[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
COLORADO'S ROADMAP FOR CLEAN ENERGY
ACTION: LESSONS FROM STATE AND
LOCAL LEADERS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE
CLIMATE CRISIS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD
AUGUST 1, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-8
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
www.govinfo.gov
Printed for the use of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
37-993 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS
One Hundred Sixteenth Congress
KATHY CASTOR, Florida, Chair
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana,
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon Ranking Member
JULIA BROWNLEY, California MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia
JARED HUFFMAN, California GARY PALMER, Alabama
A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia BUDDY CARTER, Georgia
MIKE LEVIN, California CAROL MILLER, West Virginia
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
----------
Ana Unruh Cohen, Majority Staff Director
Marty Hall, Minority Staff Director
climatecrisis.house.gov
C O N T E N T S
STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Page
Hon. Kathy Castor, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Florida, and Chair, Select Committee on the Climate Crisis:
Opening Statement........................................... 1
Prepared Statement.......................................... 3
Hon. Garrett Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Select Committee on the
Climate Crisis:
Opening Statement........................................... 16
WITNESS: PANEL 1
Hon. Jared Polis, Governor, State of Colorado
Oral Statement.............................................. 7
Prepared Statement.......................................... 9
WITNESSES: PANEL 2
Hon. Suzanne Jones, Mayor, City of Boulder, Colorado
Oral Statement.............................................. 24
Prepared Statement.......................................... 26
Hon. Wade Troxell, Mayor, City of Fort Collins, Colorado
Oral Statement.............................................. 34
Prepared Statement.......................................... 36
Cary Weiner, State Energy Specialist and Director, Colorado
State University (CSU) Extension and Rural Energy Center
Colorado State University
Oral Statement.............................................. 38
Prepared Statement.......................................... 39
Chris Wright, Chief Executive Officer and Executive Chairman,
Liberty Oilfield Services and Liberty Resources
Oral Statement.............................................. 41
Prepared Statement.......................................... 43
Heidi VanGenderen, Chief Sustainability Officer, University of
Colorado-Boulder
Oral Statement.............................................. 44
Prepared Statement.......................................... 46
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Report, Source characterization of volatile organic compounds in
the Colorado Northern Front Range Metropolitan Area during
spring and summer 2015, submitted for the record by Mr. Neguse. 65
Report, Process-Based and Regional Source Impact Analysis for
FRAPPE and DISCOVER-AQ 2014, submitted for the record by Mr.
Neguse......................................................... 65
Article from CIRES UC-Boulder, ``Accounting for Ozone,''
submitted for the record by Mr. Graves......................... 69
APPENDIX
Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Hon. Jared
Polis.......................................................... 69
Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Hon. Suzanne
Jones.......................................................... 72
Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Hon. Wade
Troxell........................................................ 75
Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Cary Weiner.. 76
Questions for the Record from Hon. Kathy Castor to Heidi
VanGenderen.................................................... 78
COLORADO'S ROADMAP FOR CLEAN ENERGY ACTION: LESSONS FROM STATE AND
LOCAL LEADERS
----------
THURSDAY, AUGUST 1, 2019
House of Representatives,
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:10 a.m., at
University of Colorado-Boulder, 2450 Kittredge Loop Dr., Wolf
Law Building 401 UCB, Wittemyer Courtroom, Boulder, CO, Hon.
Kathy Castor presiding.
Present: Representatives Castor, Casten, Neguse, and
Graves.
Also present: Representative DeGette.
Chairwoman Castor. Welcome, everyone, to the House Select
Committee on the Climate Crisis, our first national field
hearing. The committee will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the committee at any time.
I am Congresswoman Kathy Castor of Florida. I am honored to
be here in the great State of Colorado.
Without objection, Representative Diana DeGette, the
gentlewoman from Colorado, shall be permitted to join the
committee on the dais and be recognized for questioning of
witnesses.
Today we will discuss Colorado's state and local efforts to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and expand the deployment of
clean energy and clean vehicles at the Select Committee's first
field hearing. So I recognize myself for 5 minutes to give an
opening statement.
Thank you all for joining us today for the committee's
first field hearing. I am excited to be in the great State of
Colorado as the committee works to develop a national climate
plan. We need to build on what is working in states and
communities across this great country.
It is appropriate that we are here on Colorado Day. It is
the 143rd anniversary of Colorado becoming a state.
[Applause.]
Chairwoman Castor. Natural resources have always been a
critical part of Colorado's economy. Today, in this century of
the climate crisis, those resources also include the
intellectual and entrepreneurial resources. We have seen some
of these in the past couple of days at the National Renewable
Energy Lab, NCAR, NOAA, and with scientists and students here
at UC-Boulder. They are doing the cutting-edge research on the
climate crisis and the solutions to tackle the crisis. We are
also honored that our recent House of Representatives
colleague, now Governor Polis, is spending part of his first
Colorado Day as governor with us.
When we say the states are the laboratories of democracy,
we mean that literally here. Colorado is home to some of the
leading research in climate change and clean energy. And one of
the most important things we can do as policymakers is make
sure that clean technology can move from the lab to the market.
That is what creates jobs, that is what cuts pollution, and
that is what makes America the leader in clean energy. We need
to build the clean energy economy to solve the climate crisis.
Colorado in particular has been a leader in the clean
energy revolution. In the 2019 legislative session, the
Governor and the Colorado legislature have added to Colorado's
clean energy legacy by enacting several bills focused on
deploying more energy efficiency, renewable energy, and
electric vehicles. Equally important, they also created new
programs to support the energy workforce, the clean energy
workforce. Today we will be learning more about those policies
and their benefits from a variety of perspectives to inform the
Select Committee's work.
The climate crisis is the challenge of our lifetime. When
we confront it, it makes us realize that we are all in this
together and that it will take creativity, innovation, and
persistence by everyone to solve it. Those same qualities are
what helped America land the first person on the moon.
Recently, we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11
mission. Those first steps on the moon proved that America can
do anything when we work together. I have always found an extra
measure of inspiration in Apollo because I am from Florida, and
because when I first came to Congress I had the honor of
inheriting John F. Kennedy's office in the Cannon House Office
Building.
A lot of people don't know this, but JFK was also the first
president to receive a warning about how humans were changing
our climate. Every president since then has received starker
and starker warnings from the scientific community about the
consequences of carbon pollution and climate change.
Landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth
was a grand challenge. Making Earth's atmosphere safe for
everyone is now a grander one for all of us.
We don't have time to waste. We need to act as swiftly as
possible. Our next moonshot is solving the climate crisis. I
know we can do it. And I know Colorado is going to help us lead
the way.
[The statement of Ms. Castor follows:]
__________
Opening Statement (As Prepared for Delivery)
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL), Chair
U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
Colorado's Roadmap for Clean Energy Action: Lessons from State and
Local Leaders
August 1, 2019
Good morning and thank you for joining us for our first field
hearing. I'm excited to be in the great State of Colorado because as
this committee works on a national climate plan, we need to build on
what's working in our states.
We are here on Colorado Day--the 143rd anniversary of Colorado
becoming a state. Natural resources have always been a critical part of
Colorado's economy. In the 21st century, those also include the
intellectual and entrepreneurial resources we have seen in the past few
days visiting national and state scientists, who are doing cutting edge
research on the climate crisis and solutions for it. We are also
honored that our recent House of Representatives colleague, now
Governor Polis, is spending part of his first Colorado Day as governor
with us.
When we say the states are laboratories of democracy, we mean that
literally here. Colorado is home to some of the leading research in
climate change and clean energy. And one of the most important things
we can do as policymakers is make sure clean technology can move from
the lab to the market--that's what creates jobs, that's what cuts
pollution, that's what makes America a leader in the clean energy
economy we have to build to solve the climate crisis.
Colorado in particular has been a leader in the clean energy
revolution. In the 2019 legislative session, the governor and Colorado
legislature have added to Colorado's clean energy legacy by enacting
several bills focused on deploying more energy efficiency, renewable
energy and electric vehicles. Equally important, they also created new
programs to support the energy workforce. Today we will be learning
more about those policies and their benefits from a variety of
perspectives to inform the Select Committee's work.
The climate crisis is a huge problem. When we confront it, it makes
us realize that we're all in this together. And that it will take
creativity, innovation and persistence by everyone to solve it.
Those same qualities are what helped America land the first men on
the moon. Recently, we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11
mission. Those first steps on the moon proved that America can do
anything when we work together. I've always found an extra measure of
inspiration in Apollo because I'm from Florida, and because when I
first came to Congress, I had to honor of inheriting John F. Kennedy's
former office.
A lot of people don't know this, but JFK was also the first
president to receive a warning about how humans were changing our
climate. Every president since then has received starker and starker
warnings from the scientific community about the consequences of carbon
pollution and climate change.
Landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth was a
grand challenge. Making Earth's atmosphere safe for everyone is an even
grander one.
The Apollo program was a national effort that mobilized our
scientific and engineering capabilities in the federal government,
academic institutions and private industry. The climate crisis requires
that same commitment and more. As we will hear today the solutions have
already started with our state and local governments. We need to act as
swiftly as possible to follow your lead.
Our next moonshot is solving the climate crisis. I know we can do
it. And I know Colorado is going to help us lead the way.
Now I am going to yield the balance of my time to another
inspiration for all of us, the great representative of this
community, Congressman Joe Neguse.
Good morning, Joe.
[Applause.]
Mr. Neguse. Well, I first want to say thank you to Madam
Chairwoman Castor for selecting Boulder as the location for the
very first field hearing of the Select Committee on the Climate
Crisis. And welcome to Boulder to my colleagues. It is such an
honor to be able to join the committee in visiting my home
state, my home district, my home town, and my alma mater, CU
and CU Law School.
So I want to thank everyone here today, the witnesses who
will be testifying, the many activists and local leaders who
have helped in so many different ways in the fight against the
existential threat of climate change.
I in particular want to recognize my fellow committee
members, Representative Casten from the great State of
Illinois; the Ranking Member, Representative Graves from
Louisiana; Representative Buddy Carter from Georgia, who
unfortunately had to leave last night but joined us for much of
the trip; and, of course, the dean of our delegation,
Representative DeGette. Thank you all for being willing to
spend your time here in Boulder.
I can think of no better place than Boulder, Colorado, and
Colorado as a state, to host the first field hearing of the
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. It is the epicenter of
climate research in the United States. It has been an honor to
be able to visit with a number of scientists over the course of
the last two days at NREL and at NOAA and at UCAR and NCAR and
CIRES and so many other of the wonderful Federal research
laboratories that we have here in our state that we are so
lucky and blessed to be able to call home.
So I look forward to today's proceedings. This climate
emergency requires us to take comprehensive and bold action, in
my view, and, I believe, in the view of the members of this
committee, and I am so grateful for the Chairwoman's leadership
on that front.
With that, I would yield back.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you, Congressman Neguse.
At this time, I will recognize our Ranking Member, Garret
Graves of Louisiana, for an opening statement.
Mr. Graves. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to thank all of you for being here to participate in
your government. This is what the United States looks like, and
I really do appreciate every single one of you being here to
share your thoughts, to participate, and to ensure that you are
being represented.
Governor, I want to thank you for being here. I had the
chance to serve on the House Natural Resources Committee with
your governor, certainly a very well-equipped, bright guy. And
I have to tell you, I miss you, I miss working with you on the
committee. We had a number of amendments that we were able to
work on together. But congratulations to you, and I have no
doubt that you are going to do great things here, so thank you
for being with us.
Congressman Neguse, I want to thank you as well. The short
trip--I arrived just yesterday morning. This place has been
amazing, it really has. The people have been amazing.
Mayor, I want to thank you very much for being here and for
welcoming us as well.
Climate change. I represent south Louisiana. We have to get
this right, but we have to get this right. I want to explain
what I mean there.
First of all, we are in Boulder, Colorado. So we can sit
here and we can talk about the symptoms of climate change and
what is going to happen here and what has happened here. Let me
tell you about where I live.
We have lost 2,000 square miles of our state, 2,000. How
big is that? If it were the State of Rhode Island, we would
have 49 states today, alright? This isn't some place where
birds and fish live. This is people. This is homes. This is
businesses. This is history.
Our tourism department years ago--we have this area called
the Atchafalaya Basin. It is one of the only open river
floodplains undisturbed in the nation, and it is just teeming
with wildlife. It is amazing. Bears and alligators and deer,
just a really amazing place. But they kicked off this tourism
campaign, and they said the Atchafalaya Basin, America's
foreign country. And I was like, oh, that is awesome. And it
is, it is awesome.
But you know what? That is south Louisiana, the place, the
people that I represent, the culture, the music, the food, the
people. There is nowhere else. And to watch that disappear,
literally--we lose a football field of land approximately every
hour, a football field every hour.
So sea rise is one of the contributing factors. There are a
few others. It is one of the contributing factors for our loss.
You can look and you have seen the International Panel on
Climate Change, the IPCC. You looked at their projections of
sea rise. We don't have the Flatirons. If we have a slope in
Louisiana, it goes from here to there. So when sea rises, it
inundates. It inundates our homes, it inundates our businesses,
it inundates our history, it inundates our ecosystem.
Actually, I worked on an amendment in one of our
committees--I think Joe was about to throw something at me--
where I tried to get Cajuns deemed an endangered species.
[Laughter.]
It didn't work.
So from home, from the people I represent, we have to get
this right.
Now, let me explain the other reason we have to get this
right. We have had people, experts, come before our committee
who have said we can cut every bit of emissions, every single
bit of emissions from the United States today, everything, and
it is not going to change the trajectory of warming.
This place, Boulder, is amazing. Yesterday I had the
opportunity to go to the National Renewable Energy Lab. I had
the opportunity to go to the University Corporation for
Atmospheric Research. I have been to CIRES before. I have been
to the Earth System Research Laboratory before. This place is
going to be absolutely key in solving the problem, and what I
mean by that is the experts, the facilities, the scientists
that you have here, the innovation, the moon shot that the
Chair just talked about.
But when you look at what some places have done, up in the
northeast, some of the efforts to go very, very aggressive,
they have actually caused energy prices to triple those
compared to my home state. In my home state, we can't afford
it. We have a high rate of poverty. We can't afford a tripling
of energy. They have actually carried out policies that have
required the importation of natural gas from Russia. They have
caused folks to burn wood in stoves in their homes. They have
caused the burning of heating oil.
In California, we have increased our dependence upon oil
from Saudi Arabia. Let me say that again: We have increased our
dependence upon oil from Saudi Arabia.
Here is a little-known fact. In the United States today we
have reduced emissions greater than the next 12 countries
combined, the United States has twelve countries combined. So
we can continue down this path of making this an incredibly
polarizing issue and make it this big partisan fight, or we can
recognize that we are all in this together, not just in
Boulder, not just in Colorado, not just in the United States,
but the globe, because as the United States has been the world
leader in reduced carbon emissions greenhouse gas emissions by
a billion tons, China during that same period of time has
increased by 4 billion tons, more than offsetting every bit of
progress we have made here in the States.
Let me say it again. This place, Boulder, Colorado, the
scientists, the experts, the facilities you have here, this
place is going to lead the innovation not just for Boulder, not
just for Colorado, not just for the United States, but for the
world. And we are going to have to keep working together and
stop this ridiculousness about all the partisan fighting that
we are seeing on this issue and virtually everything else,
because we are all in this together.
It doesn't matter if you are Republican, Democrat, green,
purple, blue, white, whatever. When your land is being taken,
when your home is going underwater, when your business is going
underwater, when your history, your culture is going
underwater, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter what label. It
affects every single one of us.
So let me say it again, Madam Chairwoman. I want to thank
you for choosing Boulder, Colorado. Joe, Congresswoman DeGette,
I want to thank you very much for hosting this today.
Congressman Casten, thanks for coming. And most importantly, I
want to thank you all for being here to participate in your
government, and we have got to work together to figure out a
solution that gets it right and gets it right.
I yield back.
[Applause.]
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Graves.
Now we will move on to our witnesses.
We have two panels today. The first panel is the Honorable
Jared Polis, and I yield to Congressman Neguse to introduce the
Governor.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am proud today to
introduce the Governor of Colorado, Jared Polis.
Before being elected governor, Jared Polis served as a
board member and Chair of the Colorado State Board of
Education. He was then elected to represent Colorado's 2nd
Congressional District, which I am honored to serve today.
The 2nd District stretches from Larimer County and the
Wyoming border to the central mountains at the heart of
Colorado's tourism economy, to Boulder and the U.S. 36 high-
tech corridor.
In his time in the United States House of Representatives,
then-Congressman Polis was a strong advocate for finding
solutions to environmental issues. He was a national leader for
protecting our treasured public lands and addressing climate
change.
After 10 years of honorable service in the United States
House of Representatives, he successfully ran for governor last
year, in 2018, on the platform of full-day kindergarten for
all, reducing health care costs, and transitioning to 100
percent renewable energy by 2040.
As the Governor of Colorado, Jared Polis has made
significant progress towards these goals during his first seven
months in office, and he has left incredibly large shoes for me
to fill as the congressman for this congressional district.
I am thrilled to welcome him to the Select Committee's
first field hearing to share his testimony and his experience.
Please welcome our Governor of Colorado, Jared Polis.
[Applause.]
Chairwoman Castor. And without objection, the witness' 5-
minute testimony will be entered into the record.
At this time, Governor, you are recognized to give a 5-
minute presentation.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JARED POLIS, GOVERNOR OF COLORADO
STATEMENT OF JARED POLIS
Governor Polis. Good morning, Madam Chair, Ranking Member
Graves, Representative Neguse, Representative Casten,
Representative DeGette. I had the pleasure of serving with many
of you for a number of years. And today, on Colorado's 143rd
birthday, which Madam Chair so kindly recognized, I am honored
to welcome you to Colorado for a very important field hearing
to discuss climate change, an existential threat to our
security, our health, our economy, our public lands and
ecosystems, and our very way of life.
Colorado's climate has warmed substantially over the past
30 years, and even more than that over the last half century.
Time is quickly running out to take bold action to reverse and
alter the current trajectory.
In Colorado, we know this hotter, more erratic, drier
future isn't some dystopian vision. It is impacting us right
now. It is impacting our dwindling water supply, impacting our
farming and ranching communities, our outdoor recreation
industry, our wildlife and ecological diversity. It is causing
more frequent, more devastating, and more expensive national
disasters, which also costs the Federal government money.
If we want to preserve our way of life for future
generations, we need to take bold action to address the climate
crisis.
We have more than just a moral imperative to combat climate
change. In Colorado, as an example, and, of course, across
America, we also have an economic imperative to lead the global
green energy revolution, to make the future work for us.
We have a choice. We can be a leader in renewable energy,
or we can let other countries develop the technologies, create
the jobs, and reap the rewards of the renewable energy future.
In Colorado, as you have seen over the last couple of days,
we chose to lead. I ran on a platform of achieving 100 percent
renewable energy across our great state by 2040 because I know
that that will preserve our way of life and grow our economy
well into the future. This commitment was inspired and informed
by the 14 towns and counties across our state that have also
adopted the call of getting to 100 percent of their electricity
from renewable energy by 2040, or in many cases even sooner.
That is why my administration released our Roadmap to 100
Percent Renewable Energy and Bold Climate Action. You have a
copy of that in front of you as an exhibit. This Roadmap
outlines how we will drive innovation and build Colorado's
economy by continuing and growing our leadership in green
energy development.
We have taken significant strides during my first seven
months in office to put us on the path to achieving this bold
goal. But the truth is that through price reductions and
technological advances, the shift towards renewable energy is
already happening, and that is good news.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the two fastest
growing jobs in the United States right now are wind turbine
technicians and solar panel installers. In Colorado, our
largest utility, Xcel Energy, announced last fall that they
would retire 660 megawatts of coal a decade early and replace
it with more than 1,800 megawatts of wind, solar, and battery
storage. In doing so, they estimate over $200 million in
savings for customers with no impact on reliability.
This effort is just a piece of Xcel's broader commitment to
reduce emissions 80 percent by 2030 and produce 100 percent
carbon-free electricity by 2050, a commitment that our state
legislature, working with us, codified in statute this past
spring.
Other electric providers across Colorado--Holy Cross
Energy, Platte River Power Authority, and a number of other
rural electric cooperatives--have also followed suit, and
Colorado is proud to have the very first municipal utility in
the entire nation to have already achieved 100 percent
renewable energy, the Aspen municipal utility.
