Oregon’s Energy Future is Deep Decarbonization

On May 21, I had the pleasure of attending Northwest Environmental Business Council’s annual “Oregon’s Energy Future Conference.” The day both started and ended on particularly high notes. Oriana Magnera, Climate and Energy Policy Coordinator at Verde, delivered the opening keynote on the topic of “Social Equity & Inclusion in the Clean Energy Economy.” Oriana braided her experience growing up in Colorado with her professional life as a climate and social justice advocate here in Oregon.

The general thrust of her presentation was that it’s one thing for business groups and even other advocates like CUB to acknowledge the ills of social, environmental, and economic inequality, but it’s another thing entirely to embrace change by actively stepping aside to accommodate other views and voices in the public policy development and implementation space. This dynamic is particularly true as it relates to addressing climate change as communities historically ignored are those most affected by the worst effects (particularly in terms of public health and economic loss) of climate change.

Former Colorado Governor and current Director at the Center for New Energy Economy at Colorado State University, Bill Ritter, closed out the day. He delivered a decisive and generally optimistic stump speech about the increasingly important role of regions, states and cities, and even smaller communities, to address climate change through market movement by way of bold (though often incremental) public policy action.

Magnera and Ritter touched on many of the same themes. Of interest to both is the idea of avoiding one-size-fits-all solutions. The deep decarbonization policy solutions that work for one community may not work another. The solutions that works for one state may not work for another. And the same principle applies to different economic sectors, even down to the individual business.

What’s important, they both argued, is to work toward consensus on the problem (which in this case is saving the planet from the most disastrous effects of climate change) and establish ambitious goals to solve the problem. Then work hard to create pathways for the community, state, economic sector, or business to reach the varying goals. At the very least, acknowledge from the onset that not all communities, states, economic sectors, and businesses are created equal and, therefore, each may require different accommodations to mitigate cultural, environmental, and economic harm.

The overarching theme of the day, however, was rapid, economy-wide, deep decarbonization: Where are we today in the Pacific Northwest, and how do we arrive at where we need to be over the next thirty-or-so years to stem the worst tide of climate change? The general consensus among speakers was that we have most of the policy and economic tools heading into 2020 to decarbonize much of our regional economy (roughly 80 percent below 1990 levels) by the middle of this century.

The backdrop for this optimism is that the utility sector, particularly on the electric side, has hit an inflection point where steady public policy advocacy over the last twenty-or-so years has finally merged with economics that increasingly encourage lower-carbon or carbon-neutral energy production in the form of renewables (largely wind and solar) while increasingly discourage carbon-intensive, baseload energy production (largely coal but also natural gas) due to the longevity of those investments.

This last point was made surprisingly clear during a lunch time panel when Scott Bolton, Senior VP of External Affairs and Customer Solutions at PacifiCorp, highlighted that the Company has neither the interest, plans, nor economic incentive to invest in any new base load natural gas plants. This public statement, albeit at a conference, is significant coming from a multi-state and largely rural electric utility.

Rather, Pacific Power’s divestment of baseload coal and natural gas offset by additional investment in new renewables (largely wind and solar) combined with storage (largely battery or pumped hydro) makes the most economic sense, is the glidepath overwhelmingly preferred by their customers, and has the added benefit of contributing to our collective solving of the worsening climate crisis.

Dave Robertson from Portland General Electric (PGE) echoed a similar tune to Bolton, further emphasizing that economics may eventually outrun public policy requirements. And while that remains to be seen, PGE appears, both through their words and actions, to embrace, seemingly more so with each passing year, the moral imperative of energy utilities to lead the charge when it comes to addressing climate change. PGE’s Wheatridge facility in Umatilla County - which will break ground later this year to eventually combine wind, solar, and significant battery storage - may serve as a prime example of their increasing commitment to fully decarbonize.

In fact, on the midday panel “Challenges on the Road to 100% Clean Electricity”, PGE’s Josh Keeling made the point (more than once) that both the existential threat of climate change is real and that PGE does indeed understand the importance of their responsibility to decarbonize.

Sticking with the rapid, deep decarbonization theme, an earlier panel that day: “Cap & Trade: Now What?”, updated the audience on the progress and politics of HB 2020, but failed to ever address the “now what?” question. Kristen Sheeran, head of the Governor’s Carbon Policy Office, masterfully articulated the contours of the bill itself (at least as of May 21) and her strong belief that it would ultimately pass. (For background on HB 2020, review this earlier CUB blog.)

Perhaps the strongest panel of the day, at least in terms of sheer wonk, was “Northwest Pathway to Deep Decarbonization.” The centerpiece of this panel was a forthcoming deep decarbonization study from the Clean Energy Transition Institute, “an independent, nonpartisan Northwest research and analysis nonprofit organization whose mission is to accelerate the transition to a clean energy economy by identifying deep decarbonization strategies; advancing urban clean energy solutions; and building a clean energy workforce.”

Indeed, the key takeaway from the study’s early findings fits neatly with the message conveyed in both the opening and closing discussions from Oriana Magnera and Bill Ritter: In order to meet the immense – though not insurmountable – challenge that is climate change over the next thirty-or-so years – especially in the face of shameless inaction at the federal level – entire regions, states, cities, and smaller communities must continue to lead the charge.

Paraphrasing the study’s case statement: These jurisdictions must work cooperatively and with complete transparency to choreograph technological and economic choices among a wide range of actions in energy systems for specific energy and economic conditions. The new study is scheduled for release in early June. I’ll look forward to digging into the details and applying lessons learned to my own panel at the eighth annual CUB Policy Conference.

To keep up with CUB, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter!

• Share this post on Facebook.
• Share this post on LinkedIn.
• Share this post with email.

« Back