By Taylor Kate Brown for Grist.
Broadcast version by Mark Moran for Alaska News Service reporting for the Solutions Journalism Network-Public News Service Collaboration

When Kira Roberts moved to Juneau, Alaska, last summer, she immediately noticed how the town of 31,000 changes when the cruise ships dock each morning. Thousands of people pour in, only to vanish by evening. As the season winds down in fall, the parade of buses driving through her neighborhood slows, and the trails near her home and the vast Mendenhall Glacier no longer teem with tourists.

“That unique rhythm of Juneau is really striking to me,” she said. “It’s just kind of crazy to think that this is all a mile from my house.”

But Mendenhall is shrinking quickly: The 13-mile-long glacier has retreated about a mile in the past 40 years. Getting all those tourists to Juneau — some 1.5 million this summer by cruise ship alone — requires burning the very thing contributing to its retreat: fossil fuels.

In an effort to mitigate a portion of that CO2, some of those going whale watching or visiting the glacier are asked to pay a few dollars to counter their emissions. The money goes to the Alaska Carbon Reduction Fund, but instead of buying credits from some distant (and questionable) offset project, the nonprofit spends that cash installing heat pumps, targeting residents like Roberts who rely upon oil heating systems. 

Heat pumps are “a no-brainer” in Juneau’s mild (for Alaska) winters, said Andy Romanoff, who administers the fund. Juneau’s grid relies on emissions-free hydropower, so electricity is cheaper and less polluting than oil heat. They also save residents money — Roberts said she was paying around $500 a month on heating oil, and has seen her electricity bill climb just $30.

“The financial difference is huge,” she said.

Programs from Monterey, California, to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, have tried using similar models to finance local renewable or energy-efficiency projects, and carbon offsets for flying and other activities are nothing new. But most of the voluntary market for such things is run by large companies backing distant projects. The fund in Juneau is eager to capitalize on the massive tourist interest in its backyard.

The program, which until recently was called the Juneau Carbon Offset Fund, started in 2019 when members of the advocacy organization Renewable Juneau were discussing how to help Juneau achieve its goal of having renewables provide 80 percent of the city’s energy needs by 2045. The organization’s existing heat pump programs were reaching only the “low-hanging fruit,” Romanoff said: People who had money and were ready to switch for climate reasons alone. It envisioned the fund as a way to get the devices — and the fossil fuel reduction they provide — to more residents. 

Romanoff, who also is executive director of the nonprofit Alaska Heat Smart, is aware of the reputational hit carbon offsets have taken lately, but believes the fund’s focus on heat pumps, and working locally, provides transparency and accountability. “It’s a carbon cost that people could actually relate to and understand,” he said.

Many voluntary offset projects overestimate the emissions they’re preventing, sometimes by as much as five to 10 times, said Barbara Haya, director of the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project. “Project developers are making methodological choices that give them more credits instead of less,” she said, and those verifying the claims are not enforcing conservative estimates when there’s uncertainty.

The Alaska Carbon Reduction Fund uses three years of utility bills to determine how much oil a recipient was burning before getting a heat pump. It’s paid for 41 installations since 2019, at an average cost of $7,000, and estimates the devices will prevent 3,125 metric tons of carbon emissions over their 15-year lifespans. Those calculations, plus a subsidy from non-tourism donations, brings its carbon price to $46 a ton. 

That’s more expensive than many voluntary credits, but in line with what Haya said are higher-quality projects. “That looks like the cost of real mitigation,” she said. A more fundamental issue is proving any offset project wouldn’t have happened on its own, Haya said. 

Romanoff believes their project meets that condition because the heat pumps go to residents who earn less than 80 percent of the local median income. One of the first recipients, Garri Constantine, lived on far below that when his system was installed. In the three years since, Constantine has become an evangelist for the technology, in part because he no longer spends $300 a month on firewood, trading it for a $50 monthly increase in his electricity bill. 

“I just don’t understand why these things haven’t taken off like wildfire,” he said.