It is undeniable that companies see a profitable future in
renewables, and given the dire stakes, it is our job as
policymakers to accelerate the transition towards a cleaner,
greener, more sustainable, and more affordable energy future.
Let's take transportation, the nation's largest source of
greenhouse gas emissions. My very first executive order set
into motion the establishment of a Zero Emission Vehicle
Center, an investment in electric charging infrastructure, to
make it easier for consumers to choose electric vehicles.
We also, for the grid, unlocked financing solutions,
including securitization, to help reduce the cost of retiring
coal-fired plants. We also passed Senate Bill 181 to put health
and safety first and give local residents a say in what happens
in their communities when it comes to oil and gas drilling
operations, in addition to setting up a process to minimize
fugitive emissions of methane and other pollutants from oil and
gas activities.
We don't have to choose between creating good jobs and
saving our air, our water, and our way of life. We can and we
must do both by growing our renewable energy sector.
When it comes to renewable energy and climate action, I
believe that Colorado has a lot to show the rest of the nation,
and I have no doubt that we can take bold action at the Federal
level as well. I was glad to see the House pass H.R. 9 to keep
America in the Paris Climate Agreement, and I hope the Senate
follows suit.
The United States does not back down from a challenge. We
are a nation of leaders, of doers, of dreamers. In America, we
get to choose our own destiny. Thank you for allowing me to
testify this morning, and I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The statement of Governor Polis follows:]
----------
Written Testimony of Governor Jared Polis
Governor of Colorado
House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
``Colorado's Roadmap for Clean Energy Action: Lessons from State and
Local Leaders''
August 1, 2019
Good morning, Chairwoman Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and the
members of the House Select Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify in front of you all today here in the great State of Colorado
for your committee's first field hearing.
My name is Jared Polis and I serve as the 43rd governor of the
State of Colorado, and as such I welcome you to our great state for
this important Congressional field hearing. I was born and currently
live here in Boulder, and before serving as Governor, I represented
Boulder, Fort Collins and the rest of Colorado's 2nd District in the
House of Representatives for a decade. I am proud to see our Colorado
Representatives Neguse and DeGette here today protecting Coloradans by
leading our nation's efforts to combat the climate crisis on the Select
Committee.
Today, I will provide an overview of Colorado's urgent efforts to-
date to achieve 100% renewable energy and bold climate action. It is my
hope that other states and the federal government can draw lessons from
Colorado to achieve substantial and permanent reductions in pollution
and other activities that contribute to the climate crisis.
coloradans leading on climate action
Since 2004, Colorado has been among the states leading the clean
energy transition. Not only do we have a moral imperative to combat
climate change to protect the health of our communities and our
environment, we also have an economic opportunity to lead the global
clean energy revolution.
We have a choice: we can be a leader in renewable energy, or we can
let other countries develop technologies, create the jobs, and reap the
rewards of a renewable energy future. In Colorado, we have chosen to
lead.
Renewable Energy Standard: In 2004, Coloradans approved Amendment
37, which established the first voter-approved state renewable energy
standard, originally set at 10% by 2020 for our investor owned
utilities. Subsequent legislation increased this to 30%.
Clean Energy Utilities: Since 2004, the State's largest electric
utility, Xcel Energy, has increased its renewable energy from zero to
roughly 3,600 megawatts of wind and solar installed today. Part of this
clean energy is supplied by almost 50,000 Coloradans that have solar
installed on their rooftops. HB10-1365--the Clean Air Clean Jobs Act--
established a process to bring the state into compliance with federal
Clean Air Act requirements by retiring, retrofitting, or repowering 900
megawatts of coal-based power generation from Xcel's Colorado system.
After recent state Public Utilities Commission (PUC) approval of the
Colorado Energy Plan, Xcel plans to retire two more coal units a decade
early and projects that by 2026, nearly 55% of the electricity it
provides to customers will be from renewable resources. The Colorado
Energy Plan was not driven by a legislative mandate, but rather by the
remarkable reductions we have seen in the cost of wind and solar.
Recent bids for new utility scale renewables have come in at about two
cents per kwh for wind combined with battery storage and about 3 cents
for solar--while simply operating existing legacy coal plants is over 4
cents per kwh. A study released earlier this year by Vibrant Clean
Energy concluded that Colorado could close every coal plant in the
state, replace them primarily with new wind and solar, and dramatically
reduce greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation--all while
saving ratepayers more than $2.5 BILLION and having a net increase in
jobs.
Utilities across the state are committing to an ambitious
transition towards renewable energy because they know this is where the
industry is headed--in Colorado and across the nation--and, they want
to thrive as part of the 21st century, clean energy economy. We share
that vision for the state. Xcel Energy has committed to an 80%
reduction in emissions below 2005 levels by 2030 and is striving to
reach 100% by 2050. We worked with Xcel and the legislature this spring
to codify the goal of an 80% reduction by 2030 and create a pathway for
approval of a plan by the state PUC. As part of the same bill, SB19-
236, Colorado now requires the use of a social cost of carbon in
utility planning to make sure that we are considering the very real
costs imposed by carbon pollution. This is an analytical framework that
will allow us to more precisely consider all costs and better inform
our decision-making when deciding on generating resources, as well as
investments in energy efficiency, electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure,
or beneficial electrification. SB 236 also, for the first time, brings
our largest rural utility, Tri-State Generation and Transmission, into
PUC jurisdiction of their electric resource planning. Tri-State
recently announced intentions to develop a Responsible Energy Plan,
designed to establish pathways to comply with the state's carbon
reduction and renewable energy goals. We look forward to engaging with
Tri-State in their planning processes and at the PUC to continue to
progress to an affordable and reliable clean energy future. Other
utilities across the state are also showing leadership. Holy Cross
Energy, the electric utility for several mountain communities in
central Colorado, recently adopted a goal of 70% renewable energy by
2030 and now expects to achieve that goal 9 years ahead of schedule.
Platte River Power Authority in Northern Colorado has also recently
adopted an energy policy calling for a 100% zero carbon energy mix by
2030.
Clean Energy Local Action: Fourteen Colorado towns and counties
have already taken the initiative and adopted the goal of getting 100%
of their electricity from clean renewable energy: Denver, Pueblo,
Boulder, Fort Collins, Summit County, Frisco, Aspen, Glenwood Springs,
Breckenridge, Longmont, Lafayette, Nederland to Golden. These diverse
communities know that protecting Colorado's way of life means doing our
part to combat climate change, and that swiftly adopting renewable
energy in our electricity sector and then extending the impact of that
clean electricity across the economy will protect the health of our
communities, create good-paying jobs, strengthen our economy, and keep
rates low for customers. Our rural electric co-ops are also taking bold
steps. In June 2019, Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association announced
a new goal to provide 80% carbon-free energy to its members by 2030,
joining three other electric coops in Colorado to establish a clean
energy or carbon reduction goal. Delta Montrose Electric Association
also recently announced an agreement to exit Tri-State in order to
pursue higher levels of local, renewable energy generation.
Clean Transportation: Colorado is also taking the lead on moving
towards clean transportation. While electricity generation is our
largest single source of emissions, transportation is a close second.
And while electricity generation is already on a path towards deep
emissions reductions, transportation is not. Added to this, cars and
trucks are one of the two largest sources of ozone precursors, which
contribute to smog on our front range. That is why Colorado has stepped
up to support cleaner vehicles and transportation systems. But we need
the federal government to step up too. The biggest single step that the
federal government has taken on climate was adoption of federal clean
car standards that will cut emissions per mile in half by 2025, while
saving consumers hundreds of billions of dollars in fuel costs. In
2017, a national consulting firm studied Colorado and concluded that a
large-scale transition to EVs by 2050 would create a net savings of $43
billion for Coloradans. Unfortunately, the current administration is
trying to roll back these standards, despite near unanimous opposition
even from the automobile industry.
Last year, Colorado adopted Low Emission Vehicle standards, which
will reduce emissions by over 2 million tons a year of carbon pollution
compared to the proposed rollback--while saving our consumers hundreds
of millions of dollars. We are also in the midst of considering
adoption of zero emission vehicle (ZEV) standards, which will require
automakers to make more EVs available to Colorado consumers.
And, I am proud to announce that earlier this week, state agencies
announced an agreement with the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
and the Global Automobile Alliance, which together represent over 99%
of the vehicle market in Colorado, to support a ZEV standard that works
for the state and for the industry. The proposal will not only increase
ZEV adoption and provide air quality benefits, but also will drive
early ZEV adoption and ensure the automakers can implement the
regulation efficiently. We are hopeful that this signifies a new era of
common-sense cooperation between states and the automobile industry,
working together to reduce emissions.
This progress builds on the fact that Colorado already has the
fourth highest EV market share in the nation. Some people may think of
EVs as something we only see in coastal states or heavily urbanized
states, but, in fact, the mountain west has emerged as an EV hotspot.
Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and Arizona have consistently been in the top
ten states for EV market share, and I am proud that the governors of
every mountain west state--Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Wyoming,
Idaho, Montana and Colorado--have joined together in an eight state
Regional Electric Vehicle West Memorandum of Understanding,
collectively committing to build fast charging along every interstate
highway connecting our states. Colorado signed a contract with the
company ChargePoint in April of this year, and by June 30, 2020, we
should have 33 fast charging stations along major highway corridors.
When combined with fast-charging stations planned by Electrify America,
the program will provide fast-charging every 30-50 miles along
Colorado's major transportation corridors.
Colorado currently has the highest ZEV incentive of any state in
the country ($5,000 per ZEV tax credit), which the legislature recently
extended through 2025. Financial incentives are important to increasing
ZEV sales and are a factor in Colorado having higher sales than all but
three other states.
Colorado is also building out a direct current fast charger network
through the state's major corridors to address ``range anxiety''
allowing the use of EVs for longer trips.
While Colorado is already developing robust electric charging
infrastructure, we passed legislation this year that requires electric
utilities to file transportation electrification plans with the PUC
every three years starting in 2020 to further expand that
infrastructure.
The State is spending the maximum allowable amount of the
Volkswagen Settlement funds on light-duty EV charging infrastructure
(15% or $10.3 million), and an Executive Order I signed in January,
directs State agencies to allocate all remaining Volkswagen Settlement
funds to support vehicle electrification, including electric buses and
school buses. In the executive order, I established a target of nearly
a million EVs on the road in Colorado by 2030.
Just as with electricity generation, technological advances in the
transportation sector are making it possible for us to reduce emissions
while saving money. Even with today's electric grid in Colorado,
powered by nearly 25% renewable energy, it's far more efficient to
drive electric vehicles powered by more efficient utility-scale power
production than a distributed, small scale internal combustion engine.
Our analysis shows that widespread electrification of our
transportation system will save consumers money because of lower fuel
costs, will drive down the cost of electricity because it makes the
grid function more efficiently, and do all this while cleaning our air
and achieving deep reductions in climate pollution.
Move Towards Zero Emissions Buildings: While our electricity and
transportation sectors are the top two sources of climate warming
pollution, fuel use in buildings in our residential, commercial, and
industrial sectors is not far behind and is an area where we need to
make substantive progress. Achieving the state's emission reduction
goals will require significant reductions in emissions in this sector.
Integrating more energy efficiency with the expanded use of clean
electricity as an alternative to burning fossil fuels in buildings
could bring consumer cost savings, enhanced electric grid operations,
and reduced emissions. This past spring, we passed HB19-1260, which
requires that local jurisdictions adopt one of the three most recent
versions of the International Energy Conservation Code, at a minimum,
when updating any other building code. We are also working with local
stakeholders to develop next generation building codes that address
energy efficiency, building electrification, distributed renewables,
and EV charging.
Reducing Emissions from Oil and Gas Development: As we work to
reduce the use of fossil fuels in our electricity, transportation and
building sectors, we must also mitigate methane emissions from oil and
gas extraction and the natural gas fuel cycle. In 2014, Colorado became
the first state in the nation to enact regulations requiring oil and
gas companies to detect and reduce methane emissions. Looking forward,
as part of the passage of SB19-181 (historic oil and gas reform
legislation that protects public safety, health, welfare, and the
environment and reinforces local government's regulatory authority over
the surface impacts of oil and gas development), the Air Quality
Control Commission will soon be adopting additional rules to further
minimize emission of methane and other pollutants from the oil and gas
production process.
Other Emissions Sources: As we look to the required emission
reductions demanded by the latest available climate science, there is
no single sector our strategy that will allow us to achieve our goals.
In addition to the numerous progress and activity that I have already
outlined, we must continue to convene diverse stakeholders to advance
economic and environmental progress in other sectors, such as
agriculture, waste management, and our industrial sector.
2019: a year of action
The 2019 Legislative Session brimmed with incredible clean energy
achievements and was arguably the most productive session in the
history of this state on clean energy and climate action. We have
adopted strong economy-wide targets, outlined in HB19-1261, for
reducing greenhouse gas pollution, with goals of 50% reduction below
2005 levels by 2030 and 90% by 2050, which will lead to coordinated
action by the Air Quality Control Commission and other state agencies
to implement measures to progress towards those goals.
We have empowered the PUC to facilitate a rapid transition to
renewable energy across the state that includes working with our
largest utility to invest in renewable energy and reduce greenhouse gas
pollution 80% by 2030. We're building a regulatory framework that will
enable the PUC to work with our second-largest utility to transition
from coal-fired power to cheaper, cleaner sources of energy.
We are making it easier for individual Coloradans to participate in
this work by expanding access to energy efficiency and community solar
gardens. And, as we continue our work to clean up our electricity
sector, Senate Bills 77 and 239 and House Bill 1159 will further
support the electrification of our transportation sector.
As I previously mentioned, we have put public safety, health,
welfare, and the environment first in the oil and gas sector, and
empowered local governments to make decisions about oil and gas
operations. We are starting rulemaking to implement the direction of
Senate Bill 181 to minimize methane and other emissions from oil and
gas development.
We have unlocked creative financing solutions to help reduce the
cost of retiring coal-fired power plants and we will establish a Just
Transition Office tasked with aligning and delivering programming and
funding to communities and workers impacted by a transition away from
coal-fired electricity, in addition to disproportionately impacted
communities who have borne the costs of pollution.
In addition, through Senate Bill 96, my administration and the
legislature took steps to ensure a more consistent and robust tracking
and reporting of Colorado's greenhouse gas emissions, which is
foundational to effectively implementing a wide range of policies and
programs designed to allow the state to cost-effectively meet its
emission reduction goals.
We have worked together combining shared values with incredibly
diverse strengths to prioritize the future of our great state. We have
proved that we can take bold, decisive action on climate and clean
energy. This legislative session has put Colorado on the right path.
coloradans delivering results
My Administration is inheriting and building upon many years of
Colorado's clean energy leadership working to reduce greenhouse gas
pollution, improve air quality, and save money for Coloradans.
Shifting to clean energy has been an economic engine in Colorado.
According to one analysis,\1\ Colorado has roughly 57,000 clean energy
jobs including 34,342 Energy Efficiency jobs, 7,819 solar jobs, 7,320
wind jobs, and 2,713 clean vehicle jobs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Energy and Employment Report 2019. Colorado. Last accessed
on 7/29/19. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/
5a98cf80ec4eb7c5cd928c61/t/5c7f4096e79c70c65fe31745/1551843478412/
Colorado.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2004, Colorado's electricity generation mix was 75% coal and
roughly 25% natural gas. In 2017, the most recent year for which we
have data, Colorado has 54% coal, 22% natural gas, and 20% renewable
energy. That is a 20% increase in renewable energy and a 21% reduction
in coal energy generation. During the same period, from 2004 to 2017,
Colorado has seen a 13% decline in carbon emissions from electricity
generation in the state.
In 1990, electricity generation accounted for 43% of Colorado's
greenhouse gas emissions. By 2015, the last year for which there is
available data, electricity accounted for just 34% of the state's
greenhouse gas emissions.
In July, the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment
released the draft Greenhouse Gas Inventory 2019 Update.\2\ Colorado
greenhouse gas emissions increased between 1990 and 2010 and decreased
between 2010 and 2015. While we need to make much more progress to
achieve our goals, we should also celebrate that this is the first time
that the inventory shows a decline in emissions. Emissions are
projected to continue decreasing, dropping below 2005 levels by 2030.
Figure 1 shows a graphical summary of estimated Colorado greenhouse gas
emissions by sector, including projections to 2020 and 2030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment. DRAFT
Colorado Greenhouse Gas Inventory 2019. Last accessed on 7/29/19.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1120Ldxmec GTuf7uil9l6YmjOQonYOnxV/
view.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
roadmap to 100% renewable energy and bold climate action
My administration is committed to pushing Colorado forward on the
path to achieving 100% Renewable Energy by 2040. In June, when I signed
seven climate and energy bills at a community solar garden, I released
my administration's Roadmap to 100% Renewable Energy by 2040 and Bold
Climate Action.\3\ This pledge is motivated by the moral imperative to
fight climate change and curb pollution of our air and water and, as a
governor of the great State of Colorado, to protect and preserve what
is special to us here in the West.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Office of the Governor of Colorado. Roadmap to 100% Renewable
Energy by 2040 and Bold Climate Action. Last accessed on 7/29/19.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/
0B7w3bkFgg92dMkpxY3VsNk5nVGZGOHJGRUV5VnJwQ1U4VWtF/view.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The clean energy transition is also an opportunity to drive
innovation and build Colorado's economy by continuing our leadership
role in the green-energy economy. This transition is not just about
jobs--the transition to cleaner electricity and transportation will
help businesses and homeowners save money by switching to lower-cost,
clean energy resources.
The policies adopted in this legislative session provide the
foundation for much higher levels of renewable energy integration, but
additional strategies will be needed to get to 100% by 2040. Given the
shift that is already underway in Colorado's electricity sector, it has
never been more important than now to focus on reducing greenhouse gas
emissions from other sectors in the state. It is going to take the
perspective, expertise, and commitment from diverse voices across the
state to forge a renewable energy future that works for all of
Colorado.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Together, we can do our part to fight climate change, improve air
quality and the health of our communities, diversify and strengthen our
economy across the state, and ensure the good-paying jobs of the
quickly growing green energy economy are created here in Colorado.
colorado--a model for the nation
When it comes to clean energy action, I believe Colorado is a model
for the nation. I have no doubt we can take bold action at the federal
level as well.
I was glad to see the House pass H.R. Bill 9 to keep America in the
Paris Climate Agreement, and I urge the Senate to take it up. There is
no economic or moral reason for the United States--the most powerful
economy in the world--to stick our heads in the sand while 185 other
countries lead the way on combating climate change and developing
renewable energy.
The United States is not a nation that backs down from a challenge.
We are a nation of leaders, of doers, of dreamers. In America, we get
to choose our own destiny.
Thank you again for allowing me to testify this morning. I look
forward to answering your questions.
[Applause.]
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you, Governor, for your impressive
testimony and your bold action since you have taken office.
At this time, I will recognize myself for 5 minutes to
begin the questions.
So, to prepare for this trip, I took a look at the state of
Colorado's energy mix over the past decades, and what struck me
is how quickly renewable energy from various sources have
replaced coal, really just in the past 7 to 10 years. It has
been a remarkable switch. You are not where you need to be,
however.
What lessons can we draw as we develop bold climate action
plans and policies at the national level? What are the lessons
that you think we should write into that national climate
action plan? What has worked here? What was the impetus? Give
us a little guidance on where we should go nationally.
Governor Polis. The voters in our state showed a leadership
role by passing a state renewable portfolio standard, and
Colorado has exceeded that in recent years. We are at about 25
percent renewable energy for the grid. We have a different mix
of utilities, municipal providers and co-ops, and in some areas
of the state it is even higher, and we know that we can do even
more.
At the same time that we have grown our renewable energy,
we also have in the Xcel service area some of the lowest
electricity rates in the nation for consumers and businesses.
We have also incorporated friendly policies to support
distributed solar energy, including making sure that the feed-
in rate is fair for people, and have allowed innovative
financing mechanisms and leveraged Federal financing mechanisms
like the PACE financing mechanism, which, if expanded to
residential in an easier way, would further facilitate
distributed solar.
So we look forward to continuing to work with the Federal
Government, as well as our mixture of utilities, to help get
them to the next level of renewable energy.
Chairwoman Castor. I listened very closely to the Ranking
Member, and he is very intelligent on these issues. But one
place where I tend to disagree with him and that your testimony
raised is, as we transition to clean energy, it doesn't
necessarily mean higher energy costs for our neighbors and for
businesses. Would you expound on that point? Because in your
testimony you said it has actually helped to lower electricity
costs.
