carbon Neutral with Cow Poop

We wish we'd said it first, but at least we can quote The Oregonian as they describe the newest environmental sustainability program to come from an Oregon utility, as "moo power." NW Natural will now be offering a Smart Energy Program to allow customers to offset their carbon emissions, and part of the process involves using cow manure. The Oregonian gives a lot of details about how "the natural gas utility just won state approval to help turn a potent greenhouse gas, methane from cow manure into electricity or recycled gas."

The plan is to capture the methane from cow manure and burn the resulting biogas for energy production. This creates a new sustainable energy source while at the same time removing a proven greenhouse gas from the environment. Or, as quoted in the New West newspaper of Bend: "In perhaps the greatest statement of all time, NW Natural said it likes the idea taking a problem such as the smell and pollution from cow feces and turning it into a positive."

What neither paper reports is that the discussions for this Smart Energy program, in which customers can pay a few dollars more per month to offset the carbon dioxide produced by their natural gas consumption, began with CUB Executive Director Bob Jenks. He went to NW Natural a few years ago with a proposal: since Oregon's large electric utility companies are now offering renewable portfolio options to help customers cut their carbon output from electricity consumption, we should help customers do the same on the gas side. He argued that Oregon's renewable electricity programs' success, ranked tops in the nation for voluntary participation, boded well for interest in a similar program aimed at natural gas users.

The company was originally concerned about overtly linking natural gas, a relatively clean-burning fossil fuel, with the carbon emissions that feed global warming. But perhaps due to the increased visibility of global warming in the past two years, NW Natural did eventually agree that the idea was a good one. The company put together the Smart Energy Program, to help customers "green up" their gas usage. The result is easy to use and ready to go, and makes NW Natural the first stand-alone gas utility in the nation to offer customers a way to go carbon neutral. You can find out more about the program on NW Natural's website, and even sign up for Smart Energy in a matter of minutes (we already did!).

Bob Jenks's daughter Macy was captivated by the reports of this aspect of her dad's negotiation work ("You had a meeting about cow poop?!"). She produced a picture of the cow, the poop, and a nice warm home heated by the latter. We tried really hard to find that illustration to share with you here; unfortunately, we failed and you will just have to draw your own.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 11:16 AM | Comments (1)

August 24, 2007

Kids' Energy Links

As we fill up our calendars with back-to-school events, outfit our children with backpacks, new school clothes, and assorted reading and writing tools, we might take just a little time to also talk energy with them. Kids today are more aware of environmental challenges than perhaps any generation before. Empower them to understand how our choices affect the future by teaching them some of the basics of energy production and usage, including how not to use more than you need. You'll probably learn something yourself in the process!

The following links looked good to us (though we are in no way advocating for these organizations or businesses or implying that we agree with every statement that might be found on their websites). Take a little time to explore these with your child. And have fun in the last few weeks of summer!

Eco Kids Energy Quiz

Energy Patrol

Energy Information Agency for Kids

Renewable Energy Information & Games

Discover Solar Energy

Academy of Energy

Kids Korner of Sioux Valley Energy

Energy Activities from Ergon

UK Kids Korner of Energy Fun

Think Energy

Posted by Oregon CUB at 12:56 PM | Comments (0)

July 20, 2007

How many wizards does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

The rain has made a surprise reappearance here in Oregon, not our usual July forecast. Well, if you've got the time, you can curl up and read the seventh and final Harry Potter book, which comes out tonight at midnight! Just stay up late reading the grand finale under lights powered by a renewable portfolio option (if you are in PGE or Pacific Power service territory). Despite the fact that the Renewable Energy Standard passed by the Oregon Legislature will soon dramatically increase Oregon's clean energy portfolio, it's never too early to make a personal choice for your family that will reduce greenhouse gases.

Or walk, bicycle or take public transit to the Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix movie, now showing in many Oregon theaters. (A few of us are headed to a 4:00 showing this afternoon -- hey, it's practically the weekend and half of us are on summer vacation already!)

Whatever you do this weekend, don't use energy you don't need, and choose the energy you do consume wisely (the Energy Trust of Oregon offers tips on how to conserve, and invest in energy efficiency or renewable resources). Because whether we cast spells under power of a lightning-shaped scar, or simply live and work keeping in mind the source of our electrical power and the natural world that is affected by it, we can all make a bit of a difference.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 12:04 PM | Comments (0)

May 24, 2007

Clean Energy Bill Going to Become a Law!

There has been dancing in the streets, or at least around our desks, after the passage of SB 838, the Renewable Energy Standard, by the Oregon House yesterday, with a final vote of 41-18. The passage of this bill means that by 2025, 25% of Oregon's electrical power needs will be met by new renewable energy sources. This is the most significant move Oregon has yet made to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address global warming.

CUB feels like we have a won an Academy Award and so, before the music swells, we'd like to thank Governor Ted Kulongoski for his leadership on this bill, ably assisted by Staffer Peter Cogswell, Jeremiah Baumann of OSPIRG for tenacity and temerity in the face of huge opposition, Senator Brad Avakian, without whom the bill would not have begun its journey in the Oregon Senate, Representative Jackie Dingfelder, who made a fantastic showing in the Oregon House, and Portland General Electric and PacifiCorp, who helped organize support for the RES. CUB received some criticism for working with the utilities on this bill, but we say the end result speaks for itself: together we passed a strong bill that is going to keep Oregon clean and prosperous for the long haul. A large coalition of environmental groups and other stakeholders also played a large role and those groups deserve our thanks (some standouts include OLCV, the Oregon Conservation Network, the Oregon Business Alliance, EWEB, Oregon AFL-CIO, Renewable Northwest Project, Oregon Municipal Electric Utilities, Portland Jobs with Justice, and Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon).

CUB thanks all of our members who made phone calls and emails and trips to Salem in support of SB 838. And most of all, CUB staff and board members wish to thank our own Jeff Bissonnette, CUB Organizing Director and Man In Salem, who worked strategically and unceasingly to bring about this victory. And we thank our families, especially our mothers...

We tracked down Jeff, who had this to say about the passage of the RES: "Customers can rest a little easier knowing that, not only does this bill take us a big step forward in protecting our children's future, but also protects all of us against steep carbon-related rate hikes in coming years." When asked if he could relax a little now, he raised his eyebrows (through the phone line) and responded, "We still have quite an agenda going on."

The bill goes back to the Senate for a concurrence vote and then on to the Governor's desk. Passing the RES makes Oregon one of 22 states who have passed some sort of renewable energy legislation, and Oregon being Oregon, our bill is one of the very strongest in the nation. It's a wonderful success, and it WILL make a difference.

By the way, this is our 100th blog entry. We began this series of CUB Online newsletters with the news of our victory in the PUC decision to not approve the Texas Pacific purchase of PGE. We love having good news to share with you today, 99 emails later, as well.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 02:48 PM | Comments (0)

May 10, 2007

Q: Where's the real threat of higher rates coming from? A: Not clean energy.

The Industrial Customers of Northwest Utilities, better known as ICNU, has been opposing SB 838, the Renewable Energy Standard (or RES), Oregon's chance to build an electricity system composed of 25% renewable resources by 2025, on the grounds that rates might go up. One of the leaders of its coalition in opposition has been local corporate heavy Weyerhauser. Despite the 4% cost cap IN THE BILL, they have continued to beat the drum with legislators that rates would rise if we protect the stability of our electrical supply and our environment through investments in renewables. In fact, investment in renewable energy now will prevent higher costs later by avoiding fossil fuel volatility and carbon regulation. The bill also contains other consumer protections.

The truth is that the threat of higher rates isn't from the RES. As a matter of fact, PacifiCorp, in their latest resource plan, is expanding by over 40% -- from 1400 to 2000 Mw -- their amount of cost-effective renewable resources, and plans to integrate these resources by 2014. They are finding that renewables are cost-effective even today. (It's still important to pass the RES to ensure that all utilities make these kinds of investments.) And as carbon regulation hits and gas and coal prices go up, they will be even more affordable.

The real threat of higher rates is actually from Weyerhauser and ICNU themselves.