Although the fund has money for future installations, Romanoff said the speed with which it can work is limited by a nationwide shortage of installers. Most of its donations came from the nearby gold mine and the Juneau guiding company Above and Beyond Alaska, but Allen Marine, a regional tour operator, started pitching the fund to passengers this summer and now offers an opt-in donation when booking online. The company considered the fund an opportunity to “give back to the communities that we operate in,” said Travis Mingo, VP of operations. As part of the partnership, the carbon reduction fund agreed to start funding heat pumps in other Allen Marine destinations, like Ketchikan and Sitka.

A much smaller company, Wild Coast Excursions, includes the offset in its prices. When owner Peter Nave’s plan for summer tours on the local ski mountain fell through, he shifted to bear viewing and alpine hiking trips, some of which are far enough away to require helicopter rides. Climate change is especially visible for Nave, a Juneau native who’s seen the dramatic changes in Mendenhall up close and has worked as an avalanche forecaster. He’s covering a 125 percent offset of the climate impact of those excursions, labeling his company “carbon-negative.” He estimates that will end up being about 1 percent of the price of each tour. In his mind, it’s simply a cost of doing business.

“I kind of rationalized that if I could offset more than we would use, then I could feel a little bit better about taking on [the helicopter] strategy,” he said.

He’s skeptical of offsets in general, but the tangibility of this program made a difference. “I could see the reduction happening, because I know the heat pumps work, my friends have them, people I know install them,” he said.

Wild Coast Excursions’ contribution to the carbon reduction fund in the first year is unlikely to cover even one heat pump, however. Including cruise ships or major airlines in the program would make a far more significant dent in Juneau’s emissions. Romanoff said his organization had an initial conversation with a local representative of a major cruise company, but was told it wouldn’t participate if the fund only benefits Juneau and the offsets weren’t verified by a third party.

The Alaska Carbon Reduction Fund began pursuing verification with Verra, the world’s largest certifier of voluntary credits by volume, but walked away because of the cost and its own discomfort over negative press coverage. “We could install five or six heat pumps with that money,” Romanoff said.

Offsets are one tool cruise companies consider “on a case-by-case basis,” to hit their own emissions goals, said Lanie Downs, a spokeswoman for Cruise Lines International Association Alaska. 

Carnival Plc, which owns three cruise companies operating in Alaska, said it will consider carbon offsets only if energy efficiency options have been exhausted. The other two major cruise lines that regularly dock in Juneau did not respond to requests for comment, but do list offset purchases in their annual sustainability reports.

While the city charges cruise lines a per-head passenger fee, that revenue can be used only for specific projects in the port area. Alexandra Pierce, Juneau’s tourism manager, said the city has “never formally proposed any emissions fees,” on cruise ships, but pointed to the industry’s involvement in efforts to reduce cruise line emissions and install electric shore power, the marine equivalent of stopping idling emissions.

Allen Marine has “started discussions” about including an offset fee in its tours sold through cruise lines. “As we go through contract renewals, it will actually start to snowball effect the amount of money we’re able to receive for this program,” Mingo said. But ultimately, that leaves the bulk of tourists’ emissions — the cruises — unaccounted for.

Romanoff gets a few emails a year from people in other parts of Alaska and the Lower 48 interested in setting up their own offset funds. He thinks his organization’s model could be replicated in places with plenty of oil heating systems to replace. That said, a carbon price based on replacing gas-powered heat might be too expensive for most people, he said.

But in the Alaskan panhandle, he thinks a “groundswell” of support from small businesses could make a difference in getting the cruise lines on board. “Once we build that arsenal to a certain size, then I think that’ll speak pretty loud and clear,” he said.


Taylor Kate Brown wrote this article for Grist.


get more stories like this via email

Environmental groups in Minnesota are considering their next steps on the heels of a regulatory decision they said weakens the state's landmark carbon-free electricity law.

Late last week, the Public Utilities Commission clarified which technologies should be in the mix, as energy providers try to meet the requirement of 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040. The commission opened the door to allowing biomass -- namely the burning of wood -- and trash incineration to count as clean sources.

Barbara Freese climate program attorney at the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, said it is troubling the commission did not rule biomass options out.