Governor Polis. Yes, renewable energy is less expensive
today. So coal-powered plants often produce energy at 20 or 30
percent higher costs than renewable energy. It is really a
question of how we can distribute those sunk costs that exist
in the capitalization of coal into saving money with renewable
energy. Technologies are improving, prices are going down. In
the long run we don't only save money but we are also saving
money that would have been used to recover from climate-related
natural disasters and health issues caused by both poor air
quality as well as climate change.
So it has really been a matter of working with the various
forms of utilities we have to accelerate the retirement of
costly coal assets, to recognize savings for consumers sooner,
and environmental benefits sooner.
Chairwoman Castor. And government can't do this alone. Give
us a few examples of the collaboration between the State of
Colorado, local communities, and the private sector.
Governor Polis. So, many of our local communities have led
the way, and you will be hearing from some. But we have 14
cities and counties across our state with even more aggressive
goals for 100 percent renewable energy than the state as a
whole. I mentioned that we have one municipal utility already
at 100 percent. We have a second in Steamboat Springs that has
announced their plans to get to 100 percent this year or early
next year.
And they found a partner in the state. So it is working
with the local communities, the municipal providers, the rural
electric coops, and of course through our regulatory authority
at the Public Utilities Commission, our investor-owned
utilities, to help make sure that this transition benefits
customers, benefits workers, and also leads to the quickest
possible transition to clean energy.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you, Governor.
At this time I recognize the Ranking Member for 5 minutes
for questions.
Mr. Graves. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Governor, thanks again for being here. It is great to see
you again.
Yesterday we were at the National Renewable Energy Lab,
just to give those folks a shout-out again. One of the efforts
that they are working on right now is looking at how you
position the wind turbines for renewable energy, both the
configuration, the pitch and yaw of the blades, and everything
else. They have been able to increase the energy generation by
14 percent just by changing the angles. I mean, it is really
impressive.
You noted that the energy production costs from some
renewables is cost competitive. When you look in a vacuum just
at generation, one of the challenges we have is that you are
going from these large-scale coal, gas, whatever-fired energy
plants to perhaps distributed facilities by having a wind farm
over here and having a solar farm over here. The cost of
generation is one thing, but we have to fundamentally rethink
our electric grid.
How do we do that? I mean, the cost of that potentially is
going to dwarf the cost of building some of the renewable
energy facilities. How do we address those costs of the grid
infrastructure?
Governor Polis. Well, firstly, I am thrilled that your
committee was able to see some of our Federal dollars at work
at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and other
facilities, as well as university grants across the country.
The Federal government is leading the way in cutting-edge
research to improve the efficiency of renewable energy
generation, as well as storage, which is the second part of the
question.
For a reliable grid, as we increasingly incorporate solar
and wind energy, the exponential reductions in storage costs
have an enormous boom. And often when utilities are pricing out
solar and wind, they are adding in that storage component.
So, in fact, in a recent RFP where Xcel priced out wind
plus storage, it still came in at about 20 percent less than
existing coal power, not to mention new coal power, which would
cost even more. Nobody is building new coal. But wind plus
storage to ensure reliability of the grid priced out at a
better cost.
So those technologies continue to improve. We appreciate
the investment not only of NREL but also of sources like ARPA-
E, which have invested in storage technology companies,
including some here in Colorado, and that is a very appropriate
role for the Federal Government, to support the basic research
that will help lead this transformation.
Mr. Graves. I would love to continue working with you on
the infrastructure side of it. I think it is an under-
appreciated component. But when you look at electrification of
vehicles and other things, some estimate that (and I know that
Colorado has been one of the leaders there) you are looking at
a doubling or tripling of the capacity, the demand for
electricity. Our existing grid simply can't handle it. It is
not designed for this generation network. It is not designed
for that volume or capacity of electricity.
One other thing. In your testimony, you note that since
2010 Colorado has doubled the renewable energy production here,
and has quadrupled crude oil production here. If you look
globally--and we have had witness after witness come before our
committees that have talked about how just stopping oil and gas
production does not in any way decrease demand, it just means
that the production will come from somewhere else. And in
talking to experts, things like trucks, rail, ships, the large
ships, we don't have the technology today to be able to fuel
those through renewable energy sources. The power is too great,
so we don't have alternatives.
So what role do you see the United States playing in
recognizing that there is continued demand for conventional
energy sources? What role do we play in that, recognizing, just
like you noted, you all have been one of the leaders in
reducing emissions, fugitive emissions from methane and others.
As we are going to hear later, natural gas has actually been
one of the leading causes of our emission reductions in the
United States.
How do we look at this globally and recognize some of the
resources here, and use them appropriately?
Governor Polis. First, on your previous question, I want to
be clear. Electric vehicles and our plans to aggressively
increase their use are also an important part of load balance
and distributed storage. So they have benefits to the grid in
terms of having more electric vehicles in use in terms of when
and how they charge and/or store electricity in a distributed
manner.
Yes, we are leading the way in Colorado with our efforts
around Senate Bill 181 to reduce emissions in our extraction
industry. It takes additional steps to minimize emissions of
methane and other pollutants from the oil and gas production
process. In fact, the Federal methane rules were initially
modeled after some of the work of my predecessor, John
Hickenlooper.
The new efforts that passed this legislative session, in
addition to further protecting public safety, health, and
welfare in the extraction industry, also reinforced the local
government's authority over surface impacts of oil and gas
development and helped create a better balance between the
existing markets and the need to act on climate change.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you.
Representative Casten, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Casten. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Governor.
I also want to thank CU-Boulder. My parents are both CU
buffs. They met and fell in love in their junior year, so I can
say with absolute clarity that but for CU-Boulder, I would not
be here today. [Laughter.]
[Applause.]
Mr. Casten. I want to thank you, Governor, for raising the
point about the economics of clean energy, and I want to pick
up on a conversation we had briefly last night. Anything you do
meaningfully to lower the cost of energy and lower
CO2 are synonymous, because you can't lower
CO2 without burning less fuel, and fuel isn't free.
And if anybody grapples with that, all you have to do is ask
yourself if you have a solar panel on your roof, do you ever
wake up in the morning and say, ``Boy, the price of electricity
is down today, I should probably turn off my solar panel''? But
at a coal plant, there is somebody whose job every day,
sometimes multiple people whose job it is to say, ``What is the
forward price of power, and does it make sense for me to run
tomorrow?''
We have seen in the last decade a steady reduction in the
amount of power from coal because it is not economic, and it is
being squeezed out by sources that are much cheaper to run.
Now, that is an opportunity. There are some challenges within
there, but one of the challenges that I really want to give you
a chance to talk about is that in the regulated utility model,
the way we electrify our whole country, utilities earn a return
on their invested capital. If you retire an asset before you
fully return the capital, you bring forward all the unamortized
capital expense.
So there are a number of utilities who, in thinking about
whether they will retire an uneconomic asset that once it is
retired will lower CO2 emissions, that decision has
the impact of increasing electric rates.
You have done something really innovative here to address
that problem, and I just would like you to tell us about it,
and with the specific idea of if what you have done might be
applicable to Federal policy.
Governor Polis. Yes, and I would encourage you to look at
additional Federal policies, including tax policies, that
encourage financial innovation, because I think what you hit
upon and is very true is that this is largely a matter that
through innovative financial mechanisms we can solve. The clean
energy is less expensive today. The question is how do you
account for the stranded assets in costly coal and other forms
of non-renewable energy.
So in Colorado, we move forward with, now under new
legislation, allowing for securitization of stranded assets. So
effectively we can borrow against the future savings stream to
accelerate the retirement of coal assets today, and to help
fund a just transition for workers who work in coal-fired
plants, and recognize savings for ratepayers sooner rather than
later.
Mr. Casten. Could we do that federally?
Governor Polis. There could be Federal policies that
facilitate states doing that, and we would be happy to look
into what some of those might be and give you some
recommendations.
Mr. Casten. Thank you.
The second question, and you know this all too well--and I
take the point that while Americans have been leaders on a
whole host of issues in climate, our Federal government not so
much. We have seen cities and states step up to fill the
leadership void as the Federal government has backed away. I
was involved in setting up the Regional Greenhouse Gas
Initiative in New England a decade ago. California, of course,
followed with AB-32.
Let's plan for success in this moment. Let's assume that
the exceptional leadership on this panel is able to persuade
our colleagues in Washington to finally take the kind of bold
leadership that we need at the Federal level, and let's assume
that once we do that we push a standard that is even more
ambitious than what has been done in the states.
As you have sat on both sides of this question, how should
we be thinking about that in a way that expands on ambition but
at the same time doesn't frustrate the fact that many people in
the states have already made long-term commitments to reduce
CO2 or have binding contracts with renewable
portfolio standards? How can we align that with state policy?
Governor Polis. We hope that your hypothetical becomes
reality, and we are celebrating the success of your committee's
initiatives sooner rather than later.
Our challenge at the state level is not too different
because we have many local jurisdictions within the state. So
how do we make sure that we encourage and facilitate
communities like Boulder and communities like Aspen and Summit
County that have even more aggressive climate goals with local
buy-in than the state and then work to make sure that the whole
state moves along as well?
It is really a matter of both. Of course, I hope that the
Senate acts on House Resolution 9 with regard to rejoining the
Paris Climate Accords. I hope that we set bold goals at the
Federal level, as well as partner with states and communities
who choose to pursue a renewable energy future even faster. So
we really have the same issue in many ways at the state level,
where we have over 14 communities with aggressive goals. We
have a specific initiative to partner with them and help them
achieve their goals for their area of jurisdiction, as well as
making sure we bring along the rest of the state.
Mr. Casten. Thank you.
I yield back.
Chairwoman Castor. Congressman Neguse, you are recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you again, Governor, for being here today, for
spending so much time with us, and for your testimony and your
leadership.
I also appreciate you recognizing the local leadership. One
of the reasons that I advocated for the Select Committee to be
located here for its first field hearing was because of the 14
cities and towns across our state who have made this commitment
to a bold, 100 percent renewable energy transition. So looking
forward to their testimony as well, and I appreciate the
exchange because I think there are already a number of
different areas in which the committee, I suspect, will follow
up, that this will be the beginning of a conversation, not the
end, for regulatory reform, something that I know interests the
Ranking Member and me as well in terms of modernization and so
forth.
I want to talk a little bit about the legislative session
this past year. A lot of the conversations we are having right
now in Washington are around the just transition and how do we
make sure that folks who are working in conventional energy and
fossil fuel production can transition to a stable job. My sense
of it is that the legislature actually took some steps this
past session on this front: House Bill 19-1314, Just Transition
From Coal-Based Electrical Energy Economy (that you signed into
law a few months ago). I am wondering if you can share some
lessons learned from that particular piece of legislation, how
it is being implemented, and perhaps takeaways that we can
glean at the Federal level.
Governor Polis. I believe that Colorado is the first state
in the nation to formally establish an Office of Just
Transition to take a look at all of the programs and funding
within relevant state agencies specifically through the lens of
supporting communities and workers that are impacted by a
changing energy sector. There are enormous opportunities in
clean and renewable energy. The challenge is how do we align
those opportunities with people who work in the fossil fuel
sector.
We are convening broad perspectives to inform what kinds of
programs and funding we should be doing to do right by
Coloradans. There are workers with unique skills and expertise
in energy. Many of that ports over to the clean energy economy
or other fast-growing sectors, and we need to make sure that
the workers are part of building our clean energy economy.
We also have to look at the impact on communities that are
disproportionately related to coal. For instance, in Craig,
Colorado, the largest employer is the coal plant there. We want
to make sure that we can create a future that works for Craig
rather than keep our head in the sand and allow the larger
economic forces to hurt not just the workers but continue to
hurt the climate.
Mr. Neguse. I appreciate that, Governor, and I think that
might be an area in which we could follow up with your policy
team in terms of replicating some of what you have done at the
Federal level. Your point about there being immeasurable
opportunities in the renewable energy sector is well stated and
something we heard yesterday when we were touring one of the
Federal labs in particular, just about the growth potential and
a manufacturing facility that is being opened in Ohio, in the
heartland of America, for solar built here in the United
States, so a lot to follow up on that front.
I want to also ask you about another bill that was passed
this session, and that is Senate Bill 19-236, which you
mentioned in your written testimony. This is around the social
cost of carbon and ensuring that that is playing a role in
utility planning at the Public Utilities Commission and the
Department of Regulatory Agencies. I am curious if you can
expound on the bill, the basis for the bill, the impetus for it
and how it is being implemented, and whether it has had an
impact yet in terms of the ERPs being filed by the regulated
monopolies.
Governor Polis. Sure. Again, first to further elaborate on
your previous question, when you look at, for instance, areas
that have high employment and coal power production, inevitably
they lay along rail lines. So you look at what other types of
opportunities in advanced manufacturing can have a sustainable
competitive advantage because of the location, because of the
availability and training of the workers, because of the access
to rail for moving products.
You mentioned the social cost of carbon. A traditional
approach in any economics course taught here at the University
of Colorado or other universities talks about economic
externalities and how do you measure them, right? So the issue
with coal power production is that the true cost of coal--
namely, the climate cost, air pollution cost--is not factored
into the price that is received. So it is simply an effort at
the state level to make sure that our regulators include the
social cost of carbon, trying to account for the externalities
of production through coal power.
Mr. Neguse. I know my colleague, Representative Casten, is
working on a bill similar to what Colorado has done, so we look
forward to partnering on that front.
Governor Polis. We would appreciate Federal examination of
economic externalities, environmental and climate related, and
using the social costs of carbon in evaluating those at the
Federal level would be a big step forward.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you. Thank you, Governor.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you.
Well, I am pleased to welcome my colleague from the Energy
and Commerce Committee, who I have served with for a number of
years, a real outspoken advocate for climate solutions. Thank
you, Congresswoman DeGette, for coming over and joining us this
morning. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. DeGette. Thank you so much, Madam Chair, and thank you
for letting me waive on to this committee.
And thanks also to my wonderful and new colleague here from
the 2nd Congressional District. I am really proud of him for
being a member of the Select Committee.
As the Chair said, I am a member of the House Energy and
Commerce Committee with you, and the Natural Resources
Committee with Congressman Graves and Congressman Neguse. These
are the two committees that are going to be writing the
legislation based on this committee's findings. So I was really
honored to be asked to join you today, and I am very proud of
our wonderful governor who I served with for many years in
Congress, and I am glad you are here today because Colorado
really is one of the national leaders in addressing climate
change.
I want to talk about one specific issue that we are
grappling with, and that is Colorado's methane waste standards.
You know, methane is the primary ingredient of natural gas, and
as such, it is used to heat and provide electricity to tens of
millions of American homes. But when methane is wasted in the
environment, it is 80 times worse than carbon dioxide in its
short-term impact on the climate.
Now, Colorado has strong methane waste prevention rules,
and the EPA and BLM emulated our rules under the Obama
Administration. But now the Trump Administration is gutting the
EPA and BLM methane rule. So I am working on legislation to
pass the Methane Waste Prevention Act that reinstates this
important rule at the national level.
Governor, I am wondering if you can tell us how important
it would be for Congress to enact strong methane waste
prevention requirements at the national level to help
supplement what Colorado is doing.
Governor Polis. You know, the Methane Waste Prevention Act
would reinstate the Methane Waste and Pollution Prevention
Standards that were established by the BLM and EPA in 2016, in
addition to requiring the Bureau of Land Management to issue
new rules to further reduce the waste of natural gas from
Federal leases and to enhance reporting requirements for new
and existing wells.
As you know, emissions of methane and other pollutants
associated with fossil fuel development contribute to the
threat of climate change, as well as air pollution, and also
are a waste of valuable resources belonging to the American
public. Congress should, at the very least, reinstate the
standards established in 2016 that I would add are in many ways
based on Colorado's first-in-the-nation emission rules. We are
going further in Colorado with Senate Bill 181, which takes
additional steps to minimize emission of methane and other
pollutants from the oil and gas production process.
Ms. DeGette. And has the implementation of those standards
gone pretty smoothly?
Governor Polis. Absolutely. Colorado continues to have
strong growth in all economic sectors, and as I said, we are
using that as a building block for additional efforts for
methane reduction and other pollutant reduction with the new
legislation that was passed this last session.
Ms. DeGette. Thank you. One of the other issues that I have
been reading about and is an interesting issue is trying to
take carbon out of the atmosphere, and one of the ways we do
that is actually through protecting national forests and other
public lands.
[Applause.]
Ms. DeGette. And the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Department
estimates that the total economic contribution of outdoor
recreation is about $62 billion statewide, and it has created
more than 500,000 jobs. Of course, it also protects forestry
and other places that can really help with carbon reduction.
I am wondering if you can talk for a minute about investing
in sustainable economic drivers like outdoor recreation in
places like Colorado.
Governor Polis. So, we formed a Climate Cabinet, which is
an interagency working group of all the agencies working on
climate, not just the agencies you might expect like the
Department of Energy and Transportation, but Department of
Agriculture and Department of Natural Resources, because you
are absolutely right. Among the many reasons for protecting our
public lands, of course, is that they are enormous economic
drivers of jobs in Colorado, a big part of our quality of life
and why we choose to live here, yet another purpose is carbon
sequestration.
Ms. DeGette. That is right.
Governor Polis. It makes for healthy forests and healthy
soil.
Ms. DeGette. And as you know, Governor, Congressman Neguse
and I have a set of companion bills. One of them used to be
your bill when you were in Congress, the CORE Act. The other
one is my Colorado Wilderness Act that, if passed together,
these bills would protect about a million acres of Colorado
wilderness and BLM and Forest Service land.
Do you think we should be doing more in Colorado to protect
our incredible outdoor recreation resources?
Governor Polis. Yes. I would encourage the Committee on
Natural Resources to continue their work on establishing
additional wilderness areas both in Colorado as well as other
areas of the country. The economic benefits to Colorado of our
public lands, protecting the famed training grounds of the 10th
Mountain Division in Camp Hale, and also as part of the overall
climate solution with regard to sequestration.
Ms. DeGette. Thank you so much.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Castor. Well, thank you, Governor, for helping
us kick off our first field hearing of the Select Committee on
the Climate Crisis. How appropriate on Colorado Day. Thank you
very much for your testimony. Thank you for your leadership.
Keep up the good work.
[Applause.]
Chairwoman Castor. Now we will move to our second panel. We
will give them a minute to come forward.
[Pause.]
Chairwoman Castor. Without objection, all witness
statements are hereby entered into the record.
Can we come to order, please? Let's have order in our
committee room so we can get to our next panel.
I would like to welcome some of our local leaders who are
going to give us their expert testimony here, so let me
introduce them to you.
The Honorable Suzanne Jones is the Mayor of Boulder,
Colorado, and has served as a member of the Boulder City
Council since 2011. In addition to serving as mayor, she is
also the Executive Director of Ecocycle, a community non-profit
focused on recycling, composting, and other zero-waste efforts.
Previously, Mayor Jones was the Central Rockies Regional
Director at the Wilderness Society.
The Honorable Wade Troxell is the Mayor of Fort Collins,
Colorado. Mayor Troxell was elected in 2015 and is now serving
his second term. In addition, he is an Associate Professor of
Mechanical Engineering and the Director of the Center for
Network Distributed Energy at Colorado State University.
Mr. Cary Weiner is a state energy specialist at Colorado
State University Extension and the Director of CSU's Rural
Energy Center. Mr. Weiner helps Colorado residents make
informed decisions about energy solutions. He conducts economic
feasibility assessments for on-farm renewable energy and
conducts community and local energy assessments.
Mr. Chris Wright is the Chief Executive Officer of Liberty
Oilfield Services. He is also the Executive Chairman of Liberty
Resources. Previously, Mr. Wright served as the Chief Executive
Officer of Pinnacle Technologies.
And Ms. Heidi VanGenderen is the first Chief Sustainability
Officer at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Previously,
she was appointed by President Obama to serve as the Director
of Public Engagement and External Affairs at the U.S.
Department of Energy. She has also served as a senior advisor
on climate change and energy for former Colorado Governor Bill
Ritter, where she helped develop Colorado's first Climate
Action Plan.
[Applause.]
Chairwoman Castor. Welcome to all of our witnesses.
[Applause.]
Chairwoman Castor. Mayor Jones, you are now recognized for
a 5-minute presentation.