While the industrial customers were bemoaning higher rates at the Capitol, they were also actively trying to raise most residential customers' rates, by suing Bonneville Power Administration over the Residential Exchange. Their argument was that the Exchange, a provision of federal law that allocates a share of the benefits of the federal hydropower system to residential and small farm customers of investor-owned utilities (IOUs) such as PGE and PacifiCorp, was unfairly "subsidizing" these residential customers of IOUs on the backs of public power and industrial customers. The amount of benefits under the current Exchange settlement is worth $300 million/year or about 13% of these residential customers' rates. The court decided last week that the way BPA settled the Residential Exchange in their last rate case was not consistent with federal law; the court did not decide against the Exchange itself, but the amount to be allocated now hangs in some uncertainty. "'We're pleased that the 9th Circuit recognized the BPA was overstepping its authority,' said Melinda Davison, an attorney who represents industrial customers such as Weyerhauser and Georgia Pacific. 'We don't think public power customers should be subsidizing residential ratepayers.'" ("Ruling could raise power rates," Oregonian, 05-04-07.)

Where to begin? First off, there's the matter of complaining about a potential (but unlikely) 4% rate increase while actively working to raise other customers' rates a good deal more than that. Nice one. Then there's the matter of calling the Exchange a subsidy, when it's actually a fair allocation of shared federal resources, granted to all the region's residents in the 1980 Northwest Power Act. The Exchange is no more of a subsidy than the benefits that public power and industrial customers get. We actually don't believe it would even be legal for BPA to eliminate the Exchange benefits, but that's a battle for another day. Finally, what are industrial customers thinking? They insist that investment in new resources is unnecessary, be they renewable resources, conservation and energy efficiency programs, or even traditional fossil fuel generation (the one place we tend to agree with them). What, then, do they think we're going to do for increased energy as our region absorbs the expected growth in population over coming decades? We don't follow their reasoning, but we're certainly not following their lead on a path sure to lead to higher costs and bigger problems down the road.

This obstinate refusal to acknowledge the new ecological and economic reality is not really a necessary part of corporate business practice. The Oregonian announced May 9th that REI, Yakima, and Nike are all working on achieving carbon neutrality by offsetting the greenhouse gases they emit as a part of doing business. The day before that, Environmental Defense sent out a News Release saying that 12 more multinational corporations, including General Motors and Shell, were signing on to the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP), bringing the total number to 22. "As part of this announcement, these companies pledge to support national legislation to reduce America's global warming pollution by 60-80% by 2050." These organizations, not known for their radical rabble-rousing, are simply seeing the writing on the wall. In fact, according to one local expert, quoted in the Oregonian, "'It's not entirely commercial self-promotion, and it's not entirely intrinsic corporate virtue,' said Angus Duncan, president of the nonprofit Bonneville Environmental Foundation, which promotes clean energy development. 'It's a mix of two.'" These businesses know it's in their best interests to change course. Apparently Weyerhauser, which had earnings of $755 million in the first quarter of this year, isn't seeing the pattern or what is at stake.

If we let Weyerhauser dictate energy policy for the region, the end result will be both higher rates and hotter, dirtier air. What a deal. The RES still has a chance and is the best deal for Oregon's environment, community and economy. Oregon Legislators have the opportunity to do a good thing if they will only pass a Renewable Energy Standard for Oregon. Call your House Representative now at 800-332-2313 or email through the web. Tell him/her to vote yes on SB 838 for clean energy.

Finding a way to balance affordable rates and stable energy sources that don't cause irreparable harm to our environment is not radical politics -- it's just good energy policy.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 03:22 PM | Comments (0)

May 03, 2007

Only One Hurdle Remains for Renewable Energy Standard Bill -- Let's Clear It!

The Renewable Energy Standard Bill, SB 838, has passed out of committee in the Oregon House and will be headed for the floor soon. If passed, Oregon will produce 25% of its electricity from renewable sources by the year 2025, and will benefit from a wealth of new clean energy resources and a revitalization of rural economies.

If you've been reading CUB Online for long, you may have followed the entire course of this legislation, from "pie-in-the-sky" idea back in 2006, through strategic planning and drafting, on through its trajectory in the Oregon Senate, and here we are ready to take it home. Along with everyone from the environmental community to rural county commissioners, the Governor loves this bill; we have no doubt he'll sign it if passed. This is the final hurdle, folks.

The opposition hasn't given up, but has switched tactics. Knowing that they will have a hard time convincing anyone to vote "no" outright on such a great bill with such widespread support, they've decided to try to kill it by getting members to vote to send it back to committee. Don't let them do it.

CUB is going to be phone banking next week to awaken the considerable amount of grassroots support that we know exists out there. Dozens of people on this list, perhaps hundreds, have already taken action to support SB 838. There are hundreds more we can move to action with your help.

If you haven't already contacted your own House of Representatives member, do so now. This is a crucial time and the stakes are high. We could be developing a cleaner, more prosperous Oregon to leave to our children and grandchildren, or we could lose this opportunity. Call the Oregon Capitol now at (800)332-2313 or send an email through this link. Tell your rep to vote "yes" on SB 838 and to not let anyone send this bill back to committee.

If you've already contacted your legislator in the House, and you are assured of his/her support for the RES bill, consider coming down to the CUB offices in beautiful downtown Portland one evening next week to spend a few hours calling other CUB members to urge them to call their own representative. If you can phone bank for this Renewable Energy Standard, contact CUB Organizing Director Jeff Bissonnette at 503-516-1636 or at jeff@oregoncub.org. Also, send this message on to everyone you know who cares about clean energy.

We are so very close to victory. We can do great things for Oregon by passing this bill. We'll reduce greenhouse gases, we'll build businesses and create jobs statewide in rural economies, and we'll keep our own utility costs down (since this will protect all customers from the volatility of fossil fuel markets and the future costs of carbon regulation). Let's take it on home.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 12:39 PM | Comments (0)

April 19, 2007

ACTION ALERT: Call Your Representative and Make a Difference for Earth Day

Two critical bills need your help to pass the Oregon House. Put some action into your Earth Day by calling on your legislator to support Clean Energy and the creation of a Global Warming Commission.

CLEAN ENERGY
The Renewable Energy Standard Bill (RES), SB 838, made it through the Oregon Senate last week and now we need to keep the momentum going to make it through the House. It takes a lot more energy to overcome inertia than to keep a ball rolling, and we at CUB are all about saving energy.

That's why we are asking you to keep the RES bill on the move: CALL your Representative in the Oregon House at (800) 332-2313; tell them you support SB 838, the RES bill.

We've come a long way with this bill, but we're not there yet; we think we can get the votes we need to pass the House, but we need your help to make it happen. The opposition (led by industrial customers whose statements about the bill have been, in the words of CUB Energy Program Director Jason Eisdorfer, "either misinformed or misleading") has been lobbying hard to stop this bill; we need to make sure that representatives feel the broad base of statewide support for this bill that we know is out there. This may be the most important bill for Oregon's environment, economy, and customer protection that the Legislature will see this session. Global warming makes clean energy an urgent issue.

GLOBAL WARMING COMMISSION
While you're at it, there's another important bill that needs your help in the Oregon House: the Global Warming Commission bill, HB 3543, would create a state commission to compile and study developing research on global warming. That research would then be used to plan policy that will protect Oregon's coastlines, mountain ranges, water supplies, agriculture, and communities. Too much is at stake for Oregon's people and economy not to pass this bill.

CALL NOW!
If we do nothing else but pass these bills, the session will have been successful. Many of you have already taken action, and we thank you. If you have not yet done so, do not delay! This is not a situation that calls for last minute action - the time to act for clean energy is NOW. The Capitol Switchboard at (800) 332-2313 can connect you with your legislator. If you need to look up your legislator's name, or prefer to send an email, you can do that on the web. Call Now and ask your Representative to vote Yes for the RES bill (SB 838) and yes for the Global Warming Commission bill (HB 3543).

CELEBRATE THE EARTH WITH ACTION
In all its 37 years, Earth Day has never meant so much to so many. Of course, never has there been so much at stake for the interconnected systems that make the Earth function as our planetary home. Thousands of people will be attending an Earth Day celebration in Portland, Eugene, Corvallis, Rogue Valley or other Oregon communities this weekend.

Make Earth Day more meaningful by adding a scoop of weekday political action to your weekend party. The best thing any Oregonian can do for the Earth is to call your Representative and help pass the RES and the Global Warming Commission bills. Call now, and help make future Earth Days something to celebrate.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 03:07 PM | Comments (0)

April 12, 2007

Renewable Energy Standard Passes in Oregon Senate

Great news from Salem! The Renewable Energy Standard, Senate Bill 838, sailed though the Senate earlier this week with a vote of 20 to 10. This puts the bill in a strong position going forward to the Oregon House, where the fight may be tougher, but the momentum gained will hopefully bring a victory there, too.

