Marin moves ahead with planning for cleaner Community Choice energy

Marin County is one of the dozens of communities across the state actively planning to take control of their energy policy and explore options for more energy independence, firmer rate predictability, and large-scale reductions in emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) - in Marin's case as much as a 15% reduction by 2020.

State bill AB 117 (passed in 2002) gives a local government the authority to act as an "aggregator", purchasing electricity from a range of "energy service providers" (not just PG&E) and selling it back to power users in its community. Marin County and its cities are actively studying setting up a joint-powers authority to implement this procedure of "Community Choice Aggregation" (CCA). That way Marin could get more than half its electricity from clean, renewable, environmentally preferred sources while meeting or beating PG&E's rates. PG&E would continue to transmit the energy and handle repair duties and billing.

The county has engaged Navigant Consulting and two other firms to conduct a $297,000 implementation study, looking at current energy use and developing a draft business plan. The Pacific Sun cites Dawn Weisz, head of Marin County's sustainability team, as saying that the plan can work if 50% of the power consumers in the county participate - even with just the county and Novato or San Rafael. County officials plan to begin soliciting input from the cities and public this spring by forming a CCA "working group" and "advisory council".

Marin Supervisor Charles McGlashan points out that the new revenue stream created by CCA will allow the issuance of bonds to fund investment in reliable renewable-energy projects and local power resources. CCA could, for example, offer to install solar panels on a business' rooftop at no cost, and give the business a break on its electricity costs. McGlashan says municipal bonds could provide a cost-effective way to raise money for clean-energy capital costs. To raise the same money, PG&E would need to issue corporate bonds at a roughly 30% higher interest rate.

Newly elected Marin Supervisor Judy Arnold says CCA could generate business for local firms that provide energy equipment and services. Such local investments will have a multiplier effect, generating new jobs, trades, businesses, and education centered around new green power. Arnold is optimistic about getting the support of the business community because "CCA could be a boost for business." A promise to "meet or beat" PG&E rates over the duration of the service-provider's contract would be a strong inducement.

Marin's plan sets a goal of receiving 51% of the county's electricity from renewable sources by 2017, up from today's 13%. That would be one of the largest percentages of renewable energy used in the state and would be accomplished at no cost to business or residential consumers (compared to PG&E's rates).

Is there a risk in CCA? Robert Freehling of the Sierra Club California Energy and Climate Change Committee reverses the question: how big a risk is it to stay with PG&E? The energy "crisis" of Enron days, says Freehling, was caused by over-reliance on one form of energy, natural gas. PG&E still gets 40 - 50% of its electricity from imported natural gas. Freehling says the price of photovoltaic solar energy "has come down a lot" in the past few decades, while the price of PG&E's electricity has gone up about 4% a year since 1980. So "in looking at risk, it's important to look at the consequences of staying where you are." Freehling notes that a "diversified energy portfolio", one that includes electricity from several sources, including renewables, "can be considered a risk-management strategy rather than a risk."

There are potential roadblocks, largely coming from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).

• When customers leave PG&E they are required to pay "opt-out costs". If the CPUC drags its feet in calculating these or computes excessive values, the CCA savings will be reduced.
• The CPUC must not exercise favoritism in expediting PG&E contracts with big energy users, allowing them to stay out of the CCA.
• A portion of electricity revenues goes into a state fund for financing a range of energy-conservation measures. Currently the Marin portion of these funds goes to PG&E. The law directs that a CCA receive this local share, but the CPUC has shown signs of resistance to allowing this, even though in other parts of the U.S. CCA-type efficiency programs achieve about 40% more savings than PG&E's do.

Marin hopes to decide on CCA before year's end.

WhatYouCanDo

For more information on helping clean energy move ahead in Marin, on writing or phoning city officials, and on county CCA workshops, and to join up with CCA activist groups in your city, contact or call (415) 200-8975.

Ed Mainland, co-chair, Sierra Club California Energy and Climate Change Committee