STATEMENTS OF SUZANNE JONES, MAYOR OF BOULDER, COLORADO; WADE
TROXELL, MAYOR OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO; CARY WEINER, DIRECTOR
OF COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY'S RURAL ENERGY CENTER; CHRIS
WRIGHT, CEO OF LIBERTY OILFIELD SERVICES; HEIDI VANGENDEREN,
CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO
BOULDER
STATEMENT OF SUZANNE JONES
Ms. Jones. Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and
distinguished members of this Select Committee, thank you so
much for coming to Boulder for this opportunity to testify.
I am Suzanne Jones, Mayor of Boulder, and I am honored to
share this panel with my esteemed colleague to discuss our
climate accomplishments and talk about galvanizing a clean
energy future.
Like most cities, we are passionate about our community and
its future, but already climate change is taking a toll.
Temperatures in Colorado have risen significantly. The number
of days over 95 degrees has doubled since 2000 and is on pace
to double again. In the past 20 years we have had four costly
wildfires in the Boulder area, and floods in 2013 caused
extensive damage across Boulder County and some $4 billion of
damage in the State of Colorado.
So, we anticipate continued drastic changes to our
environment, economy, and way of life unless we, at all levels
of government and across all sectors, act decisively now. First
we must quickly transition to 100 percent renewable energy. At
the same time, we must electrify all aspects of our lives, from
heating our buildings to powering our transportation, and we
know these actions will result in significant benefits beyond
just emission reductions. If we remove air pollutants, we save
on health care costs. When we stabilize utility costs, we can
pass those savings on to households; and, of course, we are
creating more jobs and new technologies. So we should seize the
power, the economic potential of this transition.
And we have already begun this work. Here in Boulder, we
have been leading on climate action in numerous ways. With
repeated direction from our voters, we are actively exploring
the creation of a city-run and community-owned electric utility
so we have more control of our energy future. We co-developed
the National Energy Advising Model, with 18,000 participating
homes and businesses. We are now saving millions of kilowatt
hours per year.
We developed an aggressive building code, resulting in more
than half of our newly-built homes in recent years being net
zero. We have one of the highest per capita rates of solar
energy in the country, with 39 megawatts currently installed in
homes and businesses.
We co-founded a 28-member coalition of Colorado cities and
counties called the Colorado Communities for Climate Action, or
CC4CA, and together we are successfully advocating for climate
action at the state legislature.
Also, using compost and other regenerative agricultural
techniques, we are implementing state-of-the-art carbon
sequestration efforts designed to pull carbon out of the
atmosphere while also improving soil health and agricultural
productivity. And we have reduced greenhouse gas emissions 16
percent even as our population and economy grew.
While we are very proud of these accomplishments, we have
so much more to do, and we have some lessons to share that we
have learned along the way.
First off, we need systemic change. Choosing a low-emission
lifestyle must be easy, appealing, and make financial sense. We
cannot continue to rely on voluntary behavior change alone.
Systemic change means reimagining the underpinning laws,
infrastructure, and economy of our entire energy system.
Second, this must be a just transition. As we discussed, it
must involve fossil fuel-dependent communities. It also needs
to address vulnerable populations who are particularly impacted
by declining air quality, rising food and energy costs, and
extreme weather events. So racial and economic equity must be
at the center of all climate work.
[Applause.]
Ms. Jones. Third, we need new robust financial tools for
climate adaptation projects that balance up-front costs with
the long-term benefits.
Fourth, despite our successes, progress has been too slow.
Not only must we address additional sectors such as material
management to reduce waste and create circular economies, we
also know that carbon capture and sequestration is now
essential.
Finally, the scale of the climate crisis demands decisive
state and Federal action. As discussed, the city is thrilled
that we have a dozen new climate and energy laws in the State
of Colorado, and we are proud to have participated in their
creation and passage, but we need more. Moving forward, the
city joins CC4CA in advocating for implementing the Colorado
Climate Plan, increasing consumer energy choice, strengthening
oversight of oil and gas drilling, including upholding local
drilling regulations and moratoria, and other efforts to limit
global temperature rise.
And at the Federal level, we support efforts to achieve
systemic, long-term emission reductions and promote the clean
energy transition, including leveling the playing field for all
energy sources, making substantial investment in clean energy
infrastructure, including advanced grids, battery storage, and
EV charging. We support expanding fuel efficiency and emission
standards for both light and heavy-duty vehicles, pricing
carbon emissions through a carbon tax or a cap and trade
program, and finally expanding support for healthy soil and
carbon sequestration efforts.
Let me end by expressing my deep appreciation to the
committee for elevating the urgency of the climate crisis.
Throughout our nation's history, the Federal government has
from time to time stepped up to major environmental crises.
Whether it was the Dust Bowl, whether it was the burning of the
Cuyahoga River, whether it was the hole in the ozone, we have
done it before and we need to do it again. It is really time
for Federal action to help harness our country's innovation and
address this existential crisis. And if we do so and do so
quickly, we will realize lasting benefits to our environment,
public health, and our economy.
So let's be bolder, as we say here. [Laughter.]
Ms. Jones. And on behalf of the Boulder community, thank
you so much for this opportunity, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The statement of Ms. Jones follows:]
__________
Testimony of Suzanne Jones
Mayor, City of Boulder, Colorado
U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
August 1, 2019
introduction
Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves and distinguished members of
this select committee, good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify today before the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis on the
subject, ``Colorado's Roadmap for Clean Energy Action: Lessons from
State and Local Leaders.''
I am Suzanne Jones, Mayor of Boulder, Colorado. I want to welcome
you to our great city and thank you for holding your first field
hearing here. As leaders in local climate action, the Boulder community
is honored to discuss our accomplishments, challenges and ideas for
addressing the climate crisis with you and the American people.
Today, I'd like to share Boulder's perspective on the importance of
climate and clean energy action at the local level--and the urgent need
for equivalent leadership and action at the federal level.
Specifically, I will describe the urgent threats our communities face,
the opportunities and benefits of responsive actions, a brief overview
of Boulder's environmental and climate legacy that has given us decades
of lessons learned, and my thoughts on the path forward to achieving
our carbon-free energy and climate goals.
As I will emphasize, this path forward must include all of us, at
all levels of government, acting decisively and urgently to combat the
existential threats posed by climate change and achieve a cleaner,
healthier and more just energy system.
the threats
Boulder is a community that embraces innovation and seeks answers
to hard problems, with our national labs, vibrant start-ups, large
manufacturing companies and Colorado's flagship university, the
University of Colorado. We are blessed to call this place home, and
like so many communities across the country, we are passionate about
protecting and preserving it for future generations.
There is global recognition and consensus that the climate is
changing and will continue to change. It is now just a question of how
much, when and whether catastrophic impacts can be avoided. In Boulder,
the urgent threat of climate change is challenging our ability to
ensure that our city remains a safe and vibrant place to live. Boulder
has already experienced a range of climate-related impacts, including
temperature and weather extremes, increased wildfire and drought,
species disruptions and air quality concerns.
Since 1983, average temperatures in Colorado have risen more than 2
Fahrenheit and are continuing to warm, with Colorado experiencing some
of the fastest-warming summers in the United States. We are seeing more
destructive wildfires, more severe droughts and changing precipitation
patterns. We have had four costly wildfires and a major flood in the
past 20 years alone.
The 2010 Fourmile Canyon fire burned 6,200 acres and was the most
destructive wildfire in Boulder County's history, burning hundreds of
homes. The September 2013 flood swept away roads, bridges and homes
across Boulder County, and the 2013 floods across Colorado caused
nearly $4 billion in damage. Climate scientists have found that the
severe effects of the 2013 flood were enhanced by human-caused climate
change. And due to milder winters, the mountain pine beetle has
decimated more than four million acres of forest across the state.
There are also significant economic threats to consider, as the
cost of adapting to climate change will be substantial. In Boulder
County alone, analysts conservatively estimate \1\ at least $100 to 150
million of additional, non-disaster costs to taxpayers between now and
2050 as a result of the need to adapt to increased threats from
wildfires, heat waves and extreme weather. Specifically:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Chinowsky, Paul S. The Impact of Climate Change: Project
Adaptation Costs for Boulder County, Colorado (2018) https://
assets.bouldercounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/resilient-
analytics-report-impacts-of-climate-change-boulder-county-colorado.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The projected damage from wildfires will increase by
almost 50% from 2020 to 2050. Mitigation efforts to prevent additional
property damage to privately-owned homes alone are projected to total
upwards of $20 million.
Increasing temperatures will impact public health costs
due to extreme heat events and extended growing seasons, with potential
increases in allergy and asthma symptoms.
More intense, short-duration precipitation events will
impact urban drainage systems, increasing the likelihood of localized
flooding.
The projected annual road maintenance cost per mile of
road could increase from $650 per mile historically to $1,130 per mile
by 2030 due to increased damages from higher temperatures and changes
in precipitation and flooding events.
Projected improvements to Boulder County bridges could
exceed $68 million.
Government-owned buildings in Boulder County will
experience a cumulative increase in cooling costs of 31-45% by 2030
with an increase of 54-75% by 2050.
Such estimates do not include the additional emergency response and
recovery costs of future natural disasters, which we know will come.
Climate change will likely also impact macro-level factors such as food
prices, economic stability and increased risk of contagious vector-
borne diseases. Simply put, cities can't afford the extreme weather
events and climate change impacts that scientists are predicting and
that we have already begun to experience.
Further, many in our communities are at a disproportionately
greater risk to the effects of climate change. Seniors, children and
people with lower incomes are particularly impacted by the cost of
recovering from events, declining air quality and rising energy and
food costs.
In short, without significantly drawing down carbon from the
atmosphere, we anticipate continued drastic and possibly catastrophic
changes in our environment, economy and way of life.
the opportunities
Though the threats from climate change are daunting and the rapid
shift to a carbon-free energy system will be challenging, we are
presented with a real opportunity for Boulder and other cities to
strengthen our communities and improve quality of life through the
process of climate mitigation and adaptation.
Based on the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) report \2\, leading cities across the country and the world are
quickly mobilizing to respond to the accelerated sense of urgency
combined with the magnitude of carbon reductions needed. In Boulder and
elsewhere, achieving the 1.5+C temperature goal will require:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ IPCC, 2018: Summary for Policymakers. In: Global Warming of
1.5+C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5+C
above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission
pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the
threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to
eradicate poverty. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/summary-for-policy-
makers/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly shifting to a carbon-free energy system;
Accelerating existing greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction
goals to the goal of achieving net zero emissions;
Developing carbon sequestration/negative carbon
strategies; and
Focusing beyond community boundaries in setting
goals and tracking progress to achieve systems-level change.
From an emissions perspective, our energy system--from how we power
our homes and businesses, to how we get around--is the single-greatest
opportunity to draw down carbon. We know that we need to rapidly shift
to a carbon-free energy system, and we're not alone. Many localities
have announced 100% clean energy or renewables goals, and momentum is
building. In Colorado alone, Boulder is joined by 11 other cities and
counties that have made community-wide commitments to transition to
100% clean, renewable energy no later than 2050, some as soon as 2030.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Rapidly transitioning to an energy system that runs on 100%
renewable energy means quickly ending the use of fossil fuels. Our
energy future will run on the abundant and increasingly cheap renewable
resources like the wind, water and the sun, laying the foundation for
the electrification of all our energy needs, including heating and
mobility. And at the same time, we must increase the energy efficiency
of homes, businesses and other buildings, and adopt the widespread use
of batteries to store the energy from renewables.
This transition provides a chance to improve many aspects of our
everyday lives. It will remove pollutants from the air we breathe
inside and out of our homes, reducing healthcare costs for individuals
and whole communities. It will also provide significant savings to
customers, further protecting the most vulnerable to rising utility
costs. In Colorado, new wind energy plus storage is becoming cheaper
than energy from the state's existing coal plants, and new solar and
wind is cheaper than 75% of the state's coal energy. As our state
lawmakers have said recently, renewable energy is not the
``alternative'' any longer. It has become the cheapest power available,
including solar plus storage for three cents per kilowatt-hour.
Furthermore, we know there is plenty more wind and solar that is ready
for development in our state, as evidenced by the many low-cost
renewable bids still left on the table after Xcel's recent Electric
Resource Plan.
While making this transition, we can also create an energy system
that is more responsive, resilient and equitable. In fact,
transitioning to a carbon-free resilient energy system is a priority in
Boulder's Resilience Strategy, which guides our preparedness for--and
ability to respond to--future challenges. Building on lessons learned
as one of the inaugural cities participating in the 100 Resilient
Cities program, this plan recognizes that we need a grid that's better
prepared for the weather disruptions that will become more common in a
warmer climate, such as stronger wind and heavier snow storms that can
damage power lines. As we transition more of our energy use to carbon-
free electricity, it will become even more important to protect our
grid from disruptions that will harm our quality of life, limit our
economic production and threaten our critical infrastructure and
emergency response capability.
We also can't overlook the tools nature already provides for carbon
reduction. We see important opportunities in using public and private
land to sequester the carbon that's already in our atmosphere. In 2018,
the City of Boulder and Boulder County jointly launched soil-based
carbon sequestration initiatives. These efforts use demonstrated
techniques such as the Marin Carbon Farming project's application of
compost to rangelands. We are also experimenting with new and emerging
strategies, such as innovative tillage, enhanced soil health practices
and other regenerative agricultural techniques, to accelerate carbon
drawdown and enhance local ecosystem productivity. When fully
implemented, we believe these approaches could conservatively sequester
10% to 20% of local emissions. They also provide significant
agricultural and ecosystem benefits such as increased resistance to
drought and extreme weather events.
Finally, we have a chance to seize the economic potential of
guiding this transition. We can train new work forces to power our
energy future and invent new technologies than can be deployed in
cities across the globe. For instance, through 2018, every dollar the
city invested in residential energy efficiency rebates leveraged about
$9.73 in private investment--local investments that ripple through our
economy. In Boulder, we are increasingly seeing this challenge before
us as an opportunity to make our community healthier, more prosperous
and more resilient, and we will realize these benefits the sooner we
take them.
boulder's environmental and climate legacy
The city's long legacy of environmental protection and climate
action demonstrates that we are not starting from square one. We've
been working on this topic for several decades and have success stories
and challenges to share.
Over the last century, Boulder has consistently served as a
destination for individuals defined by their creative and innovative
spirit, originating some of the most progressive policies in the United
States. Our history of anticipating change and enacting forward-
thinking environmental policies dates back to at least 1898 with the
public acquisition of mountain open space. In 1967, Boulder was the
first municipality in the country to tax itself for the purpose of
acquiring open space, of which we now have over 45,000 acres. Since the
1990s, Boulder's transportation planning has been focused on reducing
environmental impacts by reducing vehicle trips, expanding the network
of our transit, cycling and pedestrian systems and integrating with
land use planning to create walkable neighborhoods.
In the early 2000s, Boulder's environmental consciousness turned to
climate action. With our large concentration of scientists, many of
whom have contributed to several IPCC reports, and an active
constituency of environmentalists and outdoor enthusiasts, our
community demanded that we take aggressive actions related to climate
change. In 2002, Boulder City Council adopted a resolution to commit to
the Kyoto Protocol goal, at a time when the federal government refused
to sign on.
In 2006, the city and concerned community members published a
comprehensive Climate Action Plan that addressed energy, buildings,
transportation, waste and natural environment impacts. The plan was
most recently updated in 2017 and includes the following specific
targets:
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Boulder community has also voted on multiple occasions to tax
itself to pay for climate programs and services. The city's 2006 per-
kilowatt tax collected on electric utility bills became the country's
first tax dedicated to addressing climate change, and it continues to
fund our climate work today. Residents also voted to levy a trash tax
that funds the city's zero waste efforts and a Utility Occupation Tax
that funds the city's analysis of creating a local electric utility.
Accomplishments of Boulder's Climate Programs and Partnerships
Since 2006, the city has been at the forefront of innovation in
leading the energy transition, and through its strong partnerships with
key public and private organizations such as Boulder County and the
University of Colorado, Boulder continues to design new programs and
approaches that have been replicated across Colorado.
In partnership with Boulder County, the city developed a national
model for delivering energy-advising services that has helped more than
18,000 households and businesses in Boulder County implement energy
efficiency and renewable energy improvements. Their participation in
the EnergySmart and Partners for a Clean Environment (PACE) programs
save 16 million kilowatt hours per year.
Moving beyond voluntary programs, the city enacted an energy code
for new buildings that is among the most stringent nationally, with the
goal of achieving net zero building codes by 2031. In the past few
years, more than half of newly constructed homes in Boulder have
achieved a net-zero impact. The city also requires rating, reporting
and energy efficiency requirements that reduce energy use and improve
the quality of Boulder's existing commercial and industrial building
stock. Participating buildings have reduced their energy use by 3% from
2015 through 2018.
The city also mandated minimum energy performance standards for
rental units, called SmartRegs. Through the eight-year compliance
timeline, over 22,000 rental units, or approximately 96% of licensed
rental units, achieved compliance with the requirements.
Boulder County has one of the highest adoption rate of electric
vehicles in the state, in part by partnering with Boulder County on
group bulk purchasing programs to lower the price for consumers. Called
``Benefits Boulder County,'' this program also included e-bikes and
rooftop solar.
Boulder has achieved one of highest rates of installed solar
capacity per capita in the United States, earning recognition as a
Platinum-level Solar Friendly Community from the Colorado Solar and
Storage Association, with 39 megawatts currently installed on homes and
businesses. The city's programs support widespread solar adoption in
the community, including a partnership with a local credit union to
provide low-interest loans on energy-efficient and solar upgrades and
the city's Solar Grants and Rebates program, which provides financing
for solar power installations at homes, businesses and facilities,
bringing solar to more income levels.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
One of the most impactful initiatives we have undertaken, in
partnership with Boulder County, is the creation of Colorado
Communities for Climate Action (CC4CA), a coalition of cities and
counties across Colorado that advocate together for climate-friendly
policies. With a current membership of 28 cities and counties, CC4CA
represents a significant portion of the state's population and has
already experienced significant success in influencing meaningful
climate policy at the state legislature and state agencies.
Finally, one of the city's most high-profile climate projects is
municipalization, the city's effort to explore the creation of a
community-owned, city-run electric utility that would bring clean,
local, affordable and reliable electricity to Boulder electric
customers. When Boulder residents first voted to explore
municipalization in 2011, it was clear that Boulder needed to
drastically reduce its emissions from the electricity generation sector
in order to meet the city's GHG reduction targets. Since then, our
community has voted several times to fund our municipalization
exploration process. The city's analysis to date demonstrates that
local electric utilities can better reflect the values of the
communities they serve and have the flexibility to offer services like
microgrids that will prepare their communities for the impacts of
climate change. Boulder has learned a lot from Colorado's 29 other
municipal electric utilities and is actively sharing lessons learned
from this effort with other cities considering municipalization, such
as Pueblo, Colorado.
Through these actions, and through the addition of renewable
resources by our current electricity provider, Boulder achieved its
2020 GHG emissions reduction target of 16% below 2005 levels in 2017--
three years early--even as our community saw growth in population, jobs
and economic activity. Achieving this reduction is largely attributable
to two key factors: mitigating the increase in demand associated with
population and economic growth through strong building codes and
incentive-based efficiency programs, and reduced grid emissions due to
state-level utility renewable energy standards and deployment of local
solar.
Now, in recognition of the challenges ahead, the city and county
recently declared a ``Climate Emergency.'' This declaration comes as
the city kicks-off a new process to mobilize city residents and
businesses to do everything within our grasp to tackle the climate
crisis. It's not just up to city and county governments alone to
address the local causes and impacts of climate change--we need our
entire community's participation, too. I believe the Boulder community
is up to the task.
lessons learned in the transition to carbon-free energy
I am proud of Boulder's accomplishments and the progress our
community has made in transitioning toward carbon-free energy, reducing
our emissions and planning for a resilient future. We also know that we
still have a long way to go and have learned many lessons along the
way.
Need for Systemic Change
Many efficiency and GHG reduction strategies that communities have
implemented rely on voluntary, individual behavior change. While
Boulder has seen success with these programs, they also have
limitations. Incentives-based efficiency programs such as rebates and
energy advising tend to influence a resident or business to choose a
better technology when they are already considering an improvement
project, but they are generally insufficient in motivating someone to
undertake a project they were not otherwise considering. Mechanisms
such as toll roads and high-occupancy vehicle lanes create some
behavior change; yet, a key challenge is ensuring persistence of the
change. Over time, behaviors tend to revert to what is easier or more
convenient. Systemic change, to the point where the good choice is the
only choice, or at least the easiest and simplest choice, is the only
way to ensure persistent behavior change. And systemic change is not
something Boulder--or any city--can do alone.