We appreciate the calls and emails of all our CUB members who talked to their Senators about passing this energy standard, which would bring Oregon to the level of 25% renewable energy by 2025. All of our elected officials in Salem need to understand that global warming has added urgency to our need to switch to green power, and passage of this bill would move us toward green power in a significant way.

Now, turn that same energy and enthusiasm toward the House and call your Representative at 800-332-2313 or email through the Legislative website. We need grassroots advocates like you contacting your Representatives, and the need is, if anything, stronger than before.

We've been calling this bill "ambitious but achievable" ever since Governor Kulongoski made the proposal in his State of the State Address. This vote brings us halfway to actually achieving our ambitious goal for Oregon. Turning the tide on climate change requires making vast reductions in our greenhouse gas emissions. Starting sooner will ease the cost and the destruction later.

Another way for Portland metro area activists to support such change is to come out this Saturday to Portland's Face It Rally to Solve Global Warming.

Act now and keep the momentum building toward a sustainable energy future!

Posted by Oregon CUB at 02:51 PM | Comments (0)

March 29, 2007

What's In a Name? Renewable Energy Standard Bill Passes Out of Committee

Great news for clean energy supporters! With a new name (or number, that is), plus an addendum supporting increased energy efficiency programs, the Renewable Energy Standard bill passed out of Committee on Tuesday of this week. As you may remember, the Renewable Energy Standard (RES) calls for 25% of Oregon's electricity to come from renewable sources by 2025. And its next stop is the Senate floor! The RES bill, previously SB 373, is now called SB 838, but has the same great combination of benefits for customers and the environment that CUB staff and our allies took such care in proposing.

Voting for the bill was a bipartisan group including Senate Committee Chair Brad Avakian, Sen. Jason Atkinson, Sen. Alan Bates, and Sen. Floyd Prozanski; Sen. Roger Beyer voted against the bill. We believe chances of a Senate floor passage of the bill are good, and that a statewide group of Oregon Senators exists who understand that the time for clean energy is now. We also want to make sure our Senators act upon the understanding that customers deserve the kind of long-term protection, both of affordable rates and stable power sources, that an RES would provide. (See the end of this article for an action you can take to help secure passage of SB 838.)

There are benefits and protections in this bill for everyone, starting with Oregon residential utility customers.

Those customers will benefit from having a significant portion of their electricity needs met from renewable sources developed to take advantage of sun, wind, geothermal, and hopefully someday wave energy. Diversifying power sources away from fossil fuels will make our electricity more stable, more local, and will keep long-term prices down. Once we invest in wind turbines or photovoltaics, there is no cost for the fuel. Talk about a free market!

Industrial customers will receive the same benefits as the residential customers CUB represents, though at this point they remain unconvinced. We have heard arguments against the bill to the effect that it will drive up prices. However, studies have shown this not to be the case in other states with similar laws. And the Oregon RES provides a cost cap of 4% which will quite likely never even be reached. Chances are far greater that relying on increasingly volatile fossil fuel markets to produce our energy will result in higher prices. We haven't quite figured out the sense behind these industrial customers' position, which so far has seemed to oppose additional investment in any new energy, either on the supply side or in managing demand (such as through energy efficiency programs). CUB recognizes that we will have to invest once in a while in the electricity production system to keep it functional, keep it sufficient to meet demand, and move it toward sustainability. We think the RES fits the bill (and in fact is the bill).

Rural Oregonians benefit from the taxes paid to those counties in which renewable projects are built, and by the possibility of increasing numbers of jobs in renewable power industries. Urban Oregonians benefit by buying the clean power their rural neighbors produce. Both urban and rural Oregonians benefit from the establishment of economic ties between different parts of the state.

Large utilities are protected by the assurance that they will be reimbursed for prudent investments. Smaller utilities are also protected, since they are only required to meet the standard if they sell more than 1.5% of the state's retail electricity. If they sell less than 1.5% they must meet a standard of only 5% renewables by 2025, an eminently reasonable goal.

Finally, this bill addresses a much-needed reduction in the amount of greenhouse gases our nation emits, 40% of which is attributable to the electricity we produce and consume. Climate change has added urgency to an already important issue. Producing "green" power rather than "brown" provides huge benefits for all of the humans and other creatures who depend on clean air and clean water to live. That would be you and I, and our children, and our children's children, and the many plants and animals that share the Pacific Northwest with us. Business and technology have brought us to a time of unprecedented population growth and relative comfort. Now, we must bring our business and technology to a place of sustainability, so that we don't collapse our society under the very weight of the engine that powers it.

This is only one piece of legislation in one state of one nation on the planet. But it is important in the overall scheme. If we can pass SB 838, the Renewable Energy Standard Bill for Oregon, we will have completed a pattern with Washington and California (who have already passed similar energy standards) that creates a sizable chunk of geographic and economic territory focused on finding a better balance between environmental health and human resource consumption. The Pacific Northwest can lead in sustainable energy and we will - all of us - be the better for it.

So call your Senator and let him or her know that this is THE bill to pass this session (Capitol Switchboard is 800-332-2313 or in Salem 503-986-1000). Or visit them on the web and send an email urging their support. We need clean and affordable energy and we need it now. Tell them to Vote YES on SB 838!

Posted by Oregon CUB at 01:38 PM | Comments (0)

March 19, 2007

Energy and the Environment Take Leading Roles in Upcoming Forums

CUB wants to let our members know about two upcoming forums on energy and the environment that will be happening in the next few weeks. We encourage you to share these notices with your friends and family, and if possible to attend one of these events, bringing your questions, your ideas, and your passion for clean, stable energy choices.

Congresswoman Darlene Hooley to Convene Public Forum on Renewable Energy in Oregon: Opportunities, Obstacles and Outlook

As a newly appointed member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Congresswoman Darlene Hooley's (OR-5) top priorities include promoting energy efficiency and production of alternative fuels, reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and minimizing the factors that contribute to global climate change.

Experts have predicted that climate change could have a devastating impact on Oregon with severe rain and snow patterns, diminished water supplies and crop productivity, increased forest fires and pests, and threatened ecosystems. Thankfully, Oregon is ahead of the game in dedicating resources to research and development of alternative energy such as wind, ocean wave energy, biomass and biofuels. By capitalizing on our unique assets, our state is poised to provide alternatives to fossil fuels while improving the economic and environmental forecast for all Oregonians.

Come learn what Oregon is doing to produce new sources of energy, and what it will take to become the model for the rest of the nation. Congresswoman Hooley is looking forward to your contribution to this important discussion.

Date: Monday April 2, 2007

Location: Portland State University
Smith Memorial Student Union
1825 SW Broadway Avenue, Rooms 327-328
Portland, OR

Check-In: 8:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m.

Forum: 9:00 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.

Please call or e-mail Andrea Salinas at 503-557-1324 to RSVP or to receive more information.

Energy and Environment Forum with Rep. Ben Cannon (Oregon HD 46)

Event: Environmental Forum with Representative Ben Cannon

Date & Time: Saturday March 24, 9-11 am - rain or shine.

Location: Mt. Tabor Park, Picnic Shelter A. It's on the north side of the park, near the amphitheater.

Contact: Leon Lindstrom, (503) 349-6033

On Saturday March 24, from 9 to 11 am, Representative Cannon will host a House District 46 environmental forum at Mt. Tabor, focusing on environmental legislation during the current legislative session and environmental goals for 2008 and 2009. The public is invited and welcome.

The Oregon Legislature is considering a number of key environmental issues year. Renewable-energy standards and Measure 37 reform are two top priorities. Senate Bill 373, the Renewable Energy Standard bill, is perhaps the most important bill for Oregon's energy future now before the 2007 Legislature, and Ben has been a strong supporter. If passed, it would require that 25% of Oregon's electricity come from renewable sources by the year 2025.

Healthy air, water, and land are critical to Oregon's economic future and livability. We must build on our region's heritage as a leader in conservation, land-use planning, public transportation, recycling, and pollution reduction. The issues go beyond those listed here, and securing the state's environmental future will require much more than we can accomplish this year in the Legislature. The March 24 environmental forum will address current legislation, and will also consider goals for 2008 and beyond.

