OLYMPIA, Wash. – Washington state's step toward a clean-energy future in the new year will involve more communities generating their own renewable energy. The Evergreen State is one of four chosen by the National Governors Association to swap policy advice on how to modernize its electric-power sector.

Tony Usibelli, special assistant to the director at the Energy and Climate Policy Division of the Washington State Department of Commerce, said the state has already taken a special interest in something lacking in the Northwest.

"Policies around small, distributed generation," he said. "Things like net metering, where you can sell your electricity back to utilities; things like the deployment of more community solar systems."

The National Governors Association also chose Oregon, Kentucky and Rhode Island to participate in what it calls a "policy academy." Washington plans to focus on reforming market incentives for solar as well. According to the Solar Energy Industries Association, the state's solar-energy capacity in 2015 grew by 85 percent over the previous year.

Usibelli noted that Washington already produces and relies on more renewable energy than any other state in the country. Hydropower provides more than half of the state's electricity, but he said the goal is to fill the rest of its needs through other renewable power sources.

"So, our interest is in finding ways that we can help fill in and help develop, particularly through this academy, some of what are becoming much more economically attractive, distributed resources to generate renewables," he explained.

Not everyone sees hydroelectric dams as truly "renewable" power, because of their effects on fish populations and the natural flow of rivers. But the state has ambitious carbon-reduction goals. It plans to reduce carbon emissions to 50-percent below 1990 levels by 2050.


get more stories like this via email

After years of double-digit rate hikes on electricity bills, some relief might be in sight.

Oregon Citizens' Utility Board, or CUB, has proposed a 7% to 10% yearly limit on rate increases for Pacific Gas & Electric and Pacific Power.

It is up to the Oregon Public Utility Commission to approve the proposal, and it will be making a decision this week.

Bob Jenks - CUB's executive director - said customers are struggling to absorb the 40% or 50% rate hikes from the last few years, and that something needs to be done to rein in this trend.

"We're concerned that this isn't going to stop," said Jenks. "This is in the interest of utilities to keep raising rates like this as long as they can."

Last winter's ice storm led to record power shutoffs for Oregon households, due to lack of payment of their utility bills.

If the PUC decides to adopt the cap, than PG&E's planned 10.9% increase and Pacific Power's planned 14.9% increase for January would need to be lowered.

Jenks said the system favors large companies, which pay much lower rates than households.

While industries need less infrastructure due to proximity to power supplies, he noted that new data centers are driving the need to grow the grid.

Yet, residential rates are rising more than three times faster than industrial rates.

"We think that residential customers and small-business customers are being asked to subsidize the big server farms," said Jenks, "the big data centers, like Amazon and Meta."

The Portland suburb of Hillsboro is newly home to many power-hungry data centers.

Jenks said PG&E's recent numbers show the centers use more electricity than all the residents in Washington County combined, and those numbers are expected to keep growing.

Jenks said CUB's proposal requires the PUC to mitigate rate increases that are higher than 10%.

They can do that by deferring part of the increase to the following year, or by setting the rate to the lowest level legally allowed that would still be profitable for the utility.

"Needless to say," said Jenks, "the utilities don't agree. "





get more stories like this via email

The power grid will need to be dramatically upgraded and expanded in the coming years to handle the transition to renewable energy - and two new reports look at the impact on wildlife, both on and off-shore.

The placement of large onshore power grids can greatly affect migratory species such as mule deer, elk, and sage grouse.

Veronica Ung-Kono is a clean-energy policy transmission specialist and staff attorney with the National Wildlife Federation.

"Proactively planning transmission development helps to strike a balance," said Ung-Kono, "that can help wildlife have their needs met while also helping people have access to low-cost and clean energy."

Ung-Kono said more research is needed because there's still a lot we don't know about the implications for wildlife as more transmission lines crisscross the landscape.

A second report on offshore wind farms recommends buffer zones around sensitive coral habitat.

It also says cables for windmills fixed to the ocean floor must be shielded and buried to reduce impacts from electromagnetic fields.

Co-author Shayna Steingard - an offshore wind senior policy specialist with the National Wildlife Federation - said if it's done right, the clean-energy transition will preserve habitat, and slow ocean warming and sea-level rise linked to climate change.

"I think climate change presents an existential threat to all species, particularly ocean species," said Steingard. "The threats from offshore wind development pale in comparison to the threat from not addressing climate change. There is no climate solution without offshore wind."

President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to kill offshore wind development. So far, site surveys have been approved for the five wind farms planned off the California coast, but they still face years of permitting and environmental review.

A new analysis of federal data shows that U.S. power plants are sitting on a huge stockpile of coal, much of which came from the Powder River Basin. Experts say the surplus could reduce demand.

The stockpiles amount to 138 million tons of coal, with a value of $6.5 billion, according to a new report from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

Seth Feaster is an institute energy data analyst and one of the authors, and said coal deliveries to power plants have been declining - but added that "doesn't appear to be enough."

"That's going to squeeze coal producers for the next year or more," said Feaster, "because the power companies are going to have to burn down that inventory, and try and reduce what their deliveries are going to be."

Feaster said previous stockpiles have taken up to three years to get through.

This excess can happen when the price of natural gas drops, driving power plants that utilize a mix of fuels to opt for more natural gas.

Feaster said another reason power companies may choose gas over coal is that while coal plants are aging and declining, natural-gas production has become a more reliable and responsive source - which mixes well with increasing renewable energy supplies.

"The ability of gas-fired power to adjust quickly to the ups and downs of solar and wind production," said Feaster, "has made it an integral part of the modern energy mix for power production."

Feaster said renewable energy is appealing to power companies because it's relatively inexpensive to build, and there are no additional fuel costs after it's built.

Although the incoming Trump administration appears to be broadly supportive of fossil fuels, Feaster said gas use will affect coal demand.

"I think it's pretty clear that anything that's going to help gas in the overall energy mix is likely to help gas much more than coal," said Feaster, "because it's going to keep prices on the fuel cheaper."

According to the report, coal deliveries have been decreasing for years. About 30 million tons were delivered per month this year, compared with 80 million tons per month in 2008.