Just Transition Must Be at the Center of All Programs and Policies
We have found that participation in voluntary, incentives-based
programs tends to be limited to more affluent residents and businesses,
leaving a significant portion of the community underserved, including
renters and lower-income residents. Regulatory approaches, such as
Boulder's energy codes and performance standards for buildings, must
balance the amount of savings that can be achieved against creating
undue financial burden for residents or businesses. The cost of
converting an existing building from gas to electric, especially in
older buildings that may lack the needed electrical infrastructure, is
a significant financial burden and raises significant equity concerns.
As a community, we need to ensure that all our buildings and
systems remain resilient as the climate continues to change; that every
community member prospers, remains healthy and can enjoy a good quality
of life; and that our economy remains strong. Equity and resilience
must be the foundation of our path forward.
Current Financial Mechanisms Are Inadequate
Due to the need to balance the financial burden of regulation with
the intended goals, regulatory approaches such as building codes tend
to be limited to lower-cost, short-payback upgrades. Cities do not
control or have enough resources to direct or manage the enormous
changes in infrastructure needed to transition to a carbon-free energy
economy on their own. New, robust financial mechanisms are needed to
achieve deeper savings. Resilience will need to be a growing priority
for public investment, and equity must be central to all planning and
deployment to avoid continued adverse impacts to our most vulnerable
communities.
Our Progress Has Not Been Fast Enough
Perhaps our greatest lesson learned is that our progress, while
substantial and ahead of schedule, has not been fast enough. Our
existing public and private sector commitments are insufficient to
stabilize climate, and energy-related emissions reductions will not
alone achieve climate stabilization. The IPCC report tells us that
carbon recapture is now essential if we are to avoid the worst of
predicted climate impacts. In addition, we know that other significant
warming factors beyond energy and transportation must also be
addressed, for example, by pursuing regenerative agriculture practices
and a circular approach to materials use that prioritizes reducing,
reusing and recycling and composting.
Solutions Must Be Replicable
Given that local action alone won't come close to adequately
addressing climate change, Boulder has worked hard to coordinate and
lead initiatives that can be replicated in other communities. Our city
participates in several global and national coalitions, including the
Urban Sustainability Directors' Network, Carbon Neutral Cities
Alliance, the Under 2 Coalition and the Mayors' Compact. These efforts
allow Boulder to interface with other cities, learning and sharing best
practices. We've learned that our actions are most effective when they
are replicable for other communities.
the path forward at the local level
Urgent, large-scale change is needed at all levels and in all
sectors of society, with cities continuing to play a critical role in
the path forward. In terms of making this transition, we largely know
what needs to happen.
Half of Boulder's current GHG emissions continue to come from
electricity generation and use, making continued investment in solar
and wind power a high priority. Recognizing the central role of clean
electricity, Boulder will continue to take innovative actions to make
this transition. We are committed to 100% renewable electricity by
2030, 100 megawatts of local generation by 2030, and emissions
reductions aligned with or more aggressive than the State of Colorado's
goal of 80% emissions goal by 2050. I expect that cities across the
country will continue to join in making similar commitments.
Investing in enough renewable energy to supply our current
electricity demands is an essential step. But to fully transition to
carbon-free energy, we need to quickly shift away from natural gas and
petroleum and electrify all aspects of our daily lives: how we heat our
buildings, produce hot water and power our vehicles and transit system.
Boulder was one of the first cities in the nation to launch efforts to
develop strategies to rapidly electrify homes. Through these efforts,
we have also helped organize a consortium of over 20 leading cities in
the U.S. to form the ``Building Electrification Initiative.'' This
initiative is developing a technical assistance, policy development and
implementation platform to accelerate building electrification
nationwide.
It is important to recognize, however, that this transition will
require significant investment. The cost to electrify all 18,000
single-family houses in Boulder will alone require approximately $700
million. A critical task facing policy makers is the development of
mechanisms to enable large-scale capital investments that reduce the
upfront costs for these household investments and enable long-term
repayment as part of improved household benefits--reduced costs,
improved safety and greater resilience to climate impacts.
At the same time, the city has taken a leading role in
transportation electrification. The city is currently working on
electrifying our fleet of 18 local buses and mapping the strategy for
the broader electrification of transit. Again, this will require
significant investment. For Boulder's local bus line alone,
electrification will cost nearly $20 million. The much broader
electrification of delivery vehicles, ride-hailing services and other
fleets will require much greater investment across both public and
private sectors.
However, switching from fossil energy to electricity in
transportation and buildings also holds tremendous potential to
dramatically increase grid flexibility, reduce total household and
business energy costs, and reduce air pollution and GHG emissions--a
concept called ``beneficial electrification.'' A recent analysis in
California found that designing new all-electric homes reduces building
costs by $1,500-6,000 and reduces homeowner utility bills by $4,000-
10,000 over 20 years. The retrofit of existing homes to high-efficiency
heat pumps also provides much-needed cooling in climates that
previously did not need air conditioning. Heat pumps also significantly
improve indoor air quality and reduce the incidence of respiratory
health conditions, particularly in children, the elderly and other
vulnerable populations such as pregnant women.
There are similar and, in some cases, even greater economic
opportunities in transportation electrification. In a recent analysis,
Boulder-based Southwest Energy Efficiency Project (SWEEP) estimated
that due to the higher efficiencies, lower maintenance costs, avoided
carbon impacts and improved health outcomes, transitioning to electric
transportation in Arizona would result in cumulative net financial
benefits of $3.8-32 billion by 2050, depending on how quickly it is
implemented. At a household level, electric vehicle adoption could
result in the costs of personal vehicle use dropping by 50% or more.
building an inclusive and transformative climate action strategy
Recognizing that achieving changes of this magnitude will require
the involvement of the entire community, Boulder is also embarking on a
renewed climate commitment--our Climate Mobilization Action Plan--which
will accelerate our targets and identify actions that will produce the
greatest impact in reducing and capturing emissions.
Key to this new plan is a renewed focus on systems-level change and
the formation a new network of climate collaborators. Action at this
scale will require new types of partnerships with a range of public,
private, academic and non-governmental entities. It will require
accelerating innovation, as the rate of change now taking place--both
in the pace and impacts of climate change and in technology, social
perspectives and policy--requires new models of rapid development,
implementation and modification of climate action strategies. It will
also require grounding actions in local benefits, designing strategies
that deliver tangible, local quality-of-life benefits while
contributing to emissions reductions.
Cities have in many ways been on the leading edge of this work. We
have helped pioneer big steps in energy efficiency and fostering the
development of more renewable power. But we know we have more to do.
Cities must continue their push for more sustainable building policies,
take greater steps to tackle transportation emissions and better track
progress to know which investments have the greatest impact. With our
innovation, ingenuity and resolve, we can build prosperous and
equitable low-carbon communities.
the critical role of state and federal action
Even with the growing engagement of cities, however, the scale of
the climate crisis is far too great for local or even regional
collaborations to solve the climate crisis on their own. While we
believe our goals are achievable, statewide, national and global steps
are essential for us to meet the demands of this challenge.
As you heard from Governor Polis, during the 2019 Colorado
legislative session more than a dozen new climate and energy bills were
signed into law, arguably making this session the most impactful yet in
Colorado's efforts to address the climate crisis. The city is very
appreciative of these actions and is proud to have played a role in
their creation and passage.
These new bills cover an array of issues, including: regulating
emissions from the major sectors; oversight of electric-generating
companies; how companies must factor climate change into their
decision-making; and new regulations on how oil and gas drilling is
governed in the state. While the design and implementation of these new
policies will be critical to their success, we expect that Boulder's
efforts will be significantly supported and bolstered by this
legislation.
Continued leadership and action at the state level is essential,
and Boulder will continue to serve as an active member of CC4CA to
reach the coalition's goals of:
Supporting actions to implement the 2025 GHG
reduction goals identified in the Colorado Climate Plan, as
well as more aggressive goals necessary to limit the increase
in the global average temperature to well below 2+C above
preindustrial levels, and to pursue an increase of no more than
1.5+C;
Increasing consumer energy choice and innovation;
and
Supporting improvements to the Colorado Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission's oversight of drilling and
preservation of local control to adopt regulations, moratoriums
or other limits as necessary.
At the federal level, we support a suite of policies and
legislation to achieve deep, long-term reductions in GHG emissions and
the transition to carbon-free energy, including:
Expanded use of regulatory mechanisms to create a
level playing field for all energy technologies and energy
sources, by adequately incorporating the full environmental
costs and benefits of different energy strategies;
Continued and expanded investment in clean energy
infrastructure, including advanced grids, battery storage and
electrical vehicle charging;
Continued and expanded fuel efficiency and emissions
standards for the entire transportation sector, including both
light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles;
Market-based programs that put a price on carbon
emissions, such as a carbon tax or cap-and-trade program, which
require emission reductions but let the private sector
determine the most cost-effective way to achieve them (for
example, House Resolution 763, the Energy Innovation and Carbon
Dividend Act of 2019);
Expanded support for carbon sequestration efforts,
particularly programs that support innovation and adoption of
carbon sequestration in the agricultural sector; and
Expanded use of the Natural Resources Conservation
Service to support regional-scale land management that improves
community resilience to climate change.
call to action
Though the challenges of addressing climate change may seem
daunting, our collective response is an enormous opportunity. If we
work together across all levels of government and all sectors, we can
strengthen our economies, improve community health, protect our
vulnerable populations and strengthen our resilience.
I want to express my deep appreciation for the select committee's
leadership in elevating the urgency of the climate crisis. The federal
government was essential in enacting solutions to past large-scale
environmental crises--from the Dust Bowl to toxic pollution that
poisoned our waters and air. It is now time, again, for a clear vision
at the federal level that harnesses the innovation in our country and
galvanizes action to tackle the existential climate crisis facing us.
In so doing, we can realize the enormous benefits to the environment,
public health and the economy that we can have today and for future
generations.
As I conclude my remarks today, I want to recognize that Boulder is
not alone in its efforts. Communities worldwide are stepping up to the
challenge of reducing their GHG pollution and are pressing other levels
of government and the private sector to do much more to combat climate
change. We are proud to collaborate closely with so many leading
regional and global cities working to achieve carbon neutrality, which
will engender greater economic prosperity, social equity, enhanced
quality of life and climate resilience for the people and businesses in
our communities. We are also deeply honored to work closely with our
peer communities in Colorado, our close colleagues at Boulder County,
the University of Colorado and federal agencies on such an important
and defining issue.
On behalf of the Boulder community, thank you for inviting me to
testify today. I look forward to answering any questions you may have.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you, Mayor.
Mayor Troxell, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF WADE TROXELL
Mr. Troxell. Thank you to Chair Castor and Ranking Member
Graves for the opportunity to address the Select Committee on
the Climate Crisis. Thank you to Representative Neguse for
hosting this hearing in the great State of Colorado on Colorado
Day.
My name is Wade Troxell, and I am the Mayor of Fort
Collins. This is where I was born, raised, went to school and
have my career, and now I have the honor of serving as Mayor.
Fort Collins is a mid-sized city of 172,000 people. We are
the fourth largest city in the State of Colorado. We are home
to Colorado State University, with a strong, diverse economy
and a deep commitment to innovation, resilience, and
excellence. For context, Fort Collins was a community of 20,000
people when I was born and is now 8.5 times that size, and it
is even better, more dynamic and forward-thinking. We like to
think that we punch above our weight class as a city, and our
collaborative approach to climate action is just one example.
Fort Collins has one of the most aggressive climate action
plans and will celebrate 20 years of climate action this fall,
including our unanimously adopted goals by City Council in
March 2015 to reduce community carbon emissions 20 percent by
2020, 80 percent by 2030, and achieve carbon neutrality by
2050. We set these goals because it makes financial, social,
and environmental sense for our community.
Fort Collins is a ``plan and do'' city. While aspirational
goals are important, what differentiates Fort Collins is that
we have translated these goals into action-oriented, pragmatic,
cost-effective solutions that benefit all in our community. For
example, energy efficiency programs through our municipal
electric utility and Platte River Power Authority are saving
businesses almost $10 million annually from improved
efficiencies, and their employees are more comfortable and
productive. Efficiency and solar programs generated in excess
of $40 million in local economic benefits last year while
supporting over 200 jobs.
Our climate economy strategy, along with our collaborative
approach, has been a key to our progress, and I would like to
share some examples.
Platte River Power Authority and its four owner
communities, including Fort Collins, has led the way with a
resource diversification policy calling for 100 percent non-
carbon energy mix by 2030. Our community has committed to 100
percent renewable electricity by 2030 as well, as have a number
of our large local businesses, many of which are technology
businesses. We can transition to a clean and resilient electric
infrastructure while achieving affordability, reliability, and
stewardship. Near-term utility-scale investments will result in
more than 50 percent of our electricity in the coming years
coming from non-carbon sources with, importantly, a neutral
bill impact on our customers.
Our ground-breaking Regional Wasteshed partnership with
Larimer County and other municipal jurisdictions in northern
Colorado looks towards a circular economy where waste is looked
at as a beneficial resource. A master plan has been developed
with new wasteshed diversion facilities, and supporting
policies were developed to help us achieve our waste diversion
goals.
We are also a leader, along with Boulder, with 27
communities in Colorado partnering to advocate state and
Federal policy in a coalition called the Colorado Communities
for Climate Action. This group helped pass over a dozen bills
in the state legislature this past year.
These efforts and investments have led to significant
results for Fort Collins. We have seen net reductions in our
emissions and reduced per capita emissions 34 percent since
2005 while our population and economy have continued to grow.
With this being said, some challenges can best be addressed
at the state and Federal level. I offer the following for your
consideration.
One, encourage goal setting at all levels. Setting
ambitious goals can help establish community direction, ensures
accountability, and it spurs innovation.
Two, recognize the climate economy. Scalable integration
technologies will come from our private sector partners.
Three, recognize the value of renewable energy solutions at
multiple levels and at multiple scales. Systems thinking and
integration must overlay these initiatives while vertically
integrating with end-use prosumers. Fort Collins collaborates
with industry and research partners, such as Colorado State
University and the GridWise Alliance, to transform and
modernize the grid to meet the rapidly transforming electric
utility industry.
With a convergence of electric and transportation systems,
continue our investments in multi-modal and electric
infrastructure. Thanks to Federal investments, Fort Collins has
doubled its transit ridership in the past four years because of
MAX, our Bus Rapid Transit system, and we will be adding seven
electric buses to the system in the near future. In partnership
with the Electrification Coalition, we now have electric
charging stations at most of our large employers throughout the
city and within our municipal parking structures.
We need to encourage innovation. Fort Collins is currently
featured in the Smithsonian exhibit at the U.S. Museum of
American History as a place of invention. Fort Collins was one
of nine award winners of the 2018 Bloomberg Philanthropies U.S.
Mayors Challenge, and the associated $1 million prize has gone
towards our innovative Epic program that provides for healthy
and equitable benefits for low-to-moderate income renters by
improving their energy efficiency with on-bill financing of
rental homes.
In conclusion, Fort Collins is uniquely positioned to
demonstrate how carbon neutrality can be achieved to benefit
all residents and businesses in an action-oriented, reasonable
approach. I look forward to our discussion and your questions.
[The statement of Mr. Troxell follows:]
__________
Select Committee on Climate Crisis Hearing
August 1, 2019
Mayor Wade Troxell's Testimony
Thank you to Committee Chair Kathy Castor and Ranking Member Graves
for the opportunity to address the Select Committee on the Climate
Crisis. Thank you to Representative Neguse for hosting this hearing in
the great state of Colorado. My name is Wade Troxell and I am the Mayor
of Fort Collins, where I was born, raised, went to school and have my
career, and now have the honor of serving as Mayor.
Fort Collins is a mid-sized city of 172,000 people, home to
Colorado State University, with a strong, diverse economy and a deep
commitment to innovation, resilience and excellence. As evidence, Fort
Collins is a 2017 Malcolm Baldrige Award Winner recognized for an
unceasing drive for radical innovation, thoughtful leadership, and
operational excellence.
For context, Fort Collins was a community of 20,000 people when I
was born and is now 8\1/2\ times that size and it's even better, more
dynamic and forward-thinking. We like to think that we ``punch above
our weight class'' as a city, and our collaborative approach to climate
action is just one example of that. Fort Collins has one of the most
aggressive climate action plans and will celebrate 20 years of climate
action this fall, including our unanimously adopted goals by City
Council in March 2015 to reduce community carbon emissions 20% by 2020,
80% by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. We set these goals
because it makes financial, social, and environmental sense for our
community.
Fort Collins is a ``plan and do'' City. While aspirational goals
are important, what differentiates Fort Collins is that we've
translated these goals into action-oriented, pragmatic, cost-effective
solutions that benefit all in our community, such as energy efficiency.
Programs though our municipal electric distribution utility and Platte
River Power Authority are saving businesses almost $10 million annually
from improved efficiencies and their employees are more comfortable and
productive as additional benefits. Efficiency and solar programs
generated in excess of $40 million in local economic benefits last
year, while supporting over 200 jobs.
Our ``Climate Economy'' strategy, along with our collaborative
approach, has been a key to our progress, and I'd like to share some
examples:
Platte River Power Authority and its four owner communities
including Fort Collins have led the way with a resource diversification
policy calling for 100 percent non-carbon energy mix by 2030. Our
community also committed to 100% renewable electricity by 2030, as have
a number of our large local businesses. We can transition to clean and
resilient electric infrastructure while optimizing affordability,
reliability, and stewardship. Near-term Utility-scale investments will
result in more than 50% of our electricity coming from non-carbon
sources with, importantly, a neutral bill impact on our customers.
Our ground-breaking Regional Wasteshed partnership with Larimer
County and other municipal jurisdictions looks at waste as a beneficial
resource. A master plan was developed for new wasteshed diversion
facilities and supporting policies were developed to help us achieve
our waste diversion goals.
We're also one of 27 communities in Colorado to partner on state
and federal policy advocacy via a local government coalition, the
Colorado Communities for Climate Action. This group helped pass over a
dozen bills in the legislature this past session.
These efforts and investments have led to significant results for
Fort Collins--we've seen net reductions in our emissions, and reduced
per capita emissions 34% since 2005, all while our population and
economy have continued to grow.
With this being said, some challenges can best be solved at the
state and federal level, and we are excited to continue a partnership
with the federal government on innovative efforts to address climate
action.
I would like to offer the following considerations for the
committee:
1. Encourage goal setting at all levels: Setting ambitious goals
can help establish community direction, ensures accountability, and it
spurs innovation.
2. Recognize the ``Climate Economy'': Fort Collins is leading the
way with its focus on the ``Climate Economy'', which we define as a
strong, stable and innovative economy based on lower carbon solutions
and infrastructure. Scalable integration technologies will come from
our private sector partners.
3. Recognize the value of renewable energy solutions at multiple
scales: Utility-scale investments, distributed energy resources, and
energy storage solutions, are all critical to the transition to clean
energy systems. Systems-thinking and integration must overlay these
initiatives while vertically integrating with end-use ``prosumers''.
Consequently, Fort Collins collaborates with industry and research
partners, such as Colorado State University Energy Institute and the
GridWise Alliance, to transform and modernize the grid to meet the
rapidly transforming electric utility industry.
4. With a convergence of electric and transportation systems,
continue investments in multi-modal and electric vehicle
infrastructure: Thanks to federal investments, Fort Collins has doubled
its transit ridership in the past four years because of MAX, our Bus
Rapid Transit system, and we'll add seven electric buses in the next
four years. In partnership with the Electrification Coalition, we now
have electric charging stations at most of our large employers
throughout the city and in municipal parking structures. We are
advocating for statewide zero emission vehicle standards because that
will bring public health benefits and improved electric vehicle choices
to Coloradoans.
5. Encourage innovation: Last year, Fort Collins was one of 9 award
winners of the 2018 Bloomberg Philanthropies U.S. Mayors Challenge and
the associated $1 million prize for its innovative Epic Homes program
that provides health and equity benefits for low-to-moderate income
renters by improving the energy efficiency of rental homes.
In conclusion, Fort Collins is a wonderful community and is only
getting better. Fort Collins is uniquely positioned to demonstrate how
carbon neutrality can be achieved to benefit all residents and
businesses through equitable solutions. Like the Fort Collins I grew up
in, we continue to enjoy the quality of life that we intend to enhance
and preserve for future generations. As past president of the Colorado
Municipal League, I am reminded of the words of Frederick G. Bonfils:
`` 'Tis a Privilege to Live in Colorado''. I look forward to our
discussion and your questions.