Oregon is well-positioned to be a leader in a cleaner, renewable economy, but it will require planning, diligence, and the active participation of citizens in the public process. The forum on March 24 is a key piece of working through the details of legislation in the 2007 session and building energy for long-term environmental reform in Oregon.

Rep. Cannon is honored to co-host this event with the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, the Oregon Conservation Network, and the Citizens' Utility Board of Oregon.

Oregon State Representative Ben Cannon
900 Court St. NE H-487, Salem, OR 97301
(503) 986-1446
rep.bencannon@state.or.us

Posted by Oregon CUB at 02:23 PM | Comments (0)

March 08, 2007

Renewable Energy Standard Bill Gets a Hearing

The Renewable Energy Standard (RES) bill, Senate Bill 373, had its first hearing Tuesday in the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Sen. Brad Avakian. Governor Kulongoski made a brief speech about the importance of passing this bill, which would require that 25% of Oregon's electrical power be produced from new renewable resources by the year 2025. CUB's Program Director, Jason Eisdorfer, also testified at the hearing in support of the bill. We are happy to say that OSPIRG, the Northwest Energy Coalition, the AFL-CIO, and Portland General Electric have also signed on as supporters.

The bill is, of course, not without its opponents, (those groups were given a voice in the March 7th Oregonian). We are convinced, however, that the RES is good environmental policy, is good for statewide economic development, and is a fundamental customer protection issue. As consumer advocates, we'd like to elaborate on that last item. Here's what an RES offers Oregon utility customers:

1) Diversity of Resources & Cheap Fuel

Resource planning for a utility's customers should ideally be both broad and deep. The breadth of the resource portfolio is what is addressed here. By adding significant amounts of new renewable resources to our energy resource portfolio, we are without a doubt reducing our own risk of being exposed to fluctuating costs. Partially, this is because there are simply fewer costs to begin with. All energy resources require capital investment and will have Operations & Maintenance costs. However, fuel costs can simply be written out of the equation when you are dealing with many renewable energy sources. As Jason Eisdorfer said at the RES hearing Tuesday, "There's no market for sunshine. There's no market for wind. There's no market for the tidal pull of the moon." Greater diversity also means less risk falls on any one resource.

2) Long-term Resource Prudence

On the depth side of resource planning, we need to be looking not just 2, not just 5, not just 10 years out, but decades into the future in order to ensure a steady and affordable and sustainable source of electrical power. We are on the cusp with the issue of global warming; concern is building and will soon turn to some form of governmental action regarding greenhouse gas emissions. Fossil fuels in general, and coal in particular, will be targeted with some form of carbon regulation and the result will be costly. All coal power production will become more expensive and it will likely end prematurely the lifespan of some coal plants. A Renewable Energy Standard would set Oregon utility customers up well for the future, ensuring that we don't get caught holding the bag.

3) Protective Rate Cap

CUB is always working to protect reasonable rates. In fact, working for renewables is the best way we see to protect ratepayers' long-term economic health (see again No. 2). But new resources require new capital investments to get going, and so this Renewable Energy Standard Bill includes a cost cap to ensure that those initial investments do not become too big a burden on customers. The cost cap in the RES bill has been set at 4%, so that the differential between the green power we hope to acquire and the brown power we would otherwise have bought shouldn't raise rates more than 4%. We don't believe this cost cap will be triggered, but if it was the investment would pay huge dividends as fossil fuel-based energy becomes more scarce, more volatile, and more regulated.

4) Addresses Future Market Volatility

Did we mention more volatile? Market volatility will apply not only to fossil fuels (an area in which natural gas markets, for instance, have been on a roller coaster ride for several years). Even without variable fuel costs, renewable energy markets could be subject to price volatility, as well. This is because renewables like large wind farms are site-specific, and once the best sites are developed, the demand for power from those sites will grow and the cost will rise. Oregon, without an RES, would be at the mercy of California and Washington power customers, who have passed Renewable standards into law and who will be looking to meet their states' goals. If prices for renewable power should spike, Oregon's RES would offer the Oregon Public Utility Commission the ability to choose a market price at which customers' green power investment (again, the differential between green and brown power) would be channeled into a savings fund, until such time as the market settles and the opportunity to invest in a prudent renewable energy source arises. This mechanism is called the Alternative Compliance Payment and it is a mark of Oregon's foresight.

5) Helps Keep Planet Habitable. 'Nuff said.

If you have not already done so, now would be a good time to contact your Oregon State Senator and Representative, which you can do online here or by calling 1-800-332-2313. Let them know that passing the Renewable Energy Standard Bill, SB 373, is important to you.

And by the way, if you didn't catch the fact that the Superbowl this year was carbon neutral and the Oscars was calling itself a green event (and by doing more than simply giving Academy Awards to the documentary Inconvenient Truth and its lead song, Melissa Etheridge's I Need to Wake Up), here is an article about global warming from that bastion of environmental thought, Sports Illustrated. Global warming isn't on the fringe anymore -- it's a mainstream issue now.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 10:16 AM | Comments (0)

February 16, 2007

CUB Holds Successful Lobby Day

Members of CUB's volunteer Board of Governors and Staff members journeyed to the State Capitol in Salem yesterday for a Lobby Day in support of CUB's Pro-Consumer and Clean Energy Agenda. At the top of the list of bills we are supporting is SB 373, the Renewable Energy Standards Bill, which would require that 25% of Oregon's electricity production be produced from clean, renewable sources by the year 2025. We also spoke with our legislators and key committee chairs regarding SB 461, the bill which would raise the amount of low-income energy assistance money offered from $10 million (which currently serves only about 23% of the need) to $15 million, with an index tied to inflation.

Our newest CUB Board member, Linda Tomassi, traveled down from Portland, along with long-time CUB Board member and supporter Fred Heutte. CUB Executive Director Bob Jenks and staff members Lowrey Brown and Shannon Floyd also drove that I-5 corridor (and, yes, we did carpool!). Already close at hand was Board member and Salem resident Steve Weiss. And coming from farther afield were Board Chair Doug Crow, from Mosier, and Board Member Hank Keeton, from Scotts Mills. Jeff Bissonnette, CUB's lobbyist and organizing director, is a fixture at the Capitol these days; he shepherded our group through a dozen or so meetings throughout the day with great efficiency and aplomb. And our newest intern, Thomas Balcom, an anthropology student at Willamette University, helped manage the many details of a busy day.

We wish to express our great appreciation to the busy lawmakers who took time to meet with us, and talk with us about these important bills. That list includes: Senate Majority Leader Kate Brown, Senator Jason Atkinson, Sen. Jeff Kruse, Senator Rod Monroe, House Speaker Jeff Merkley, Rep. Terry Beyer, Rep. Scott Bruun, Rep. Ben Cannon, Rep. Brian Clem, Rep. Diane Rosenbaum, and with special thanks to Senator Brad Avakian and Rep. Jackie Dingfelder, not only for their time yesterday, but also for their leadership roles in working to pass the Renewable Energy Standard. In between the meetings with legislators, the CUB group gave a statement to members of the Capitol press corps, met briefly with Public Utility Commission Chair Lee Beyer, attended the tail end of the Oregon Conservation Network meeting, and enjoyed some lunchtime sandwiches and cookies around a table that looked out on the Capitol back lawn.

The day went really well and feedback from Linda made us smile: "We were organized, educated, coordinated, fed, encouraged and delivered. I knew you were really good at what you did, Jeff, but knowing and seeing are very different things. Thank you. What we did today was important. Oregon's policymakers are obviously impressed with CUB's integrity and competence. I am proud to be part of such an amazing organization." We had a great CUB Lobby Day, learned a lot about the bills, the people and the processes of our Capitol, and hopefully made some strides in moving along the RES and low-income assistance from bills to state law.

Just as important as the CUB Board going to Salem to push our agenda will be CUB's grassroots members writing letters, making phone calls and sending e-mails to your legislators at key times in the process. That's where CUB's clout really comes from. Stay tuned for action alerts that will be coming as the legislative session really starts to heat up.

