CENTRALIA, Wash. – With an initiative on the November ballot to charge carbon polluters, supporters are pointing to Southwest Washington as an example of how the measure could help workers.
Initiative 1631 would put a fee on the state's largest polluters, such as oil companies, and use part of that money to invest in clean energy infrastructure.
Centralia and the surrounding communities are facing this transition right now as their coal plant is set to shut down completely by 2025, taking about 200 jobs with it.
Bob Guenther, president of the Thurston-Lewis-Mason Central Labor Council, says that's a hit he hopes the clean energy economy can fill.
"The Centralia-southwest Washington region is an area that has high unemployment, has low household income, and we're looking for a just transition from that Centralia coal plant to jobs that will be of like value to the community," he points out.
TransAlta, owner of the coal plant, has proposed a 180-megawatt solar project on the site of the former Centralia Coal Mine. It would create 300 jobs during construction.
Guenther wants to see the region invest in other projects, such as solar panel manufacturing, to create more long term employment as well.
I-1631 would invest in training to transition workers to clean energy jobs. Opponents say the fee charged to polluters will be passed on to consumers.
David Watterson is a Tenino City Council member. When TransAlta offered funding for the transitioning region, he seized on the opportunity to get solar panels installed on top of Tenino High School.
The city also is partnering with Centralia College to offer a K-through-12 clean energy job training program.
Watterson says that's the most important part of this transformation.
"Giving our youth an opportunity to get some training in a field where employment is skyrocketing is just a huge thing and hopefully something that can be replicated in other, smaller rural communities,” he points out. “So that's why I'm really hoping that 1631 will make some funds available for helping our rural communities."
Mo McBroom, director of government relations with The Nature Conservancy in Washington, says this latest effort to charge polluters has a broad coalition behind it, including businesses, tribes, labor and social justice groups.
She says the measure is centered around people and designed to create more than 40,000 jobs.
"It's about ensuring that, as we transition, no one is left behind and there are jobs in the clean energy economy for workers who want them," she states.
get more stories like this via email
Backers say a law adding nuclear power to the definition of "green" energy will give Ohioans another option to cut carbon emissions but some environmentalists are skeptical.
House Bill 308, signed in December by Gov. Mike DeWine, is designed to open the state to nuclear power research and development. However, critics are concerned it could be used to diminish the roles of renewables, such as wind and solar energy in reaching future climate goals.
Rep. Sean Brennan, D-Parma, is a co-sponsor of the bill. He is unsure the state can reach its climate goals with the current mix of renewables.
"My belief is that if we're ever going to wean ourselves off of coal and natural gas, fossil fuels, we've got to expand our nuclear portfolio in Ohio. We just have to do it," Brennan asserted. "Wind and solar just aren't going to do it for us."
Environmental groups such as Earthjustice say the measure is similar to a controversial 2022 law classifying natural gas as green energy despite the fact its use creates hydrocarbon emissions. Critics also fear the language could be used to divert public funding from renewable energy projects.
Brennan noted the bill does not promise any financial incentives for nuclear power or divert public funds from renewable energy projects. He argued opening up to nuclear energy, which does not emit carbon into the atmosphere, will help attract jobs and federal funding.
"We need to continue to expand on solar and wind," Brennan contended. "I truly believe we have to do that, but I believe nuclear is going to be hugely important for our future energy independence, and hopefully, Ohio will become an exporter of electricity in the future."
Ohio ended its renewable energy standard in 2019 in the midst of a corruption and bribery scandal involving nuclear and coal-powered energy plants in the state. Brennan emphasized Ohio needs to move forward in its efforts to fight climate change.
"I decided to join the legislation because I believe it's a good idea to send a message to stakeholders that Ohio is open to explore expanding nuclear, whereas some states have moratoriums on nuclear," Brennan added. "I think it's going to be important to our future energy needs in Ohio."
This story is based on original reporting by Kathiann M. Kowalski for Energy News Network.
get more stories like this via email
Many contend Utah, like the greater United States, is facing an energy crisis, and the fast development and expansion of artificial intelligence could make the problem even worse.
It is estimated AI data centers will require 14 gigawatts of new power capacity by 2030. Estimates show one gigawatt alone is enough energy to power about 750,000 homes.
Gov. Spencer Cox announced Operation Gigawatt late last year, an initiative he said will double Utah's energy production over the next decade. The main goals of the initiative are to increase transmission capacity, expand and develop more energy production, enhance Utah's policies and invest in Utah research.
Cox argued the state needs more energy.
"We've looked at the future and where we are headed," Cox explained. "We've made a determination that we have to do something bold. We have to change the way we develop power in the state of Utah, and we are so fortunate to live in a state where we have these opportunities."
Coal fuels almost 50% of Utah's total electricity net generation, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Natural gas accounts for about 34% and the rest primarily comes from renewable energy. Cox and others want to diversify the state's energy portfolio and bring nuclear and geothermal power into the mix. Opponents of nuclear power said it is expensive and dangerous.
Dusty Monks, deputy director of the Utah Office of Energy Development, said while nuclear power has a smaller footprint and is a zero-emissions energy source, getting nuclear power to Utah could be a long and complicated challenge. The state does not currently have a nuclear reactor at a commercial scale.
"We need to make sure that we have a policy pathway, policies that allow for us to align with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, that we are not an obstacle but we're in line with," Monks outlined. "Then as we talk about energy, or nuclear, we actually need to deploy a project."
Monks added his office will bring local, regional and national resources over the next year to consider what would be required to build a nuclear project in the Beehive State.
get more stories like this via email
The Department of Energy is taking a close look at the economic and environmental impacts of liquefied natural gas exports, which some experts argue are driving up household energy costs and worsening climate challenges.
The report comes as LNG export projects rapidly expand, with U.S. demand at record levels and expected to grow as new facilities open.
In Virginia, household natural-gas bills have increased 50% since 2016, far outpacing inflation, said Jeremy Symons, principal at Symons Public Affairs. He attributed the increase to growing LNG exports, which limit domestic supply and drive energy costs.
"A single LNG plant - the controversial CP2 facility that's being proposed for Louisiana - would export twice as much gas every day than Virginia consumes," he said. "That means that, even though it's happening on the other side of the country, it drives up energy prices across the country."
The Chesapeake Climate Action Network Action Fund has gathered more than 5,000 signatures urging the Biden administration to pause LNG export licenses until a full review is completed.
Supporters of these exports argue that expanding infrastructure bolsters U.S. energy independence and strengthens global energy markets.
Symons encouraged the public to use the 60-day comment period to ensure that affected communities are heard.
Quentin Scott, federal policy director for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network Action Fund, emphasized the environmental risks and called on the Biden administration to act decisively.
"Secretary [Jennifer] Granholm said it in her own words," he said, "that continuing to export LNG at the scale and the trajectory in which the United States has been exporting LNG over the last few years is unsustainable and not good for consumers, not good for businesses, not good for our environmental and climate goals."
As Virginia faces rising costs and environmental pressures, the debate over LNG exports has become more urgent. Scott said he hopes the Department of Energy's findings and public comment period will bring attention to the local and national implications of America's growing liquefied natural-gas industry.
Disclosure: Chesapeake Climate Action Network contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Sustainable Agriculture. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email