Attachments:
Energy Policy 2018 Annual Update Infographic is available at:
https://www.fcgov.com/utilities//img/site_specific/uploads/2018-energy-
policy-infographic-final.pdf?1563291213.
Climate Action 2017 Annual Update Infographic is available at:
https://www.fcgov.com/climateaction/files/fort-collins-2017-climate-
action-plan-update-report.pdf?1537204021.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you, Mayor.
Mr. Weiner, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF CARY WEINER
Mr. Weiner. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair, Ranking
Member Graves, and committee members. Thank you for providing
me with an opportunity to speak with you here today.
I have been the State Energy Specialist for Colorado State
University Extension for the last nine years and served as
Director of Colorado State University's Rural Energy Center for
the last seven. I have also worked as Renewable Energy Planner
for the City of Santa Fe, New Mexico. In these roles, I have
implemented sustainable energy measures and consulted with a
variety of stakeholders on sustainable energy. My testimony
today represents my own views as a specialist in the field.
In my experience, I have found that both utility-scale
clean energy development and community-based, collaborative
approaches to sustainable energy are key to maximizing benefits
to rural areas. Driven by our mission of empowering Coloradans,
CSU Extension's work has focused on the community-based,
collaborative framework which I will highlight through two
examples.
First, we have conducted community energy assessments for
several small towns in Colorado. These assessments provide
local leaders with snapshots of funding and technical
assistance opportunities available to them that align with
their needs and goals. We have done these assessments in farm
towns, in mountain towns, and now even in a coal town. Some
communities are motivated by climate change, while others just
want to save money for their taxpayers.
In Buena Vista, a small but growing town in central
Colorado, we engaged the local Chamber of Commerce, realtors,
non-profits, energy contractors, and utilities in our
assessment process. Two of our main recommendations were to
switch to more efficient lighting in town buildings and to
install electric vehicle charging stations near the downtown
area. In doing the lighting retrofits, the town hired a local
contractor, took advantage of rebates from its rural electric
cooperative, and is saving an estimated $4,000 per year in
taxpayer money. In installing the EV charging stations, the
town took advantage of a Charge Ahead Colorado grant from the
state, supplied residents and tourists with places to recharge,
and may have increased business near the charging stations
while EV drivers charge their cars.
Turning to agriculture, CSU Extension has been the
recipient of two USDA Rural Energy for America Program grants
to conduct economic feasibility assessments for solar and wind
at 60 farms across Colorado. The Rocky Mountain Farmers Union,
Colorado Corn Growers, Colorado Energy Office, Colorado
Department of Agriculture, and various rural electric
cooperatives donated in-kind cost share to market the program
statewide. Four of our participants have gone on to apply for
REAP grants of their own to install solar projects, and two
were successful. The Weis family out of Holyoke, Colorado, for
example, installed a 15 kilowatt solar array that saves $1,500
per year on electricity for pumping water. They should recoup
their investment in about 10 years.
What may seem to be modest energy savings for a given local
government, farm, household, or business can add up to a
strong, distributed network of environmental and economic
benefits, along with a sense of independence for rural
Colorado. The Garfield Clean Energy program, for example, has
helped 340 businesses, 1,200 households, and 34 government
facilities complete energy upgrades that have saved over $2.2
million through an innovative partnership between local
governments, a community college, and a non-profit in one of
the top natural gas-producing counties in the state. The
Colorado Energy Office and the Colorado Department of
Agriculture have engaged numerous stakeholders through USDA's
Regional Conservation Partnership Program to save over 1
million kilowatt-hours and $100,000 across 200 farms in the
state. And across the country, state Extension programs have
formed the National Extension Energy Initiative to learn from
one another how best to maximize impact in rural areas.
The Federal Government can strengthen community-based,
collaborative approaches to rural sustainable energy in a few
ways. Waiving or reducing the Rural Energy for America
Program's cost-share requirement for small business energy
audits could help rural businesses benefit from energy savings
and provide local jobs. Continuing the Regional Conservation
Partnership Program and streamlining the Rural Energy Savings
Program will strengthen cooperation to help rural areas save
energy and money. And restarting the pilot USDA-USDOE State
Extension Energy Partnership Program or otherwise supporting
Extension's capacity to meet local energy needs would be
welcome. With a presence in nearly every county in the country
and trusted relationships with key stakeholders, I believe
Extension is well-positioned to coordinate and catalyze
community-based, collaborative rural energy solutions.
Thank you again for this opportunity.
[The statement of Mr. Weiner follows:]
__________
Testimony of Cary Weiner
State Energy Specialist
Colorado State University Extension
U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
August 1, 2019
Wittemyer Courtroom, University of Colorado--Boulder
Madam Chair and committee members, thank you for providing me with
an opportunity to speak with you here today. My name is Cary Weiner. I
have been the State Energy Specialist for Colorado State University
Extension for the last nine years and served as Director of Colorado
State University's Rural Energy Center for the last seven. I have also
worked as Renewable Energy Planner for the City of Santa Fe, New
Mexico. In these roles, I have implemented sustainable energy measures
and consulted with a variety of stakeholders on sustainable energy. My
testimony today represents my own views as a specialist in the field.
In my experience, I have found that both utility-scale clean energy
development and community-based, collaborative approaches to
sustainable energy are key to maximizing benefits to rural areas.
Driven by our mission of empowering Coloradans, CSU Extension's work
has focused on the community-based, collaborative framework which I'll
highlight through two examples.
First, we have conducted community energy assessments for several
small towns in Colorado. These assessments provide local leaders with
snapshots of funding and technical assistance opportunities available
to them that align with their needs and goals. We have done these
assessments in farm towns, in mountain towns, and now even in a coal
town. Some communities are motivated by climate change while others
just want to save money for their taxpayers.
In Buena Vista, a small but growing town in central Colorado, we
engaged the local Chamber of Commerce, realtors, non-profits, energy
contractors, and utilities in our assessment process. Two of our main
recommendations were to switch to more efficient lighting in town
buildings and to install electric vehicle charging stations near the
downtown area. In doing the lighting retrofits, the town hired a local
contractor, took advantage of rebates from its rural electric
cooperative, and is saving an estimated $4,000 per year in taxpayer
money. In installing the EV charging stations, the town took advantage
of a Charge Ahead Colorado grant from the state, supplied residents and
tourists with places to recharge, and may have increased business near
the charging stations while EV drivers charge their cars.
Turning to agriculture, CSU Extension has been the recipient of two
USDA Rural Energy for America Program grants to conduct economic
feasibility assessments for solar and wind at 60 farms across Colorado.
The Rocky Mountain Farmers Union, Colorado Corn Growers, Colorado
Energy Office, Colorado Department of Agriculture, and various rural
electric cooperatives donated in-kind cost share to market the program
statewide. Four of our participants have gone on to apply for REAP
grants of their own to install solar projects, and two were successful.
The Weis family out of Holyoke, Colorado, for example, installed a 15
kilowatt solar array that saves $1,500 per year on electricity for
pumping water. They should recoup their investment in about 10 years.
What may seem to be modest energy savings for a given local
government, farm, household, or business can add up to a strong,
distributed network of environmental and economic benefits along with a
sense of independence for rural Colorado.\1\ The Garfield Clean Energy
program, for example, has helped 340 businesses, 1,200 households, and
34 government facilities complete energy upgrades through an innovative
partnership between local governments, a community college, and a non-
profit in one of the top natural gas-producing counties in the
state.\2\ The Colorado Energy Office and the Colorado Department of
Agriculture have engaged numerous stakeholders through USDA's Regional
Conservation Partnership Program to save over 1 million kilowatt-hours
across 200 farms in the state. And across the country, state Extension
programs have formed the National Extension Energy Initiative to learn
from one another how best to maximize impact in rural areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In a 2010 article in Energy Policy entitled `Putting Renewables
and Energy Efficiency to Work', Wei and Kammen found that solar energy
produces the most jobs per gigawatt-hour of energy generated (0.87),
with landfill gas second (0.72) and energy efficiency third (0.38).
Distributed solar and energy efficiency can typically be supported with
local jobs and are often found in community-based, collaborative
approaches to sustainable energy.
\2\ Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: COGIS Database.
Retrieved 7/29/2019 from https://cogcc.state.co.us/data.html#/cogis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The federal government can strengthen community-based,
collaborative approaches to rural sustainable energy in a few ways.
Waiving or reducing the Rural Energy for America Program's cost-share
requirement for small business energy audits could help rural
businesses benefit from energy savings and provide local jobs.
Continuing the Regional Conservation Partnership Program and
streamlining the Rural Energy Savings Program will strengthen
cooperation to help rural areas save energy and money. And restarting
the pilot USDA-USDOE State Extension Energy Partnership Program or
otherwise supporting Extension's capacity to meet local energy needs
would be welcome. With a presence in nearly every county in the country
and trusted relationships with key stakeholders, I believe Extension is
well-positioned to coordinate and catalyze community-based,
collaborative rural energy solutions.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Colorado State University Extension has for over 100 years
acted as an impartial consultant to the public on issues such as
agriculture, natural resources, community development, and youth
development. The Food & Agriculture Act of 1977 expanded Extension's
scope to provide information to the public on renewable energy, and the
Biomass Energy and Alcohol Fuels Act of 1980 expanded our scope to
include work on rural energy. According to a 2016 article in the
Journal of Extension entitled `Opportunities for and Barriers to
Renewable Energy Outreach in Extension', Thomas and Brain found that 26
states now have centralized or distinct Extension energy programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
appendix: extension's current and potential role in sustainable energy
(Excerpts from `National Energy Education Needs and Priorities: A
Roadmap for the Cooperative Extension System' by the National Extension
Energy Initiative, January 2018)
The National Extension Energy Initiative (NEEI) represents the
primary energy professionals within the Cooperative Extension System
(CES) from more than 30 states. NEEI is well positioned to assess and
prioritize energy education needs that can best be addressed by CES
educators/agents (with community-based education and applied research).
NEEI leverages the CES network at the state, regional (multistate) and
national levels by sharing expertise and fostering collective responses
to a range of topics, including: energy development, energy efficiency,
and renewable energy for urban and rural communities. Members of this
professional affiliation group meet regularly via conference calls,
webinars and annually at the National Extension Energy Summit. NEEI
also seeks to partner with other organizations and agencies (e.g., USDA
and DOE) with the goal of increasing the integration of CES education
and research with collaborators. Areas of potential partnership
include:
Residential/citizen education on energy efficiency
and conservation.
Assistance to community organizations, local
governments and public facilities with planning, priority-
setting, and collaborative educational programming.
Rural, on-farm, agricultural energy conservation/
efficiency/independence, energy audits and applied research on
energy consumption and evaluating alternatives.
Small business development, including planning and
tools for evaluating energy needs.
Collaboration with State Energy Offices (SEOs) and
State Energy Programs (SEPs).
CES has the ability to offer national experts, each with specific
areas of expertise on a range of energy issues, problems and needs.
Furthermore, our community energy education programs involve Extension
educators who work closely with consumers, businesses, utilities and
local government to develop and implement new sustainable energy
practices. An important strength of CES is to meet unique needs with
education and research at a local-community scale. CES also has
developed educational materials and publications, core curriculum, and
uniform outreach strategies that are often shared nationally within the
land-grant university network and with other agencies and stakeholder
groups.
Chairwoman Castor. Terrific. Thank you very much.
Mr. Wright, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF CHRIS WRIGHT
Mr. Wright. Thank you. Chairwoman Castor, Ranking Member
Graves, and committee members, my name is Chris Wright. I am
the CEO of Liberty Oilfield Services, a high-tech hydraulic
fracturing services company headquartered in Denver, Colorado.
It is an honor and a privilege to be here today.
The climate change issue is intimately tied to energy, the
field that I have spent my life in. I specifically attended MIT
to work on fusion energy. In graduate school at UC Berkeley, I
worked on solar energy. After graduate school, I became an
energy technology entrepreneur working in both geothermal
energy and oil and gas.
Climate change is global, and hence the solution must be
global. In the quest to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we
must be thoughtful. A rational global approach must balance
climate mitigation, economic growth, energy access, and, most
importantly, human well-being.
Energy matters. A lot. Throughout human history, global
life expectancy was 30 to 35 years. But in the last 200 years,
global life expectancy has doubled, to 72 years. Extreme
poverty has dropped from 90 percent of humanity to 10 percent
and falling. The growth in human liberty and the dramatic
increase in available energy are likely the two main catalysts
for this tremendous progress.
Unfortunately, we still have a billion people in the world
without electricity and 2 to 3 billion that still cook in the
deadly fashion that our ancestors did: burning wood or charcoal
indoors in open stoves, which kills 4 million people annually,
per the World Health Organization. Liquid petroleum gas, or
LPG, is by far the most common, clean, and safe replacement
cooking fuel that also saves women more than an hour a day not
spent collecting wood or dung for cooking fuel. Energy poverty
is the world's greatest challenge.
As my background shows, I am for any and all energy sources
as long as they are reliable, clean, and affordable, with the
power to lift humans up. The enormous annual growth in global
energy demand is driven predominantly by folks rising out of
poverty, aspiring to lives like ours.
The U.S. shale revolution is aiding the poor abroad and at
home via much cheaper energy, with annual consumer savings over
$1 trillion. It has also driven natural gas to become the
number-one source of electricity in the U.S., which helps clean
our air and drives CO2 emissions per person down to
a 50-year low.
Global gas-powered electricity is also surging, displacing
coal generation and pushing down emissions. Globally, coal is
still by far the largest source of electricity, followed by
natural gas, hydropower, and nuclear. U.S. natural gas exports
not only lower global greenhouse emissions, they also lower
particulate matter, PM 2.5, the world's most lethal pollutant,
plus other pollutants in both Asia and our Western states, like
Colorado, which are downwind. In fact, a recent paper by an
author at NOAA concluded that Asian air pollution was by far
the biggest contributor to smog in the Western U.S.
Hydrocarbons today provide a little over 80 percent of the
world's energy, the same as they did 20 years ago. The U.S.
Energy Information Administration projects this dropping to
only a little below 80 percent by the year 2040, but with a
much larger drop in greenhouse gas emissions with continued
natural gas displacement of coal. Global energy consumption
grew 2.3 percent last year; think millions of folks rising out
of poverty. Solar and wind combined supplied less than 2
percent of total global energy last year, or less than one
year's increase in global energy demand. Hence, the trajectory
of greenhouse gas emissions is impacted far more by the mix of
hydrocarbons than the rate of growth in renewables.
Oil production itself leads to emissions, from natural gas
flaring and fugitive methane emissions. These emissions are
much lower in countries like the U.S. than they are in Russia,
Iraq, Mexico, or virtually anywhere else.
Oil and gas produced in Colorado has even lower emissions
than the U.S. average, due to rigorous regulations on methane
capture and very little gas flaring. Even as Colorado's oil
production has quadrupled, VOC emissions have dropped 40
percent. This is technology at work.
Consumers dictate oil consumption. Regulatory regimes only
impact where oil is produced, which leads to some counter-
intuitive conclusions, like maximizing oil and gas production
in the United States lowers global greenhouse emissions, and
taking regulations too far, regulatory overshoot, is counter-
productive. Inhibiting production in cleaner areas like the
U.S. or Colorado leads to increased global emissions as it
simply moves production to less clean places. It also hands
greater control of the global energy supply to countries that
are hostile to the United States, such as Iran and Russia. To
date, Colorado has been a shining star, extremely modern, low-
emission oil and gas production that is displacing dirtier
production elsewhere. Seeking territorial-based solutions that
would keep U.S. fossil fuels in the ground would result in an
increase in global emissions. There is no point exporting our
industry and jobs while importing, not avoiding, the emissions.
Thanks for hearing me out, and I welcome any questions.
[The statement of Mr. Wright follows:]
__________
August 1, 2019--Written Testimony, Colorado's Roadmap for Clean Energy
Action: Lessons from State and Local Leaders--Chris A. Wright
Chairwoman Castor, Ranking Member Graves, and Committee Members, my
name is Chris Wright. I am the CEO of Liberty Oilfield Services, which
is headquartered in Denver, Colorado. We are a premier hydraulic
fracturing services company. It is an honor and privilege to be here
with you today to discuss Colorado's state and local efforts to expand
clean energy development.
The climate change issue is intimately tied to the energy sector,
which I have spent my life working in. Over 35 years ago, I chose to
attend MIT specifically to work on fusion energy. In graduate school at
UC Berkeley, I worked on solar energy. After graduate school, I began
my career as an energy technology entrepreneur working in geothermal
energy and oil & gas.
Climate change is a global problem that requires a global solution.
In our quest to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, we must
recognize the realities of the global energy market and the global
economy. A rational global approach that balances climate mitigation,
economic growth, and energy access objectives is required. Fortunately,
Colorado's oil & gas sector is well positioned to play its part in
achieving all three priorities.
Energy matters. A lot. Throughout all of human history, global life
expectancy was 30-35 years. In the last 200 years, global life
expectancy has doubled. Extreme poverty has dropped from 90% of
humanity to 10% and falling. The growth in human liberty and the
dramatic increase in available energy are likely the two main catalysts
for this tremendous progress.
Unfortunately, we still have a billion people in the world without
electricity and 2-3 billion that still cook in the deadly fashion that
our ancestors did: burning wood or charcoal indoors in open stoves
which the World Health Organization estimates kills about four million
people annually. Liquid Petroleum Gas, or LPG, is by far the most
common replacement fuel (followed by natural gas) that allows clean and
safe cooking while also saving women the more than an hour per day
typically spent collecting wood, dung, etc. for cooking fuel. Energy
poverty is the world's greatest challenge.
As my background shows, I am for any and all energy sources as long
as they are reliable, clean and affordable with the power to lift
humans up. The enormous annual growth in global energy demand is driven
predominantly by folks rising out of poverty, aspiring to lives like
ours.
The U.S. shale revolution is aiding the poor abroad and in the U.S.
via much cheaper oil and natural gas. Our shale revolution saves global
consumers over one trillion dollars every year. Natural gas has become
the number one source of electricity in the U.S., helping clean our air
and being the largest factor in driving our CO2 emissions
per person to a more than 50-year low!
The U.S.' rapid transition from being the world's largest importer
of natural gas to the third largest exporter of Liquified Natural Gas
has driven down world natural gas prices, which in turn drives growth
in global gas-powered electricity, dominantly displacing coal
generation. This is a major force in shrinking, or slowing the growth
of, greenhouse gas emissions. Globally, coal is still by far the
largest source of electricity, followed by natural gas, hydropower, and
nuclear. U.S. natural gas exports not only lower global greenhouse gas
emissions via coal displacement, they also lower particulate matter,
the world's most dangerous pollutant, plus SOX,
NOX, and mercury in both Asia and the U.S. as our western
States are downwind of East Asia. In fact, a recent paper by an author
at NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration)
concluded that Asian air pollution was by far the biggest contributor
to smog in the Western U.S.
Hydrocarbons provide a little over 80% of the world's energy, the
same as they do in the United States. The US Energy Information
Administration projects this dropping to only a little below 80% by
2040, but with a much larger drop in greenhouse gas emissions as the
projections show continued displacement of coal with natural gas.
Global energy consumption grew 2.3% in 2018--think millions of folks
rising out of poverty. Solar and wind combined supplied less than 2% of
total global energy last year, or less than one year's INCREASE in
global energy demand. Hence the current global trajectory of greenhouse
gas emissions is impacted far more by the MIX of hydrocarbons--coal
versus natural gas, for example--than the rate of growth in renewables.
One must also consider the emissions from the production of
hydrocarbons. Flaring of natural gas and fugitive methane emissions are
the main sources of production-related greenhouse gas emissions. It
should not be surprising that both emission sources are dramatically
lower in higher income/better infrastructure countries. Oil and natural
gas produced in the United States results in lower emissions than oil
and gas produced in Russia, Iraq, Mexico or virtually anywhere else.
Further, oil and gas produced in Colorado has lower emissions than the
U.S. as a whole, due to rigorous regulations on methane capture and
very little gas flaring in Colorado. In fact, over the past eight
years, Colorado's oil production has quadrupled at the same time as a
nearly 50-percent drop in volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions
from oil production. This is technology at work, coupled with the
construction of new high-tech gas gathering infrastructure.