And if you want to come to Salem yourself to personally talk to your legislator, consider attending the Oregon Conservation Network Lobby Day on April 3rd. It's always a fun and empowering day, joining with a few hundred Oregonians from around the state. A key focus will be supporting the Renewable Energy Standard bill as well as other parts of the Clean Energy Agenda. To find out more about the OCN Lobby Day, contact Jeff Bissonnette at jeff@oregoncub.org.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 03:00 PM | Comments (0)

February 07, 2007

Upgraded Possibility for Global Human Change

The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a worldwide consortium of 2000 scientists and thinkers who have studied, synthesized and evaluated the scientific data available regarding climate change, have come out with their fourth report. In it, they have upgraded the probability that the changes we see in our climate are due to human activities, to over 90%.

The IPCC's first report came out in 1990. In the 17 years since then their knowledge base has grown, global changes have accelerated, and our understanding of this dilemma is coming of age, as are our strategies for addressing it. Young Britons who were just being born when the first IPCC report was released are now being readied to face the challenge: "As part of a year-long environmental education campaign to combat global warming, Al Gore's documentary will be sent to every secondary school in England, over 3,385 schools."

Beyond what each of us can do to address our own fossil fuel consumption, CUB is addressing the threat of global warming in the following ways:

1) We successfully opposed PacifiCorp's attempt to get PUC approval of plans to build 2 new coal plants, a major emitter of carbon emissions, linked to global warming. PacifiCorp has indicated it will issue a Request for Proposals on the coal plants anyway, so this battle is far from over.

2) We participate in utility resource planning at the PUC to ensure that investments in energy production are safe and stable for the long term, and this includes both environmental and financial impact on customers.

3) We are working in the Oregon Legislature to pass a Renewable Energy Standards agenda, which includes a 25% renewable power by 2025 component, along with common sense energy efficiency measures and extensions of tax credits to developers installing renewable energy sources.

4) We are working in the Oregon Legislature on a carbon agenda which would bring the issue of global warming to the forefront of discussions regarding state policy decisions regarding energy, where it belongs.

5) We advocate and inform on national issues that affect Oregon utility customers. For example, Congress has begun, suddenly with increased numbers and enthusiasm, to tackle clean energy issues. This is perhaps most apparent with the news, from industry newsletter Clearing Up, that "At least four key U.S. Senators made it clear last week that they believe the war against global warming should begin with the utility industry ... Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) ... and Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) ... said they plan to introduce a bill this week that focuses solely on reducing emissions from the electric utility industry. The measure ... would cap carbon dioxide emission from power plants at 2001 levels by 2015." The article goes on to say that Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Sen. Barbara Boxer, both Democrats from California, have each introduced their own clean energy bills aimed at decreased greenhouse gas emissions.

A Boston Globe columnist claimed in a column today that to cap emissions was "to arrest economic growth." We think this "economy or the environment" setup is a false choice, since a healthy economy on an unlivable planet is not a realistic win. We agree also with Lewis & Clark Economics Professor and Founding Director of the Greenhouse Network, Eban Goodstein, that this is a false choice, because addressing the challenges of global warming and other environmental issues can create opportunities for economic growth.

One of the burgeoning clean energy industries is obviously wind power. The status of another, solar energy, was discussed recently in the Northwest Energy Coalition's Transformer: "PVs have become big business, with about $7 billion in worldwide sales in 2004. Manufacturing costs plummeted about 30 percent from 1999 to 2003, although demand is so great that local dealers have seen rising sales prices over the past year for the hard-to-come-by panels." Although the Coalition concedes that installation costs for solar can still seem comparatively high to fossil-drenched First World consumers, still, they say that "Given the historical improvement in technology, it is quite likely that solar PVs will soon be the least-cost choice for utilities serving many sun-drenched cities."

CUB hopes to help steer such positive alternatives to "business-as-usual" fossil fuel electricity production into reality. We aren't the United Nations -- we're just trailblazing Oregonians, but we have upgraded the probability that the changes in energy production that we seek are possible, to over 90%.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 04:08 PM | Comments (0)

January 31, 2007

PGE Renewable Power Program Is Well-Designed & Successful

We are not ones to hold back our criticism of Portland General Electric (critiques of PGE are all over our website, particularly in General Utility Regulation). That being said, we disagree strongly with the Oregonian's criticism of PGE's voluntary renewable power program. The Oregonian cites the percentage of each dollar that goes into marketing, but fails to point out that the reason the percentage appears high, is because the cost of the green power itself is so low. Oregon's green power programs are well-designed, and allow customer to purchase 100% of their power from new renewable sources of energy for a cost that is lower than other utilities in the country. By joining with others to purchase renewable power, participating customers are sending a clear and effective signal to developers to build more renewable resources in the Northwest.

The Oregonian Is Just Plain Wrong

First, we must point out that the Oregonian's main criticism is simply wrong. The Oregonian article says that Oregon's is one of the most expensive nationally when it comes to marketing. The Oregonian has it exactly backwards. The administration and marketing costs of PGE's program are significantly less than those of similar programs around the country.

An average participating PGE customer pays an additional $8 per month to ensure that 100% of his or her power comes from new renewable resources. Around the country, other utilities charge an average of $24 per month for similar programs. PGE's administration and marketing costs are 56% of the additional monthly payment, or about $4.50 per customer. The federal Department of Energy cites a figure of 29% marketing for other utility programs. 29% of $24 per month works out to about $7 per month. By our math, $4.50 is less than $7.

The real question the Oregonian ought to have investigated is why Oregon is able to supply 100% of a customer's power with green energy so much more cheaply ($8/month) than other states ($24/month). The answer is that Oregon's program is well-designed, carefully regulated, uses competitive bidding, does not allow for utility profit, and strives to keep costs down.

A Little History

In the late 1990s Enron and PGE, big power marketers, industrial customers, and free-market ideologues were pushing electric deregulation. Their idea was to get rid of traditional monopoly power companies, and instead require that all customers purchase their power from a wide open retail marketplace. In many states, Enron was joined by advocates of renewable power who believed that there was a market for renewable energy, but that utilities were not serving that market.

CUB responded to the concern of renewable power advocates by proposing that we simply require utilities to offer renewable power to customers under a regulated system. Advocates of deregulation argued against CUB's proposal, claiming that a deregulated market would bring the necessary marketing to reach customers who want green power. We responded by including marketing in Oregon's regulated green power programs. Thus evolved CUB's proposed model that we have today.

Not only was CUB instrumental in stopping Enron-style deregulation in Oregon, but we devised a way to bring renewable power options to Oregonians, while continuing to protect customers in a regulated electric system.

The Process For The Renewable Power Programs

Currently, a committee overseen by the Public Utility Commission (PUC) designs the criteria for the renewable power products to be offered to customers. In addition to criteria for the power itself, the committee includes requirements ensuring that the renewable products are adequately marketed. The utility puts these products out for bid in the wholesale market, selects the lowest-cost provider, and offers these choices to customers. The utilities do not earn a profit on these products. The PUC oversees the entire process to ensure that customers who pay for renewable power are getting high-quality, reasonably-priced renewable power. (More information about the administration of the renewable program can be found in a previous blog entry, Oregon Leads the Way in Voluntary Support for Renewables.)

This renewable program design has worked well. Oregon has proven that, through wholesale bidding, we can make renewable developers and marketers compete against each other to offer Oregonians renewable power at a low price.

Renewable Programs Jump-Started NW Renewable Industry

At the time we started the renewable power programs, we were frustrated that we had been unable to get utilities to invest in renewable power. Developers of renewable projects in the Pacific Northwest were struggling to survive. It is not a leap of faith to claim that Oregon's voluntary enrollment renewable power programs helped to jump-start the renewable power industry in the Northwest, and helped developers through some tough times.

Oregon's voluntary renewable power programs have also shown the utilities that customers support investment in renewables. The programs not only helped to change the marketplace, they have also had a significant environmental impact. In 2005, through these programs, Oregonians purchased enough renewable power to serve 44,000 homes. This reduces CO2 emissions by approximately 350,000 tons -- the equivalent of taking 60,000 cars off the road.

Today, utilities across the region are investing in renewable resources. Seven large wind farms have been developed in the Northwest since October 2005, producing enough power to serve more than 230,000 homes. Washington and California have passed laws requiring utilities to purchase renewable power for all their customers. Oregon's legislature will soon be considering such a law for our state.

Oregonians should be proud of their extremely successful and inexpensive renewable power programs. These programs are the envy of utilities around the country, their environmental impact is real and measurable, and their contribution to the development of the renewable power industry in the Northwest is admirable. We encourage everyone to sign up.

