BERKELEY (March 29, 2011) - In a bold move to bolster one of the few bright spots in California's economy and set a precedent for strong renewable electricity standards nationwide, the California Legislature today approved a bill that would require utilities in the state to obtain at least 33 percent of their electricity from clean, renewable sources, such as the wind and sun, by 2020.
Promoted by the governor and legislative leaders in both houses as part of a green jobs stimulus package, the bill would create the most aggressive renewable energy requirement in the country and position California as a national leader in clean energy investments.
Lost in the press clippings of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's vapid executive order to boost the amount of renewable energy that California's utilities offer, is the question of what happens to this unenforceable executive order when this governor terms out (executive orders expire when the governor who orders them leaves office).
At the press conference to announce the order, the chair of the California Air Resources Board, Mary Nichols, offered this analysis:
"I think any new governor is likely to want to continue that program," Nichols said.
Obviously Nichols isn't paying attention to the California Republican Party primary, in which it seems that no position is too backwards for the two main candidates: Steve Poizner and Meg Whitman.
Energy independence and a transition to renewable energy are pressing issues impacting our national, environmental, and financial security. Our current economic crisis also presents an unprecedented opportunity to make long-needed changes in our nation's energy policy. We need intelligent, progressive legislation that provides incentives, training, and investment opportunities for a transition to a softer energy path and a more peaceful and productive world.
Fossil fuels kill the economy, the environment, and international security: Nonrenewable energy is bad for the economy, the environment, and international security. Nonrenewable and foreign sources of energy exacerbate our current economic crisis, impacting tens of millions of families, making it harder to get to work, more costly to move goods and operate services, and more expensive to heat and cool our homes and workplaces. Fossil fuel consumption is destroying our environment, contributing to global climate change, soil erosion, barren mountaintops, deforestation, and health-threatening particulate materials in our air and water. Dependence on foreign sources of energy virtually guarantees continued international tensions, tempting policymakers into foreign military interventions that threaten the lives of Americans and others, contributing to international instability and violent extremism.
I noticed Jeremy Wade's editorial in Beyond Chron, and while I might agree with the odd point here and there, he misses the forest for the trees. First, before we discuss the important issues raised surrounding solar and clean energy, I should point out that the allegations (also picked up at LA-ist) made against some of the environmental organizations are just not true. I have confirmed with several of the groups that they have not taken money from the utilities. I haven't made an exhaustive search of these records, but let's just toss that stink bomb aside. It's only meant to be sensational, and create divisiveness within the environmental community. Such accusations against groups that have fought valiantly for clean energy are not helpful to a conversation about the future of renewables. UPDATE: I was mistaken about at least one of the groups, CLCV. They have taken some money from PG&E to their IE committee.
Bob's post today about the San Francisco Clean Energy Act brings up the other issue: conflating the two initiatives. They are not the same thing. The Clean Energy Act seeks to get to 100% renewables in SF. That's a good thing, especially with Al Gore's challenge to do so within 10 years. But that act is not connected to Prop 7. The SF Clean Energy Act has gone through public hearings, was placed on the ballot by a majority of the Board of Supervisors, and has a long list of endorsements, including several environmental organizations, Asm. Mark Leno and former PUC General Manager Susan Leal. In fact, I personally support the SF Clean Energy Act. But let's be clear: the SF CEA is not the same thing as Prop 7.
The endorsement list for Yes on 7 is considerably shorter, consisting mostly of a few local officials that former SF Supervisor (and current Yes on 7 Consultant) Jim Gonzalez knew from back in the day. As to those environmental organizations: they are overwhelmingly opposed to the measure. Toss in the California Young Democrats, the California Labor Federation, and the California Solar Energy Industries Association, and you have a pretty robust coalition in opposition to a a renewable measure. Why? Well, the measure enscribes some flawed legislation into law, and changes require a 2/3 vote of the Legislature.
Peep the flip for a quick summary of those objections.
CALIFORNIA TAKES ANOTHER GIANT LEAP ON GLOBAL WARMING POLICY AIR BOARD RELEASES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO CUT POLLUTION
SACRAMENTO (June 26, 2008) - The California Air Resources Board (CARB) released the nation's most comprehensive plan to date for reducing the pollution that causes global warming. While the plan is still a proposal, it represents the furthest step forward any state has taken in the fight against global warming, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
Patricia Monahan, the director of UCS's California office, said CARB's plan would add more momentum to the fight against global warming. "California is showing the rest of the country how we can build a clean energy economy," she said. "There's no drilling our way out of energy problems. As energy prices skyrocket, consumers need real alternatives that sip rather than guzzle, and that are homegrown instead of imported."
The 75+ page plan includes a range of policy recommendations. Chief among them is increasing the state's renewable electricity standard. The plan also contains provisions for a regional cap-and-trade program that could work in harmony with other more specific policies to reduce pollution economywide. The plan also says CARB will consider a vehicle "feebate" program that would provide incentives to consumers to buy cleaner cars.
In addition, the proposal includes plans to reduce emissions from heavy-duty trucks with hybrid engine technology and better fuel economy. Like many of CARB's proposals, the heavy-duty truck provisions would improve public health by also reducing smog-forming pollution. The plan also advocates for a high-speed train system in California.
Christopher Busch, a UCS climate economist, pointed out that many of the draft plan's policies would save consumers money and yield economic benefits, while the overall cost of implementing the plan would likely be negligible. "Fundamentally, we're talking about making our economy more efficient, which will give us energy savings," he said. "And investing in clean, renewable energy will make our electricity and fuel supplies more diverse, and insulate us from price swings in the fossil fuel market."
Busch added that global warming pollution reduction strategies also would provide public health benefits by cleaning up the air as well as support the state's growing clean technology industries. "California has proven time and again that we can clean our air and grow our economy," he said. "Now the state is going to prove the same thing with global warming."
The renewable electricity standard in the plan would require utilities to generate 33 percent of their electricity from clean, renewable sources, such as wind and solar power, by 2020. Such a standard would reduce global warming pollution by an amount equivalent to avoiding the construction of 10 new large fossil fuel power plants or removing nearly 3 million cars from the road. And such a standard could save residents money on their electricity bills by displacing natural gas. Additionally, it would reduce smog-forming pollution, create new green-collar jobs in the state, and bolster California's growing clean technology sector.
"California has a wealth of renewable electricity potential we aren't tapping into yet," said Dan Kalb, UCS's California policy coordinator. "Shifting to clean, safe sources of carbon-free electricity in a smart and well-planned manner is a win for the environment, the economy and consumers."