Demand for oil and natural gas is driven by consumers and is not
impacted by the location of oil production. Take China, for example,
which is the largest contributor to global oil demand growth, has
double U.S. greenhouse gas emissions that are rising rapidly up another
50 percent between now and 2030 under the Paris Agreement. However,
China's domestic oil production is declining rapidly. Consumer demand
or ``pull'' is what dictates total oil consumption. Regulatory regimes
only impact WHERE oil is produced.
These facts lead to some counterintuitive conclusions, such as:
Maximizing oil and gas production in the United States
LOWERS global greenhouse gas emissions because of our modern
and closely regulated domestic industry.
Taking regulations too far, regulatory overshoot, is
counterproductive. Inhibiting production in areas with lower
emission profiles (cleaner production practices) leads to
INCREASED global emissions as it simply moves oil production to
less clean places. It also hands greater control of the global
energy supply to countries that are hostile to the United
States, such as Iran and Russia.
Colorado to date has been a shining star, having
extremely modern, low emission oil and gas production that has
been growing and therefore displacing less clean oil production
somewhere else.
The same is true outside of oil and gas production.
For example, the U.K. lowered their local greenhouse gas
emissions by driving the petrochemical sector out of their
country. But they did not lower global emissions, they simply
relocated them.
In conclusion, I caution against exporting industry and jobs, while
importing pollution. Climate change is a global problem that requires a
global solution. Seeking territorial-based solutions that would keep
U.S. fossil fuels in the ground would result in an increase in global
emissions as dirtier producers would simply meet market demand. At the
same time, such a climate policy would undermine U.S. national security
interests to the benefit of Vladimir Putin and the radicals in Iran.
Thankfully, Colorado's producers are amongst the cleanest in the world
when it comes to the GHG profile of oil production. We should welcome
their innovation; not punish it.
Thanks for hearing me out and I welcome any questions.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you very much.
Ms. VanGenderen, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF HEIDI VANGENDEREN
Ms. VanGenderen. Good morning, Chair Castor, Ranking Member
Graves, Representative Casten, Representative Neguse,
Representative DeGette. It is an honor and a privilege to be
here. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and welcome to
Boulder.
My name is Heidi VanGenderen, and I am a third-generation
Colorado native. I have spent over three decades now working to
advance the policies, technologies, deployment, and financing
of low-carbon strategies. The Chairwoman was kind enough to
provide a couple of highlights of my career. I would note that
my testimony today represents my own views based on my
professional background.
You have heard this morning from Governor Polis and both
mayors about Colorado's leadership in advancing clean energy at
the state and local level. You heard about the benefits of
clean energy from Colorado's rural communities, in particular
from Cary Weiner. And you heard about the role of natural gas
and some regulatory outlook from my colleague, Mr. Wright.
I refer you to my testimony, the written testimony, which
addresses Colorado's energy economy and the policy landscape as
well, and I thank my fellow panelists for covering those topics
so ably this morning. I would augment their presentations only
to add that the escalation of state and local policy has in
good measure been spurred by the lack of action at the Federal
level over the last two decades in particular.
I would note further that the best energy policy--
Representative Casten and I spoke briefly about this this
morning--optimally is bipartisan and trans-partisan. The
economic, health, and community benefits derived from a willing
diversification of our energy fuel portfolio are eminently
evident in Colorado and elsewhere around the world and the
country.
The Select Committee has the opportunity to demonstrate a
different path, and I applaud your efforts to work on these
issues in truly bipartisan fashion.
I turn, then, to the importance of leadership by example
and the investment in research exemplified by the work underway
by the state's flagship university, the University of Colorado.
Research for all aspects of climate change and the energy
transition is an extraordinarily important investment as
researchers and scientists seek to provide you, the lawmakers,
with accurate, science-based evidence on which to base
policies, programs, and investments that can make a difference,
at sufficient speed and scale.
CU-Boulder became an inaugural member of the University
Climate Change Coalition, which now boasts 20 of the top-tier
R1 universities from Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. Our
chancellor, Phil DiStefano, recently attended a summit hosted
by the University of British Columbia and was able to converse
with other university leaders about combining research
endeavors across universities so that those research dollars
are used as efficiently and effectively as possible.
Roughly 74 percent of the University of Colorado-Boulder's
research funding comes from the Federal government. Thank you
for your awareness of the importance of the Federal
government's role in adequately funding this critical research.
While we cannot rely on technology development and applied
research as the sole solution to this challenge, there is some
remarkable work underway through breakthrough technologies at
this university.
Three among many examples are: one, the development of a
long-range methane leak detection system that is a literal game
changer in finding and capping methane leaks from oil and gas
production. This is now a for-profit company.
Development of nanobio-hybrid organisms capable of using
airborne carbon dioxide and nitrogen to produce a variety of
biodegradable plastics and fuels, literally pulling the carbon
from the atmosphere toward sequestration of it. This innovation
could vastly improve our ability to do just that and
manufacture sustainable biodegradable chemicals and plastics.
Development of an electric vehicle charging infrastructure
begun at CU-Boulder that would be embedded in roadways and
allow ongoing charging of EVs as they travel among those
roadways.
Three amazing examples.
CU-Boulder's work in climate science, in collaboration with
the many national labs, has been noted this morning as legion,
and again outlined further in my written testimony.
Last but not least, CU-Boulder also seeks to demonstrate
leadership through its own operations in deployment of our
campus as a living laboratory. The latter provides
opportunities for our students through integrating research and
education into our daily operations and creating fertile ground
for innovation and entrepreneurship by bringing together our
researchers, our industry partners, and venture capital, with
the goal of taking applied research quickly to
commercialization. The importance of partnerships like these
cannot be underestimated.
Thank you. I look forward to the discussion and to
answering your questions.
[The statement of Ms. VanGenderen follows:]
__________
Written Testimony of Heidi VanGenderen
Chief Sustainability Officer, University of Colorado Boulder
For Field Hearing on: Colorado's Roadmap for Clean Energy Action:
Lessons from State and Local Leaders
Good morning Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, Congressman
Neguse, and other distinguished members of the Committee. Thank you for
the opportunity to testify at today's field hearing, and welcome to
Colorado.
My name is Heidi VanGenderen. I am a third generation Colorado
native and I currently serve as the first Chief Sustainability Officer
at the University of Colorado Boulder. I have worked for over three
decades in the public, private, non-profit, and academic sectors to
advance the technologies, policies, deployment and financing of low-
carbon strategies.
My comments today represent the views stemming from my professional
background in energy and sustainability policy, and do not represent
the official positions of the University of Colorado Boulder.
Colorado is a wonderful state in so many ways. It sports immense
natural beauty and natural resources, particularly in the energy realm.
It is a western state where people pride themselves on individualism,
but pitch in readily in community. It is a state that prides itself on
health and well-being. It is a state whose people have strong political
opinions and party registration is about evenly split between
Republicans, Democrats and Independents. It is a home rule state where
individual communities wield tremendous influence and voters aren't
afraid to step up to the ballot box through initiative. And it is a
state where public institutions like the University of Colorado help
lead through education, research, convening power, and operational
example. I will elaborate in the following.
Colorado is a state that is blessed with abundant energy
resources--we are literally an ``all of the above'' state that is
``richly endowed'' with both fossil and renewable resources.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=CO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several important facts about Colorado's energy economy: \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado's crude oil production has quadrupled since
2010, and the state holds about 4% of total U.S. crude
reserves.
Colorado is the fifth-largest natural gas-producing
state, and 11 of the nation's 100 biggest natural gas fields
are located in the state.
Colorado is the top coalbed methane-producing state,
and has nearly one-fourth of U.S. economically recoverable
coalbed methane reserves.
Electricity from renewable sources has more than
doubled since 2010 to almost 25% of Colorado's net generation
in 2017, led by increased wind power from the state's nearly
2,000 turbines.
Although coal production in Colorado has declined
64% since 2005, over half of Colorado's electricity still comes
from coal-fired power plants, and annual coal production in the
state increased for the first time in six years in 2017, as
foreign demand for U.S. coal rose.
Colorado's economy overall ranks agriculture, manufacturing, mining
and tourism as its four top contributors. Mining represents 4.8 percent
out output and 1.2 percent of jobs. It is further estimated that each
job in oil and gas extraction supports an additional 4.2 indirect and
induced jobs which amplifies the effects of Colorado's fossil fuel
economy.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.cobizmag.com/Articles/The-economist-Whats-the-most-
important-industry-in-Colorado/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no free lunch for any source of energy, but Colorado also
knows first-hand the human health effects that come, particularly, from
the extraction and use of fossil fuels. Last year, there were 280 days
of recorded unhealthy air quality in the state, particularly along the
Front Range where two-thirds of the state's population resides. The
national average is 227 days.
As one example, a new University of Colorado Anschutz study finds
that mothers living near more intense oil and gas development have a 40
to 70 percent higher chance of having children with congenital heart
defects.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.cpr.org/2019/07/19/cu-anschutz-study-suggests-link-
between-oil-and-gas-developments-and-child-heart-defects/.
See also: https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/cu-
study-finds-people-living-near-oil-and-gas-may-be-at-higher-risk-of-
cancer.
https://www.cuanschutztoday.org/those-living-near-oil-and-gas-
facilities-may-be-at-higher-risk-of-cancer-and-other-diseases/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Health can and should be one of the primary drivers in our
collective recognition of the need (and inevitability) of transitioning
to a genuinely low-carbon economy. The health of people, the health of
ecological systems, and the health of all living beings should be
squarely in our sights as we continue to consider and take steps to
move forward from primary reliance on fossil fuels
Renewable energy in Colorado is quite a story, as it is now in many
states across the country. Providing new electric generation that
reduces the energy sector's impact on public health and the environment
and diversifying the state's electricity portfolio, thereby increasing
the resiliency of the electrical grid are two strong components of
Colorado's expanding renewable energy economy.
Jobs are another important part of the equation in Colorado's
diversification of its energy economy. While Colorado is far from one
of the most populous states in the country with a statewide population
of only 5.7 million, our state now ranks 7th in the U.S. in terms of
renewable energy jobs. Approximately 17,000 workers now work in
renewable energy with the solar industry employing nearly 8,000 people
and the wind industry employing more than 7,000. One sector that is
likely to increase quickly is in the electric vehicle (EV) space, which
already employed about 3,000 people as of 2018.\5\ Overall, the state
has 57,591 people working in clean energy industries.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.cobizmag.com/Articles/The-economist-Whats-the-most-
important-industry-in-Colorado/.
\6\ https://www.solarreviews.com/news/colorado-7th-us-renewable-
energy-jobs-061418/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy efficiency, as we are all aware, is one of the most critical
elements in the path to ensuring a low-carbon economy. As noted, the
energy we don't use is the cleanest, least carbon intensive and least
expensive of all sources. The majority of clean energy jobs in Colorado
are in energy efficiency, which employs 32,036 workers. Nationally that
accounts for 1.4 percent of all the energy efficiency workers in the
US.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
policy matters
Energy has been a prominent and storied part of Colorado history.
That history begins in earnest with the Pikes' Peak Gold Rush in 1858
that brought unprecedented numbers of people into the region. That
influx, in turn ``led to powerful social, economic, and political
changes that brought about the creation of Colorado Territory in 1861,
culminating in the admittance of Colorado to the Union in 1876.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://www.historycolorado.org/mining-industry-colorado.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A more recent story begins with a brown bag lunch convened nearly
twenty years ago at the University of Colorado Denver that brought
together business, non-profit, and academic sector energy
representatives to explore the most effective policies that could help
advance Colorado's energy economy. The top option identified was a
renewable energy standards that was then, quite swiftly, declared to be
``politically unviable'' by many of those assembled.
Although introduced in three legislative sessions, the legislature
did not pass a renewable energy standard. Instead, in 2004, Colorado
became the first state to pass a citizen-initiated renewable energy
standard (Amendment 37 that resulted in a mandate to the state's two
investor-owned utilities to produce 3% renewably based electricity by
2007 and 10% renewably based electricity by 2015.
Xcel Energy serves roughly 78% of Colorado and had begun
exploration, before the passage of Amendment 37, of wind power. Spurred
by the RPS, Xcel stepped up its efforts and completed construction of
the 44 turbine, 25.3 Ponnequin wind farm on the Colorado/Wyoming
border. That wind farm enabled the family that owned that ranch land to
both remain on their property, and provided them critical income at a
time when they would have otherwise had to vacate a failing ranch.
Cattle and the turbines co-exist to this day and represent a critical
element of Colorado's renewable energy economy--namely, rejuvenation of
Colorado's rural economy through renewable energy. You have heard more
about that story from Cary Weiner who testified earlier.
Xcel Energy found its wind investments to be tremendously viable
and discovered that they were on track to meet the renewable energy
standard well ahead of schedule. The utility then came to visit former
Governor Bill Ritter when he was elected in 2006 to not only
discontinue its opposition to the renewable energy standard, but to ask
the Governor's support for doubling the standard. That standard has
been strengthened three times since 2004 and today is at 30% by 2020,
with 3% from distributed resources.
Today, Xcel Energy is the number one wind producing utility in the
country. Xcel recently came before Colorado's Public Utilities
Commission with its Clean Energy Plan to reach 80% carbon free
electricity by 2030 and to produce 100% carbon free electricity by
2050. That plan was codified in the state's 2019 legislative session in
SB 236, signed into law by Governor Polis, which also included
cooperative utilities in the mix with a 20% renewable requirement by
2030.
Partnering with utilities, rather than combatting them, represents
a new kind of politics that can supersede destructive partisanship and
result in mutually beneficial polices and plans that advance
economically beneficial, healthful, low-carbon strategies.
As Governor Polis noted in his testimony, thirteen bills relating
to strengthening Colorado's energy policies came to his desk for
signature. SB 236, noted above, addressed another critical component of
Colorado's evolving energy economy--namely, the many workers in the
fossil fuel industries. While oil and natural gas workers have
increased, along with Colorado's production, coal workers do not face
the same story with the closure of several coal plants across the
state.
In recognition of the state's transition away from fossil-based
electricity generation, SB 236 also allows utilities to pursue
securitization (i.e., using low-cost bonds) to refinance power plants
so as to retire them early and also requires the PUC to consider
workforce transition issues for individuals and communities that have
relied on jobs in the coal sector. The thoughtful and active retraining
of workers is a role in which all societal institutions can and should
participate: government, the private sector and educational
institutions primary among these.
Optimal energy policy is truly bipartisan and transpartisan. It is
policy that recognizes its role in providing technology neutral
platforms that can unleash the best of human capacity and enterprise.
It is policy that recognizes the inevitability of a changing energy
economy while recognizing the unprecedented prosperity that has been
brought through reliance on finite fossil fuels. It is policy that can
help bring continued prosperity to communities everywhere through
support of diversifying our fuel portfolio, lowering our carbon
footprint, and protecting human health. It is policy that recognizes
the optimal roles of government as a partner in needed public-private
partnerships that can invest the capital required for this energy
transition: as a purchaser in that new energy economy; and as a
regulator to ensure that all energy enterprise is conducted in
sufficiently transparent and ethical ways.
Over the last decade or more, energy policies have been enacted in
the United States more at the local, state and regional levels in the
absence of significant action at the federal level. While this is a
global challenge, that is and will be practically addressed at a very
local level, recognition of the now globally-connected energy economy
is also an opportunity for rejuvenated, bipartisan effort in Congress,
as well as continued policy enactment, as appropriate at the state and
local levels.
research also matters
Research for all aspects of climate change and the energy
transition is an extraordinarily important investment as we seek to
provide lawmakers accurate science-based evidence on which to base
policies, programs and investments that can make a sufficient
difference.
The University of Colorado Boulder became an inaugural member of
the University Climate Change Coalition (UC3) which now boasts 20 top-
tier Research-1 (R-1) universities from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.
UC3 members are committed to leveraging institutional strengths to
foster a robust exchange of best practices and lessons learned in
pursuit of accelerating local climate solutions that reduce greenhouse
gas emissions and build community resilience.
CU Boulder Chancellor Phil DiStefano just attended a UC3 Summit
hosted by the University of British Columbia in Vancouver where he was
able to engage in transnational conversations about how to combine
research endeavors across universities so that critical research
dollars are used as efficiently as possible while leveraging the
respective strengths and expertise of the collaborating universities.
Roughly 74% of CU Boulder's research funding comes from the federal
government. The importance of adequate support of leading edge research
cannot be underestimated if we are to successfully address one of the
greatest challenges, and opportunities ever faced. While we cannot rely
on technology development in the applied research space as the sole
solution to this challenge, there is some remarkable work underway at
our university, and others.
Two among many examples in the applied space include:
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Institute (RASEI):
A team of CU Boulder, the National Institute of Standards
(NIST) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) researchers led by CU's Dr. Greg Rieker has developed a
long-range methane leak detection system based on CU's Nobel
Prize winning frequency comb laser, which also resulted from a
collaboration between CU Boulder and NIST. The system is
capable of scanning several square miles in just a few minutes,
paving the way to improving both safety and efficiency. The
team formed a Colorado-based commercial spin-out company to
transition the technology to market. https://www.colorado.edu/
mechanical/2017/01/26/cu-boulder-team-track-methane-leaks-
usinglasers.
Chemical & Biological Engineering: Prashant Nagpal's
research has ``developed nanobio-hybrid organisms capable of
using airborne carbon dioxide and nitrogen to produce a variety
of plastics and fuels, a promising first step toward low-cost
carbon sequestration and eco-friendly manufacturing for
chemicals. By using light-activated quantum dots to fire
particular enzymes within microbial cells, the researchers were
able to create ``living factories'' that eat harmful
CO2 and convert it into useful products such as
biodegradable plastic, gasoline, ammonia and biodiesel.''
https://www.colorado.edu/today/2019/06/11/these-nano-bugs-eat-
co2-and-make-eco-friendly-fuel.
CU Boulder is home to some of the most renowned climate research in
the world, and was recently ranked number one in the world for
geosciences. Nested in a constellation of federal labs (several of
which I understand you visited during your trip to Colorado), that
research includes:
The Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research
(INSTAAR): Tania Schoennagel analyzes the increase in wildfires
in the American West over the past 30 years. Her work projects
how climate change will affect the trend in coming decades,
particularly with regard to the wildland/urban interface. In
Congress and elsewhere, she advocates for policies that promote
adaptive resilience in response to changing fire regimes.
https://www.colorado.edu/today/2017/04/17/new-era-western-
wildfire-demands-new-waysprotecting-people-ecosystems.
INSTAAR: One of the most cited researchers in the
geosciences, James White was among the first to document the
astonishing speed and magnitude of past climate change seen in
ice cores. By showing that climate change in natural systems
tends to happen abruptly over decades, White's work has
contributed greatly to our understanding of the potential
consequences of climate change within our lifetimes. https://
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/12/131203-abrupt-climate-
change-scienceearly-warning-report/.
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental
Sciences (CIRES) and INSTAAR. CIRES is a partnership between
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and
CU Boulder. More than two dozen CIRES and INSTAAR researchers
are at the heart of NOAA's global monitoring program, which
continually tracks and studies levels of greenhouse gases in
the atmosphere. Those measurements of gases, including those
known to cause greenhouse warming and others involved in
depletion of Earth's protective ozone layer, are the foundation
of the world's understanding of past, current, and future
climate change. (Carbon Cycle Greenhouse Gases group)
CIRES: Lisa Dilling and other researchers in the
CIRES-based Western Water Assessment seek to understand how
climate change and variability affect water and other resources
in the Intermountain West. The WWA team is working with water
managers and lawmakers to understand how cities plan for and
respond to natural hazards and climate change, exploring what
kind of snowpack data can best inform water managers making
decisions about water allocation and use, and working with
ranchers to help navigate matters like drought and insurance.
CIRES: CIRES scientists are among the most well-
known experts in the world on Earth's changing frozen realms--
the cryosphere. Led by CIRES Director Waleed Abdalati, an
expert in remote sensing of Greenland's dynamic and melting
ice, CIRES scientists track changes in Arctic sea ice, study
permafrost evolution, conduct field work from the South Pole to
the North Pole, and much more. The CIRES-based National Snow
and Ice Data Center tracks changes in Earth's frozen realms to
better understand our future: from measurements of sea-ice
extent in the Arctic and sea-ice forecasting for the Navy, to
discovering the climate impacts of melting permafrost.
CU's engineering, environmental design, geosciences and business
programs, supported by the work of centers and institutes such as the
Center for Science Technology Policy Research (CSTPR) and those noted
above are also cultivating the workforce of the near-future who will
literally help design, engineer, build and operate the low-carbon
economy.