Bottom Line is Green

In summary:

1) Customers paying for the renewable option are responsible for putting up to 100% of their power usage in the form of renewable energy onto the system.

2) Both in terms of the overall costs of the renewable option and the amount spent on marketing, Oregon's program costs less than similar programs around the nation.

3) By participating in these programs, customers are having exactly the effect they hope: that is, expanding the development of new renewable energy and greening up a distressed planet.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 04:01 PM

January 24, 2007

The Good the Bad and the Climate: CUB Responds to the SOTU

The Good News about President Bush's State of the Union address last night was that he actually acknowledged "global climate change" and called it a "serious challenge." The Bad News is that his proposal to address the serious challenge sounded not all that serious, a 20% reduction in gasoline usage over 10 years. This reduction, according to Philip Clapp of the National Environmental Trust, would still allow for overall growth of greenhouse gas emissions by 14%. And of course, the Climate is still changing.

Don't get us wrong. We're happy that the words "climate change" came from the President's mouth, and we're happy he's suggesting taking some action. But the proposal he has put forward leaves us unimpressed.

For one thing, it deals mainly with transportation-produced greenhouse gases, which is hardly the only source of global warming pollution. Within that somewhat incomplete focus on transportation, Mr. Bush has narrowed the pool of solutions further to include solely automobile-related ideas, with an emphasis on biofuels -- particularly ethanol. Again, incomplete. Perhaps Mr. Bush should visit Portland, OR (our fair city) to take a look at other possible ways to reduce transportation-related greenhouse gases, such as public transit, bike lanes, ride-sharing, walkable neighborhoods, buying local, etc.

Beyond transportation lies the 40% of global warming pollution that is produced by the nation's electricity production (and consumption, of course). For our electrical grid, Mr. Bush has almost nothing to say about the rapidly growing industry of renewable energy sources and the vast gains that stand ready to be made in the areas of conservation and energy efficiency. At last year's Institute of Science in Society conference in the United Kingdom, the Rt. Hon Michael Meacher, M.P. said this: "I think the evidence is absolutely clear. Renewables are set to become the dominant energy source of the 21st Century; plus determined energy conservation for economic as well as climate change reasons..." Mr. Bush offers us instead only passing mention of renewable energy (at least it made the list), a nod to clean coal (which is still a fossil fuel and still in the pilot stage), and the "Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, aimed at reducing proliferation risks while expanding availability of clean, safe, climate-friendly nuclear energy." Right.

What's missing, perhaps most notably, was any discussion of federal carbon dioxide regulation. (And don't even mention the international standards of the Kyoto Protocol -- oh, that's right, he didn't.) Without that crucial link, the rest of it may sound nice but offers no real plan for effectively dealing with perhaps the greatest crisis humanity has yet encountered. Without federal regulation of carbon, it becomes even more important that states continue to take the lead on combating the causes of global warming.

Well, you can't expect a pig to talk like a duck, or a leopard to change its spots, or President Bush to put forward much beyond the "Cooperation with Private Industry" plan that he has offered the American people this year. What's amazing is that giants of industry are actually ahead of the Bush Administration on this issue: a Call to Action was issued last week by Alcoa, General Electric, and Dupont (among others) calling for national legislation which would cap greenhouse gas emissions. They understand how much stands to be lost to global warming, even if the current Administration does not.

Last year, Mr. Bush admitted that "America is addicted to oil" and the admission caused a stir. During the resulting year, however, his Administration did little to address the oil issue beyond a continued push to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. And, of course, our soldiers remain enmeshed in Iraq. This year he offers us a modest and voluntary plan to reduce emissions, with ethanol in the starring role and ANWR no doubt waiting in the wings. Even when he speaks of raising vehicle mileage standards, he wants his Administration to keep control of the standards rather than Congress legislating them, but how much conservation credibility has this Administration earned?

We are fortunate that the new leadership of Congress is poised to take serious action on climate change. A new House Committee has been formed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi to study issues related to climate change. And the McCain Lieberman bill on climate change is back, with Sen. Barack Obama as a new cosponsor. More importantly, we in Oregon live in a state that wants to lead. CUB, the Governor, and many others are pursuing an ambitious Renewable Energy Standards agenda in the Legislature. We hope to decrease our own emissions while at the same time armoring ourselves against the future changes and losses that are expected to result from global warming.

America is behind the times on this issue. Again, from the U.K.: "Science shows that only significant and substantial cuts of greenhouse gas emissions (by as much as 60% by 2050) can achieve stabilisation at low levels in the atmosphere. The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report has also shown that the greater the reductions in emissions, and the earlier they are introduced, the smaller and slower the damages." This president is going to do what he's going to do. That is why we are really going to have to run with the '70s adage to "Think Globally, Act Locally." Let's get with it, people.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 02:02 PM | Comments (0)

January 17, 2007

Double Header Victories for Customers and the Environment

CUB had a big week, snowstorm aside. Two hotly contested cases resulted in Orders from the Public Utility Commission and CUB feels good about the outcome of both.

First out of the gate was the Commission's decision on PGE's general rate case. PGE asked for an increased Return on Equity (ROE), or profit margin, of 10.75%; they got a decreased ROE to 10.1%. We feel this is reasonable, the PUC having recognized that the ROE should only be high enough to attract shareholder investment, not high enough to gouge customers.

The other big issue in the case was whether to institute a Power Cost Adjustment (PCA), and if so, what should that look like. PGE suggested a PCA that would have required customers to pay 90% of all costs that went basically even a dollar above the forecast level, and would have returned money to customers if costs were lower than expected (a more unusual turn of events). For CUB, this was a non-starter. Instead, CUB suggested a PCA that includes a deadband, or allowable variation, of about $24 million above cost or $12 million below cost before triggering the PCA process. This represents the normal variation of costs utility shareholders are expected to absorb; managing this normal variation is why we pay the company a profit margin. CUB's PCA also included an earnings deadband that required the change in costs to result in a change of at least 100 basis points to PGE's ROE, or about $16 million, before any change would flow to customers' rates. The Commission chose to adopt CUB's PCA, only changing the sharing band outside the deadband to be 90/10 (customers responsible for 90% of extra costs) rather than CUB's suggested 50/50 sharing split.

The combination of the lower profit margin for PGE and the PCA based on CUB's model will save customers a good deal of money over the next several years (the last general rate case before this one was in 2000-01).

You may remember hearing some media flurry about this case with regard to a Standard & Poor's credit report. That report was used by PGE to support their argument for a PCA. Since CUB and the PUC Staff were supportive of using a PCA as well, although a substantially different version, we don't feel the publicity exposing PGE's influence over the report-writing process had a large impact on the case. It did, however, ensure that CUB will be continuing to monitor utility influence on credit reports and how they are used in the regulatory process.

The Second big decision came yesterday, when the PUC sent out the following announcement:

"Today the Oregon Public Utility Commission rejected PacifiCorp's request to conditionally approve a plan to seek bids to build two coal plants in order to meet growing energy demands. The Commission found that the company failed to justify the need to acquire the amount and type of energy resources sought...

"A coalition of customer groups and others had opposed the plan because it included coal generation.

"In its decision, the Commission declined to resolve issues related to CO2 risk at this time. However, the Commission has opened a separate proceeding to review CO2 risk related to the expected cost, risk and uncertainties of coal resources."

CUB had intervened in this case, along with Northwest Energy Coalition and Renewable Northwest Project, among others, and was leading the fight against the PUC approving any new pulverized coal plants to serve Oregon customers. If approved, these coal plants would have been producing significant amounts of carbon dioxide, a major global warming pollutant, for decades to come, and customers would have been responsible for any future charges due to carbon regulation (such as has been adopted in the European Union).

We are very happy that the Commission has instead directed PacifiCorp to look at filling their energy needs for Oregon using energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. This not only makes sense for filling the needs of the moment, but also, as the Commission noted, gives a few years of breathing room for the utility to investigate the "new" coal technology called IGCC which could eventually allow for carbon sequestration, a much cleaner way to use coal for power production.

This decision highlights the difference in outlook between PacifiCorp's two largest states, Oregon and Utah, and leaves the company in an awkward position. Toward the end of 2006, Utah's Commission directed the company to produce more power, and lots of it, to meet the needs of a quickly growing population and an increase in household usage of electricity. By contrast, Oregon's household usage of electricity is not rising and, overall, the Pacific Northwest philosophy seems more open to conservation and renewables.