"The law clearly said that to be carbon free, a generating source has to generate without emitting carbon dioxide," Freese pointed out. "These two sources of electricity, solid waste and biomass, emit tremendous amounts of carbon dioxide."

But utilities like Minnesota Power prioritize biomass as a form of renewable energy, with supporters arguing it is better to burn wood scraps from the logging industry than let it decompose. They argued it creates other carbon dioxide issues, and a carbon-neutral approach helps carry out the mission of the law. The commission decided more analysis is needed to get a clearer picture of the eligibility of these sources.

Despite the outcome, Minnesota's carbon-free requirement is not going away as the state added renewables like wind and solar. Freese expressed concern about what lies ahead.

"We can't be confident that the wording of the law will be accurately enforced," Freese contended. "And that is very troubling because there's going to be a lot of pressure to try to weaken this law."

She suggested pressure will not end with last week's decision. The law provides "offramps" for utilities struggling to meet the standard if clean-energy technologies are too costly or hinder grid reliability. And there is a push in the Midwest region to approve carbon-capture projects, with skeptics arguing some proposals are too large-scale and have yet to prove their effectiveness.


get more stories like this via email

In Kentucky, 462 businesses, farms and schools have received $77 million in federal funding to boost energy efficiency through the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Energy For America Program, according to a new report.

The program provides loan guarantees and grants to farmers and rural small businesses.

Quenton King, government affairs specialist for the group Appalachian Voices, said the program is critical for helping agricultural producers and those in the tourism economy keep operating costs down.

"We're really grateful to the two Kentucky farms that agreed to talk with us, SouthDown farm in Letcher County and Sylvatica, a forest farm in Rockcastle County," King pointed out. "Both of those farms got a REAP grant to build solar arrays on their property."

SouthDown Farm in Letcher County received more than $7,000 from the program in 2020, enabling its owners to install a 20-kilowatt solar array. Sylvatica Forest Farm was awarded more than $11,000 in grant funding. Both businesses said the solar infrastructure will help reduce their energy consumption and lower their electric bills.

The infusion of an additional $2 billion for the program through 2031 as part of the Inflation Reduction Act will bring more energy efficiency and clean energy projects to Appalachia, King emphasized. He noted despite the funding boost, demand for the program continues to outpace available funding.

"We're looking at a future where people might not be able to apply for projects, or get money for projects," King projected. "That's really disheartening."


get more stories like this via email

Indiana is positioning itself as a national leader in clean energy, driving economic growth through innovative projects and significant investments.

Economic development officials said Indiana's heavy industry and manufacturing capabilities make it a natural partner for emerging technologies like carbon capture, hydrogen and solar power.

Andrea Richter-Garry, senior vice president of global strategy for the Indiana Economic Development Corporation, said clean energy is transforming the state's economy and creating new opportunities.

"A great example of that would be Heidelberg Materials down in Mitchell, Indiana, receiving a huge Department of Energy grant to be able to push forward a carbon capture project that will lead to low carbon cement," Richter-Garry outlined. "Wabash Valley just announced a huge project in Terre Haute."

Some opponents have said the best approach is to hold back on renewables, arguing technology will get better and be less disruptive to landscapes. Richter-Garry countered Indiana's manufacturing strength is a critical component of the transition. The clean energy industry has brought in $12 billion in capital investments, more than $40 million annually in taxes, and about $35 million a year in lease payments to Indiana landowners.

Richter-Garry noted Indiana's workforce and existing infrastructure are well-suited to produce essential clean energy components, including wind turbines and solar panels, helping meet national and global energy goals.

"The Mammoth Solar project, that 13,000-acre solar farm is going to generate 1.3 gigawatts of power," Richter-Garry pointed out. "That's 75,000 homes. Indiana again has the correct kind of landscape as well as some of the local partnerships to be able to continue that trend."

Indiana's clean energy initiatives are not just about sustainability, they are about securing the state's economic future. By leveraging its strengths in manufacturing and innovation, Indiana is paving the way for a prosperous green economy to benefit communities across the state.


get more stories like this via email