What is Clean Energy?

Over the past few years, Oregon has passed quite a few laws and regulations to clean up our energy system and address climate change. From the 100% Clean Electricity Bill to the Climate Protection Program, there is a lot to be excited about. What do we mean when we talk about clean energy, though?

In this blog, we will dig into the sometimes complicated definitions of “clean” and how Oregon’s energy resources stack up.

What is Clean Energy?

Clean energy is generally defined as energy generated from sources that do not produce emissions. Often, “emissions” just refers to carbon dioxide. When the definition is expanded, clean energy can be energy generated from sources that do not emit any greenhouse gases.

Greenhouse gases are gases that linger in the earth’s atmosphere and trap heat from the sun which would otherwise escape into space. This results in warming of the earth. While this is a natural process, excess amounts of these gases could potentially raise the earth’s surface temperature above normal levels, resulting in global warming. Global warming in turn speeds up climate change.

While carbon dioxide is the most common greenhouse gas, many other emissions are much larger drivers of climate change. Methane (ex: natural gas), nitrous oxide (ex: byproduct of burning fossil fuels), and many other gases also cause climate pollution. We should consider all these emissions when talking about clean energy.

Clean Energy: Beyond Emissions
Looking at just emissions has its limitations. If we broaden the concept of clean energy to include impacts beyond just emissions, we may have to rethink the environmental impacts of all energy resources.

For instance, emissions do not account for impacts on local communities. Water pollution and health impacts of methane or radioactive wastes from nuclear plants are not considered. Emissions also do not account for harm to ecosystems caused by loss of wildlife, forests, or other natural resources.

Energy Generation in Oregon
Current utility regulation primarily focuses on carbon emissions to distinguish between clean vs. dirty energy sources. This makes wind, solar, hydro, nuclear, and energy efficiency clean energy resources. Applying the broad definition of clean energy, we evaluate some of these resources that will dominate Oregon’s future energy landscape.

Here are a few examples of issues that have been raised on the environmental impacts of clean energy generation.

Biomass:

“There is not a consensus on the carbon intensity of biomass energy. Advocates of biomass energy consider it to be renewable because forests can be replanted after they’re harvested. These advocates argue that replanted forest will gradually remove carbon dioxide emitted during the combustion of the old trees, which makes biomass energy production carbon neutral in the long term. Critics argue that from a carbon accounting perspective, biomass energy production incurs significant carbon emissions when transporting biomass fuel to power plants. They also reason that burning biomass energy releases large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere at once and that it takes several decades for the released carbon to reaccumulate in the forest. Through this lens, though biomass may be carbon neutral long-term, it is not helpful for short-term carbon reduction efforts needed to stop climate change.” (Excerpt from a recent post on the CUB Blog)

Hydroelectric Dams:

“There has been considerable opposition to the Klamath River hydro dams, including from environmental activists and Indigenous American tribes. The dams have been very harmful to salmon and steelhead runs on the river. Iron Gate, the lowest Pacific Power dam on the river, has no fish passage equipment and acts as an insurmountable barrier to fish passage. Before the Pacific Power and Klamath Basin water management projects, the Klamath was an extremely productive fishery for chinook salmon, coho salmon, and steelhead trout. The spring chinook run on the Klamath has dwindled to an estimated 2 percent of its historic volume.” (Excerpt from a recent post on the CUB Blog)

Nuclear:

“As a metric for environmental injustice, consider this fact: there are hundreds of millions of tons of uranium mining and milling wastes in the United States from nuclear power and nuclear weapons production. There are over 500 abandoned mines on Navajo Nation land alone. Environmental justice communities, and especially indigenous communities, literally experience that injustice in their bones and lungs. Mill tailings are toxic with radioactive materials, like radium and thorium, and non-radioactive materials like arsenic and vanadium – all left over when ore is refined to produce purified uranium. The poisons will last essentially forever.” (Excerpt from Just Solutions Collective)

Solar:

“Lake Oswego-based Obsidian Renewables received a permit to build a solar energy facility in the high desert of Christmas Valley.

Farmers and ranchers said the solar installation would displace animals like deer and elk and rodents onto nearby crop fields, and that the facility will create issues with dust and heat plumes, according to documents from a contested case hearing. They also took issue with land designated for agriculture being used for non-agricultural purposes.” (Excerpt from Investigate West)

Wind:

“As with all energy supply options, wind energy can have adverse environmental impacts, including the potential to reduce, fragment, or degrade habitat for wildlife, fish, and plants. Furthermore, spinning turbine blades can pose a threat to flying wildlife like birds and bats. Due to the potential impact that wind power can have on wildlife, and the potential for these issues to delay or hinder wind development in high-quality wind resource areas, addressing impact minimization, siting, and permitting issues are among the wind industry’s highest priorities.” (Excerpt from the EPA)

The Energy Sector is a Major Contributor to Climate Pollution

The energy sector is one of the most important sources of climate pollutants like carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrogen oxide. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), electricity generation constitutes 25 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

The fuels we use to generate electricity matter. Right now, 60 percent of electricity in the U.S. is generated from burning fossil fuels like coal and natural gas. The ongoing clean energy transformation aims to move away from fossil fuels. The goal is to replace these with energy sources that do not generate greenhouse gas emissions.

As we continue our clean energy transition, we need to consider more than just emissions. New generation projects should consider impacts on surrounding communities and local ecosystems.

CUB is advocating for a more comprehensive analysis of energy resources in utility regulation. CUB will work to minimize both the cost and the environmental impacts of new energy resources on Oregon’s utility customers.

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