However PacifiCorp is able to reconcile these two viewpoints, we are excited to see the Oregon Commission drawing a line at building more traditional coal plants. In our (not so) humble opinion, this is the only sane policy: When you're in a hole, you stop digging; when you're directly threatened by the global climatic shifts associated with the burning of fossil fuels, you stop building coal plants.

A good week, all in all. And the powdery snow and hot chocolate was good, too.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 03:15 PM | Comments (1)

January 04, 2007

Here Comes the Year of Clean Energy!

Well, 2006 has been called the Year of Living Globally (by eweek.com), the Year of You (by Time Magazine), and The Year of the Democratic Woman (by lots of people, from The Nation to The National Review). The year 2006 could (and has) also been called the Year of Global Warming. Last year gave us thousands of showings of An Inconvenient Truth, the Second Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol in Nairobi, the evacuation of one island (off of India) due to rising sea levels, and today saw a cartoon by Jack Ohman of the Oregonian suggesting that Endangered Polar Bears could lead to Threatened Bush Junk Science. The denial is melting as fast as the ice sheets, it seems.

If 2006 was the year the U.S. began to acknowledge global warming, then 2007 will undoubtedly be the year we start to deal with it, right? Well, with the Chinese New Year coming up (February 18th) and China growing in importance to international discussions of finance, politics, and (yes) global warming, we also offer this description of those born in the upcoming Year of the Pig (or Boar): "Fire Pigs breathe new life into everything they do. These Pigs are vivid, motivated individuals who cannot be deterred from a goal once they have set it."

Cue the opening of the Oregon State Legislature. CUB and its allies, particularly those who are members of the Fair & Clean Energy Coalition, will be moving forward with a Clean Energy Agenda that has been fine-tuned and spit-polished, ready to take to Salem next week.

Our goals include:

1) We will work to create a Renewable Energy Standard for the State of Oregon that requires that 25% of Oregon's electricity come from renewable sources by the year 2025.

2) We will work to increase the amount of money available to help low income Oregonians pay their electric bills, from $10 million to $15 million.

3) We will work to remove the current sunset provision on the funding for the hugely successful energy efficiency and renewable projects managed by the Energy Trust of Oregon.

4) We will explore additional investment in those successful energy efficiency and renewables programs.

5) We will work to earmark one percent of new public buildings' budgets for installing solar technology.

6) We will work to improve building standards so that we achieve a 15% increase in energy savings in new buildings.

7) We will work to expand clean energy technology credits so that homebuilders and others will have an incentive to install solar power systems or energy efficient appliances.

8) And finally, we will work to increase our energy efficiency standards for appropriate appliances to reflect other energy-saving standards being adopted around the country.

This list has been carefully crafted by those within CUB and our network who know the affected laws currently in place (and in some cases helped write them) and know how to work for maximum impact going forward. We believe that everything on this list is eminently achievable.

In fact, we are feeling rather Boar-ish. Watch out, Salem -- here comes CUB.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 04:59 PM | Comments (2)

December 14, 2006

Now, here is movement!

This week we want to recognize and applaud PGE. Does that seem surprising? Well, credit should go where credit is due, and PGE has done a good thing. In fact, they've done exactly what we asked them to do, which is to take a leadership role on addressing global warming. Here's how:

Yesterday CUB Staff Attorney Jason Eisdorfer spoke on a panel at the NW Energy Summit, a conference on energy issues generally throughout the region; the topic was regulation. He made the point that of the types of regulation possible (there are 4), the only one he wanted to talk about, the one that will be playing a dominant role in energy regulation for at least the next 100 years, is environmental regulation. Global warming has brought this particular issue to the forefront, and there it is likely to stay.

Peggy Fowler, chief executive of Portland General Electric, also spoke at the Energy Summit. She could have chosen a topic that didn't touch on global warming. She could have hemmed and hawed around, as so many businesspeople have done for decades: the science isn't certain; solutions would be too expensive; we don't have the tools, etc. Peggy didn't say any of that. Instead, she said, "Doing nothing is not an option."

She said PGE would "work in the next legislative session to ensure that Oregon adopts a successful RPS." Wow. She went on to say that "PGE is launching an effort to advocate adoption of a national policy to reduce climate change, including the enactment of mandatory federal limits on global warming pollution..." Finally, Peggy made the essential point that "The longer we do nothing, the more it will cost our region, and the nation, both environmentally and economically." We couldn't have said it better ourselves.

These statements contrast very favorably with the statements of Oregon's other large electric utility, PacifiCorp. PacifiCorp has questioned the science of global warming, and their actions show this attitude: PacifiCorp spent money trying to defeat Washington's recent RPS (which won despite the opposition); and they continue to propose new coal plants as sensible resource choices. Which means that, on the PacifiCorp front anyway, we have a long way to go.

This week's Energy Summit, though not labeled as "environmental," was driven by topics such as energy efficiency, renewable energy sources, and how to address global warming. Jason mentioned this to a longtime observer of state policy and the energy industry, who responded, "You're mainstream now!" It's true that we've been beating this drum for quite a while now, and we're ecstatic to have been joined in the past few weeks by the Oregon Public Utility Commission (and the Commissions of Washington, California and New Mexico -- see their Joint Statement pledging to find ways to address global warming), and now by Oregon's largest electric utility provider. This creates a political environment that could result in real change, positive movement toward a sustainable energy policy.

CUB believes that, if federal regulation is not immediately forthcoming, then it is appropriate and necessary for Oregon and other states to take action, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and thereby minimizing the threats posed by global warming. We also believe that Oregon ratepayers are in agreement, that they understand the dangers of our current situation and want to help turn the tide. More than that, Oregonians love their particular place in the world and want to help preserve its health and beauty.

CUB is not automatically against every action of the big utilities. When they use their powers for good, we're right there with them. And when they use their powers -- well, you probably know what we often have to say about our largest energy producers. CUB will always focus on what will ultimately benefit the residential and small business utility consumer.

Those customers are facing rising seas and financial storms with the course as currently set. But we have the power to change course, and working together will help bring that about. With PGE and the PUC on board, along with CUB of course, this ship is going to turn.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 03:11 PM | Comments (0)

November 29, 2006

West Coast Commissions to Tackle Climate Change

It takes a very special person to perk up and get excited at the prospect of discussions surrounding "Energy Efficiency and white certificates in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative" or "Meeting the Kyoto Protocol Goals: Energy Efficiency in the European Union." We must be special. We're excited about the first ever Joint West Coast Public Utility Commissions 2006 Energy Efficiency Workshop, being held Friday, December 1st by the Commissions of California, Washington, and Oregon. While the CUB schedule (not to mention the budget) wouldn't allow for trips to San Francisco to bask in the fog and the energy discussion, we will be following it on the webcast (available at the California Commission website).

The tone will be set with a Special Signing Ceremony, at which members of the three Commissions will sign a Joint Action Framework on Climate Change. Some points covered in the Framework include:

* Regional cooperation to address climate change.
* Development and use of low carbon technologies in the energy sector.
* Promotion of conservation and demand response programs.
* A strong, continued commitment to renewable energy resources.
* Reliance upon Integrated Resource Plans to inform utility and Commission decisions.

Renewables, conservation, reducing carbon emissions, and regional cooperation with regard to this global problem are all fairly self-explanatory. The last item, a particularly wonky bit, is actually one of our favorites.

You see, the Integrated Resource Planning (or IRP) process is the way in which customers and other stakeholders can have a say in the way our energy is produced. With 40% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions coming from the electricity industry, what could be a more important environmental issue? And it's timely, too.

Soon PGE will embark on its IRP process (an every other year event) with CUB as a party to the case. As we have in years past, we will argue for more energy efficiency (the cheapest, cleanest power around) and renewable resources, and we'll be arguing with an increased sense of urgency and an enhanced arsenal to back it up, since the past 2 years have seen solidified agreement that climate change is real and the crisis needs action to be averted. Since PGE's last IRP, Hurricane Katrina destroyed New Orleans, and Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth has reached millions of Americans with the history of climate change, a story bolstered by a formidable mountain of data. Concern for ourselves, our neighbors, and our planet demands a shift in the "business as usual" practice of electricity production. As columnist Polo stated in a recent Asian Reporter article, "The trick is in teaching the connections -- the connection between us releasing carbons stored a zillion years deep inside old mother earth and the frightening build-up of atmospheric carbon now blanketing our warming planet."

Energy efficiency may sound like a tame solution for such an immense problem, but consider this recent article from the BBC News website: "The rise in humanity's emissions of carbon dioxide has accelerated sharply, according to a new analysis. The Global Carbon Project says that emissions were rising by less than 1% annually up to the year 2000, but are now rising at 2.5% per year. It says the acceleration comes mainly from a rise in charcoal consumption and a lack of new energy efficiency gains."

Perhaps the most notable aspect of this event is the fact that these 3 Commissions, agencies empowered to make and enforce the rules that protect the financial well-being of utility ratepayers, are coming together to address climate change. They are acknowledging the huge economic impact that climate change will have on customers, and they are being proactive in addressing climate change because that will mitigate any financial burdens that may be heading our way. That these economic goals are also hailed by the environmental community as ecological goals just goes to prove that they are elegant solutions, working to solve multiple problems at once. We commend the Commissions for their foresight.

We wish the three Commissions and their speakers (which includes local energy efficiency mavens Margie Harris, Director of the Energy Trust of Oregon; Charlie Grist, Senior Analyst for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council; and Margie Gardner, Executive Director of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance) a brisk and fruitful discussion. We hope they bring back new ideas and new weapons for the fight against global warming. And if they think to tuck a piece of Ghirardelli chocolate in their bags for those of us back at home, well, that would be okay, too.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 04:38 PM | Comments (0)

November 15, 2006

Clean Energy Makes Everybody a Winner!

After all the ballots were counted up in Washington State (and it took until this week to do it), voters passed Initiative 937, the Clean Energy Initiative. Because of Washington State's electoral practice of counting absentee ballots postmarked on Election Day, there was a delay in claiming victory until it was clear the pro-clean energy forces had carried the day.

In the words of the Yes on 937 campaign: "Passing I-937 in Washington State continues the momentum of clean energy across the nation. Global warming and energy independence are critical issues that need practical solutions like I-937. Using energy more efficiently and developing clean, homegrown resources like wind and solar will position us well economically and environmentally for the future."

That is why CUB was watching this campaign so closely. Its victory does indeed continue a strong momentum on clean energy issues, and we're going to carry that momentum into the Oregon legislature come January. The Washington initiative demonstrates grassroots support in the Northwest for ambitious but achievable clean energy policies. Here in Oregon, we have a Governor who is strongly in favor of promoting clean energy proposals and many legislators, both Democrat and Republican, who campaigned in favor of clean energy and energy independence.

We plan to make sure that the campaign poetry gets translated into governing prose. Earlier this year, CUB began working on the Oregon Clean Energy Agenda to enact progressive energy policies. Some items on the Clean Energy Agenda:

* We support the Governor's proposal for a Renewable Energy Standard calling for 25 percent of Oregon's energy needs to be met by renewable resources by 2025.

* We want to extend public purpose funding dedicated to energy efficiency and renewable resource development past the current sunset of 2012.

* We plan to accelerate clean energy development by exploring an increase in the funding that we currently invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy resources.

* We think that by revising clean energy tax credits we can encourage broader use of clean energy technology by consumers and businesses.

* We hope to increase energy efficiency standards for certain appliances to reflect other energy-savings standards being adopted around the country.

You can help promote the Oregon Clean Energy Agenda. Please take a few minutes and contact Governor Ted Kulongoski, as well as your state representative and state senator, and ask them to make clean energy issues a priority in the 2007 session. Governor Kulongoski can be reached by calling 503-378-4582 or via e-mail on the web. If you are not sure who your state representative or state senator is, contact CUB Organizing Director Jeff Bissonnette at jeff@oregoncub.org and he'll point you in the right direction.

Clean energy is going to be a major issue in the 2007 session. Help CUB bring a victory home to Oregon in the coming year, by letting our elected leaders know you care about clean energy.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 01:59 PM | Comments (0)

November 03, 2006

Get Out the Vote for Clean Energy

A couple of weeks ago, CUB Online talked about I-937, the Clean Energy Initiative in Washington State. We highlighted one of the key aspects of the measure: a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requiring that 15% of the state's energy be produced from clean, renewable resources by the year 2020. In addition to that goal, the measure also calls for increasing Washington's energy efficiency work to ensure that all cost-effective efficiency is captured to lower energy bills overall for both businesses and households.

When people think of clean energy, they think of windmills and solar arrays but, as we talk about a lot here at CUB, "the cheapest energy is the energy you don't have to produce in the first place." In fact, there's a lot of room for more energy efficiency and conservation. "Despite great examples of conservation leadership, some utilities are underperforming," said Stan Price, executive director of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Council, a trade association representing energy efficiency businesses. "Passing I-937 will make sure that Washington maximizes its conservation potential."

Because I-937 addresses both efficient use of energy plus the clean production of energy, that makes it even more attractive to support. And, as we mentioned last time, a win in Washington will help similar efforts to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy generation here in Oregon.

We have several CUB members and supporters going across the river to help talk to voters by phone in Clark County this weekend on Saturday, November 4th. If you want to join the crew, contact CUB Organizing Director Jeff Bissonnette by phone (503-516-1636) or e-mail (jeff@oregoncub.org).

And even if you can't come this weekend, if you have family or friends who are Washington State voters, you can still help out. Either forward this entire e-mail to folks you know in Washington and encourage them to vote Yes on I-937, or cut and paste the message below into a separate e-mail and send it out.

---------------------------------------------------

VOTE YES on I-937! I-937 will ensure that 15% of Washington's energy comes from clean, renewable sources like wind and solar by 2020. I-937 also ensures that utilities help their customers save money and energy through energy conservation.

This is our chance to take control of our energy future for our kids and grandkids. I hope you'll Vote Yes on I-937, and forward this email on to your friends! For more information, visit Yes on 937! Watch the tv ad!

-------------------------------------------------------

Even sending this to a few people and encouraging them to pass it on would be a big help. And, as we said a couple of weeks ago, even though CUB does not endorse candidates, we do encourage voters to pay attention to what candidates say about global warming, utility taxes, and other issues that are important to utility consumers. Then, cast your vote accordingly by November 7th.

Posted by Oregon CUB at 01:35 PM | Comments (0)

October 18, 2006

Over the river and to the voters/ Of Washington State we'll go...

A few weeks ago CUB Staff Attorney Jason Eisdorfer was quoted in a Northwest energy news publication, Clearing Up, saying, "If we're going to rely on utilities to save the world, we're in trouble." He was speaking of global warming and the need to switch to cleaner energy sources. Then last week we wrote about our first Energy Symposium, at which PGE executive Pamela Lesh said in response, "If we're going to exclude utilities from being part of the solution, we're in even bigger trouble." Of course, they're both right.

CUB doesn't want to exclude anyone from being part of the solution, least of all the utilities which have so much direct and significant control over power production and its environmental side effects. But it becomes sometimes apparent that when utilities move too slowly they need to be hurried along a bit. That is the case with the movement transitioning to clean, renewable energy sources. It IS happening; we are developing alternative energy sources. But in order to adequately address a reduction in greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, things need to be sped up. And though utilities can and must participate, it seems clear that utilities will not lead the charge on this particular issue. So who will? As an old axiom states, "When the people lead, the leaders will have to follow."

The people of Washington State have a chance to lead on the issue of renewable energy, and CUB members have a chance to help Washington voters see what is at stake.

Washington will be voting on November 7th to decide whether to pass Measure I-937, the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requiring that 15% of the state's energy be produced from clean, renewable sources by the year 2020. That is an admirable goal, and when Washington voters hear the specific goals of the measure, they are overwhelmingly supportive.

Unfortunately, the ballot title does not always come across so clearly. Voters need to understand this measure to fully support it, and this makes voter contact extraordinarily important. That is why CUB is organizing groups to cross the river to Vancouver this Saturday, October 21st, and on November 4th, the Saturday before the election, to talk to voters, urging them to vote yes on I-937. We want you to come with us.

This measure is supported by a broad-based coalition that includes some of CUB's strongest allies, such as Renewable Northwest Project, Northwest Energy Coalition, Northwest Energy Efficiency Coalition, and WashPIRG. Individual supporters include both U.S