Students are prepared, in part, to do so through participating in
our campus as a living laboratory. This refers to integrating research
and education into our daily operations and creating a fertile ground
for innovation and entrepreneurship by bringing together our
researchers, industry partners, and venture capital with the goal of
taking applied research quickly to commercialization. A brilliant and
potentially breakthrough concept like Prashant Nagpal's as one example,
has to be demonstrated through pilot scale deployment to prove their
merit and ultimately their efficacy in the marketplace. What better
place than university campuses, and the communities in which they
reside, to provide that testing ground?
The imperative is clear. The work underway is remarkable and
hopeful. The respective and collective roles of each sector and
institution you are hearing from in the course of the work of this
Select Committee are also clear. The very fact of your work through
this Select Committee is an indication that congress not only
recognizes the imperative, but is looking for paths to support the good
work at the local, state, and regional levels across this country, and
across the world. We in Colorado applaud you, and thank you.
Again, thank you Chair Castor, Ranking Member Graves, Congressman
Neguse, and members of the committee, for the opportunity to testify
today. I look forward to the discussion and to answering any questions
you may have.
Chairwoman Castor. Terrific. Well, thank you all very much
for your compelling testimony.
At this time I will recognize myself for 5 minutes for
questions.
Mayor Jones, last week the Boulder City Council declared a
climate emergency, passed a resolution declaring it so. That
resolution commits to keeping the concerns of vulnerable
neighborhoods and neighbors at the forefront as we transition
to the clean energy economy and kind of double down on the
planning process.
There is already too much inequity across this country, and
I would like to ask you, and Mayor Troxell as well, you all
have your finger on the pulse of your communities. What
recommendations do you have for us at the national level as we
develop a national climate action plan that can be impactful to
ensure that as we deploy certain resources, make certain
investments, that we are lifting people, that we are treating
people equally, we are not leaving anyone out?
Ms. Jones. Well, thank you, Chair, for that question. We
are lucky to have a partnership with the Just Transition
Collaborative here at CU to help wrestle with this very issue,
and several recommendations came out of that work that I would
pass on to you.
One is that I think as we embark on this huge systemic
change and transition is to make sure that underrepresented
communities are at the table as part of the decision-making
process and their voices are heard.
Another is to make sure that the jobs, the solar energy
jobs, the energy efficiency and household jobs, are going to
those communities, to those workforces, low-income workers that
can be trained and be a part of the solution, and so that they
have access to that economic growth.
And then I would also say that we want to make sure that we
are providing the solutions, whether it is solar on the roof or
what not, make sure that everybody has access to that. One
example that we have here in Boulder is we have a program to
try to do just that, so that everyone is included in the
solution and the benefits of it.
Mr. Troxell. And I would just like to add that in Fort
Collins, a priority of our Council is equity and inclusion. So
we look at everything that we do through that lens for our
entire community so we have a community for all, and with that
we look at investment in our infrastructure as key because it
does benefit all in our community.
And finally, an important part of our community is
engagement, and engagement is really meeting people where they
are, not coming to City Council on Tuesday night at 6 o'clock,
but it is really engaging everyone where they are.
So we work closely. I would state one program in
particular, working with the Center for Public Engagement at
Colorado State University, it really does bring people
together. It is not the loudest people in the room, not the
smartest people in the room, but it is everybody in the room to
have a conversation and to really get to better solutions.
Chairwoman Castor. Terrific.
Mr. Weiner, it is not your parents' Extension service
anymore. Thank you for your concrete policy recommendations for
us.
Will you expand upon that? Tell us a story, a real-world
example of something where maybe you were surprised at the
impact or you are hopeful for the opportunity if we scale
something up on the national level.
Mr. Weiner. Thank you for that. I think working with the
agricultural sector has been a pleasant surprise, engaging
their interest in renewable energy. I think we oftentimes think
of large wind farms being planted down on farms across the
United States, and then farmers getting the benefit of lease
payments. But what was surprising to me was just seeing the
interest in offsetting their own electricity use, noting how
some of these irrigation expenses make up a pretty significant
part of their operating expenses for running a farm, for
example.
So when we opened up our first Rural Energy for America
program grant to these folks, we had space for 30, and we
filled 50 right off the bat. So I think there is a lot of
interest. We didn't have as many agricultural producers succeed
in their applications as we would have hoped, but that was
something that has been a pleasant surprise.
Chairwoman Castor. And when you think about the struggles
across rural America right now and so many challenges our
farmers face, I think this is a very important area, and I hope
the committee can focus a lot more time on this in the future.
Thank you, and at this time I will recognize Ranking Member
Graves.
Mr. Graves. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thanks again for all of your testimony. It was a pleasure
to meet you.
Mayors, I have an important question to ask. I heard these
subtle references to UC-Boulder and Colorado State University.
Which one is better? [Laughter.]
Mr. Troxell. Actually, we have excellent research
universities, and I would speak to the renewable energy
laboratory that actually brings together Colorado State
University, University of Colorado at Boulder, and Colorado
School of Mines in partnership with NREL and really working
collaboratively related to our energy-related needs.
Mr. Graves. Thank you. There wasn't a right answer. All I
know is I think I see Saint colors on that flag over there.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Graves. Seriously, Mr. Weiner and Ms. VanGenderen----
Ms. VanGenderen. Just call me Heidi. It is a lot easier.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Graves. Right. Oh goodness, my Dutch-German family
would be very disappointed in me.
But in any case, you both mentioned something that I think
is pretty important, as did Congresswoman DeGette. We talk
often about reducing emissions, which is, of course, an
objective I think we all share, and we need to ensure we
continue on this downward trajectory. But you both also
mentioned potential opportunities for sequestration, as did the
legislation that Congressman Neguse and Congresswoman DeGette
were working on, the role of the biogenic environment and
actually capturing.
In Louisiana, one of the things that we do for
sustainability is we engineer oyster reefs in a way where you
can set up geometric formations to where wave energy comes in,
hits perhaps a pyramid shape, sends the wave energy up instead
of into our communities. Oyster reefs sequester greenhouse
gases. They purify the water. They help to clean the water.
They obviously provide a food source. Multiple win-win-wins as
a result of those, and I think it is something that is really
important that oftentimes isn't given as much respect in this
discussion that is needed. So I appreciate both of you bringing
it up.
Mr. Wright, you brought up some things that were somewhat
counter-intuitive, I think. You actually said--and don't let me
put words in your mouth, but basically that by producing
natural gas, we are actually resulting in cleaner emissions,
cleaner energy solutions. Could you expand on that a little
bit? Because I think particularly energy production in Colorado
perhaps is cleaner than anywhere else as a result of producing
natural gas here.
Mr. Wright. Yes, two points on that. The first is that over
the last decade, the significant drop in U.S. greenhouse gas
emissions, the single largest source of that drop--there are
different studies. Somewhere between 50 and 70 percent of the
drop in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions has been from the huge
surge in U.S. natural gas production, which has driven down the
price. Coal used to be, not long ago, by far the largest source
of electricity in the United States, at over 50 percent. Today
it is down to about 30 percent, and natural gas has displaced
it. So by burning natural gas instead of coal, it has halved
the greenhouse gas emissions. That has been the biggest driver
of reduction of the United States' CO2 emissions.
And then where it is produced, the second half of your
question, matters too. Our wonderful governor spoke about that
earlier today. When you produce in Colorado, which is even
better than the country as a whole, or in the United States, we
are just simply much more careful about gathering all the gas,
and those technologies continue to get better. I love the
monitoring technology. A friend of mine is involved in that
company that Heidi mentioned. If you can collect a much larger
percentage of the gas, therefore less leaks out, and when you
don't have the infrastructure you have to burn the natural gas,
called flaring--so it doesn't release methane but it burns and
releases CO2 emissions. So there is much less of
that in the United States, particularly in Colorado, than
production almost anywhere else in the world. So given the
constant demand, or whatever the marketplace demands for oil
and gas, where you produce it matters.
Mr. Graves. I think I read recently where gas that comes
from the United States as compared to Russia is 13 percent
cleaner. So whenever you are using Russian gas, it results in a
dirtier environment and greater emissions.
When we were at NREL yesterday, I don't remember who it was
but one of the scientists said that if we had to pivot
immediately to renewables, that the technology, the grid--I
think you mentioned that 2 percent of the world's energy is
produced from renewables--that we are simply not capable at
this point of just having this automatic transition. I noted
that a lot of the scientists who talked to us about trucks and
ships and planes and other areas where the energy concentration
of renewables and the storage capacity of batteries is not
great enough.
The U.S. I think is viewed globally as perhaps not the
leader on emissions reduction, but as I stated earlier, we
actually are. Could you briefly compare the U.S. to perhaps
Europe and our strategies for emission reduction?
Mr. Wright. You bet, and maybe the biggest example here is
Germany, who has certainly spent, per capita, the most of any
country in the world. They started earlier. Germany spent
somewhere between $200 and $400 billion on the German clean
energy transition. Number one, they reduced their
CO2 emissions over the last decade significantly
less than the United States has. In fact, I mentioned the world
gets 81 percent of its energy from fossil fuels. Germany gets
84 percent of its energy today from fossil fuels.
Mr. Graves. And is supporting Nord Stream 2 to bring in
more Russian gas.
Mr. Wright. But the part that concerns me the most--to me
it should be always focused on humans--is Germany doubled their
electricity prices from the start of their energy transition.
They are today three times higher than the United States, and
from their own public health data 30,000 people are killed
every year, premature deaths, because of the extra costs of
energy, that they don't heat their homes. That is a significant
problem in the U.S. More than 10 percent of Americans report
keeping their house at unsafe temperatures, both too hot and
too cold, because of electricity prices; 14 percent receive
disconnection notices.
So I loved all the ``cough'' about lower energy prices. If
we could transition energy and drive prices down. It would be
fantastic, but it would be a first.
Mr. Graves. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Castor. Mr. Casten, you are recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Casten. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to pick up on that thread, and I have to warn the
crowd, I am going to nerd out here a little bit. But you and I
have very similar backgrounds. I wasn't smart enough to get
into MIT but went up the road to Dartmouth for engineering
school and then spent 16 years as a CEO of various clean energy
companies.
Mr. Wright. Fantastic.
Mr. Casten. You didn't say this in your testimony but I
would suspect you sort of intimated. One of the theories I came
to early on is that we consistently make the same mistake in
our energy policy that Dartmouth and probably MIT made in their
alcohol policy. [Laughter.]
Mr. Casten. We assumed that we can regulate demand by
regulating supply.
People want energy, and that led me to really focus on
energy efficiency and conservation, particularly on the
generation side.
But I want to talk a little bit, because I have some
concerns about what you said, but I want to sort of hear your
thoughts on this.
For most of the beginning of my career, natural gas was
always $3 per million BTU. It was locked in place, and the gas
industry--if you could sell it for $5, you would rather sell it
for $5. But a lot of the power sector built massive amounts of
gas-fired generation in the '90s because they said at $3, we
can compete with coal. We built 200 gigawatts--that is 20
percent of our entire power fleet--gas-fired generation in
about a 10-year period to chase $3 gas.
Now, as I don't need to tell you, in 2007 the price went up
to about $12. First of all, I am assuming that you would agree
with me that that was basically a supply/demand balance that
really pushed that up.
Mr. Wright. One hundred percent.
Mr. Casten. Okay. Post-recession and post the fracking
revolution, the price has gone back to $3, and we have been
basically at $3 for the last decade. And I agree with you that
that has substantially explained the demise of coal. Renewables
has played a big role, efficiency has played a big role, but
gas has played a big role there.
During that same 10-year period, European gas prices have
been around $7 on average, roughly speaking. There was a huge
push in the '90s to build LNG facilities to export gas to
Europe to chase high-cost gas, because a lot of gas producers
wanted to chase that expensive gas market.
Your testimony suggested that if we export gas overseas, we
will drive down the price of gas overseas. Why does supply and
demand not still apply? Because we learned those lessons
before, and if we raise the price of gas internationally, we
will bring coal back.
Mr. Wright. I appreciate very much your comments and agree
with your assessment of history, absolutely. The difference is
the magnitude of the shale revolution. Almost all oil and gas
was originally produced in shales. It slowly, through geologic
time and natural hydraulic fractures, leaks out. So before, we
were just finding the stuff that leaked out and got trapped.
Now we are going into the source rocks, and the reserves in the
United States are just gigantic. I think $3 is a ceiling on
natural gas prices for as far as the eye can see.
The one thing I disagree a little bit with is the United
States, we used to be the largest importer of natural gas 10
years ago. By the end of this year we will be the third largest
exporter of LNG in the world, and we have actually meaningfully
depressed LNG prices. They are down 40 percent if you take a
global average of before the start of U.S. exports and today.
So, yes, we are growing the growth of demand for natural
gas. Yes, supply and demand works. So more demand for natural
gas should be, in theory, a push up on price. Right now what it
is--that is all true, but during the years before the financial
crisis we averaged 1,000 natural gas rigs drilling, and we were
a large importer. Today, it has been two years before we had
200 rigs drilling for natural gas. It is about 175----
Mr. Casten. I guess my challenge to you, all of that might
be true, and by the time we know for certain it is true, it is
going to be too late to change course. If you look at the
history of North Sea oil, we did a really good job of drilling
when oil was expensive, and then exporting when oil was cheap,
and I think most of those European countries would say that
they did the opposite of buy low, sell high. If you can sell
gas for $3 in the United States, why would you possibly invest
in liquefaction, storage, and shipping to sell it for $3
overseas? You are not going to get any return on your capital.
Chesapeake had a negative return on equity for most of their
life.
I have a real, real concern that if the price of gas goes
up, we are going to use a lot more coal in this country.
Mr. Wright. A very legitimate concern. I would love to talk
with you more about it offline. But the reserves and
productivity of gas in the United States, there is 100 years of
low-cost production at today's rates.
Mr. Casten. But that is a supply question. Demand still
matters.
Mr. Wright. One hundred percent.
Mr. Casten. Thank you.
I yield back.
Chairwoman Castor. Representative Neguse, you are
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to each of the witnesses for being here today,
for your testimony. I can assure Representative Graves that the
correct answer, when you represent the 2nd Congressional
District, is that both universities are wonderful universities.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Neguse. So I am particularly grateful to the mayor of
Boulder and to the mayor of Fort Collins, the mayors of the two
largest cities in my congressional district, for their
leadership and for showing us the way. My hope is we can export
some of what we have gleaned from your testimony to Washington
as we develop our recommendations.
Mr. Wright, I do want to talk about your testimony. I
reviewed it in great detail, your written testimony, and
obviously your oral remarks. I disagree with your appraisal of
natural gas in the context of poverty and the way in which you
have characterized it in your testimony, and here is why. Most
empirical studies that I have seen demonstrate that unmitigated
climate change, if anything, amplifies poverty, because climate
change will affect developing countries and poorer communities
more than rich ones.
In the United States, the economic toll--there was a study
published last April that found that inaction on climate change
by the year 2090 would cost the United States $224 billion more
in economic impacts per year. That is the cost of health care,
infrastructure, electricity, water resources, agriculture, and
ecosystem. So I just respectfully disagree with the way in
which you framed that.
But beyond the economic arguments, I want to drill down a
little bit here on one of the phrases that you mentioned in
your testimony, which is this notion that natural gas is,
quote, ``helping to clean our air.'' You are familiar with the
acronym VOC, with volatile organic compounds; correct?
Mr. Wright. I sure am.
Mr. Neguse. And you would concede that some VOCs are known
to be directly hazardous to human health; is that right?
Mr. Wright. That is correct.
Mr. Neguse. And some of them contribute to the production
of ozone or other regulated pollutants; right?
Mr. Wright. Correct.
Mr. Neguse. And for the benefit of the folks here,
according to the National Institutes of Health, VOCs can cause
irritation of the eyes, respiratory tract, dizziness, visual
disorders, memory problems, damage to the central nervous
system, and in some cases cancer.
Would you concede that the drilling process of hydraulic
fracturing can release what are known as volatile organic
compounds?
Mr. Wright. Yes, it does.
Mr. Neguse. Okay. And just again for the benefit of the
record, the University of Colorado's Institute of Arctic and
Alpine Research completed a study this year determining that
high levels of harmful atmospheric pollutants such as VOCs are
regularly blown into Boulder County, here where I live and
where so many here in the audience live, from oil and gas wells
to the east. They ran over 8,000 samples for VOCs in the study,
and there is no other place, program, or organization in the
state that has run that many samples for these types of gases.
So given all of that, I suspect you will agree with me that
fracking can cause health risks regarding air quality.
Mr. Wright. All energy production involves health risks,
all of them.
Mr. Neguse. Well, I would disagree with you there.
Obviously, a big focus of our work over the course of the last
two days has been visiting with scientists that are part of the
renewable energy transformation, and I can assure you that the
health risks from the various sources of energy that we have
been looking at, solar and wind, of course, pale in comparison
to the health risks caused by hydraulic fracturing.
I will just tell you that a 2016 Johns Hopkins
epidemiological study of more than 400,000 patients showed that
there was a significant association between fracking and
increases in mild, moderate, and severe cases of asthma.
Are you familiar with which industry is the top producers
right now, a top producer I should say, of VOCs along the Front
Range?
Mr. Wright. The largest producer of VOCs in Colorado is
naturally occurring sources.
Mr. Neguse. Well, I disagree with you there, and perhaps we
will discuss this further offline, but from the studies we have
seen----
Mr. Wright. I think that is reasonably well documented.
Mr. Neguse [continuing]. The oil and gas industry is the
top producer of volatile organic compounds along the Front
Range, which is a region that has failed to comply with Federal
air quality standards for more than 15 years. So this notion
that problems in our ozone here, emissions and so forth, are
being caused by emissions in Asia--I am sure you are familiar
with this, that just in March of this year, our air quality in
Denver was three times worse than Beijing.
So I just would implore you, and I certainly implore others
who are watching, to read the data, to talk to people in the
communities that are being impacted here in Boulder County,
elsewhere across the state. It is a very real, visceral issue
for them. My wife and I have an 11-month-old daughter. We want
to make sure that she is able to breathe clean air here in
Colorado, in the place that we are lucky to call home.
So with that, I would yield the balance of my time.
[Applause.]
Mr. Wright. May I respond?
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you.
Before we turn to Congresswoman DeGette, for our panel and
for the audience, we would like to have another round of
questions, if you all are willing to do that. Good, okay.
Congresswoman DeGette, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. DeGette. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Well, I think I would like to follow on to Congressman
Neguse's questions about fracking, very briefly, because as
well as the VOCs that result from fracking and which we are
trying to deal with on the Federal level, fracking also, of
course, has the fracking fluid that can potentially contaminate
ground water. So last Thursday I reintroduced the ``FRAC'' Act,
which I have been doing for some years. What that does is it
eliminates the Halliburton loophole that was enacted in the
1990s which exempts only the oil and gas industry from
reporting the chemical components of the fracking fluid from
the Safe Drinking Water Act.
So I guess there are a lot of environmental impacts, as
Congressman Neguse noted, that come from fracking. So as a
result, Mayor Jones, I know that the City of Boulder recently
extended its fracking moratorium. I am wondering if you can
talk about the municipality's reasons for this moratorium and
what it has done for your local economy here, pro or con.
Ms. Jones. Thank you, Congresswoman DeGette. We have a lot
of concerns in our community with fracking from two angles. One
is, as Congressman Neguse eloquently stated, there is a lot of
public health impacts that come from oil and gas drilling and
exploration, and I will just note that the Boulder County oil
and gas inspector did a study to look at leaks from oil and gas
production and found a 65 percent leak rate, which prompted the
industry, to their credit, to go and do a big push to fix those
leaks. But two years later I went back to see how we are doing,
and it is a 45 percent leak rate because new leaks happened.
I guess my point is there are a lot of air pollutants, both
methane, which deals with climate, and VOCs, which address
public health, that come from oil and gas production, and it is
a concern of our community; we are downwind.
The other side of that is our economy is very much based on
a high quality of life, our wonderful vistas, our wonderful
outdoors, being able to recreate and breathe clean air, and a
lot of companies are attracted to bring their companies here
because of that. We have a very robust economy, and fracking is
at odds with the basis of that.
Ms. DeGette. So one thing, Colorado has actually passed
some of the most stringent laws around fracking in the last few
years, but yet you are saying this leaking and some of these
other issues, it still occurs even despite the strong laws and,
frankly, the commitment of most of our oil and gas companies
here in Colorado to comply with those laws.
Ms. Jones. Yes. The methane rules that were passed were a
great step forward. We appreciate industry's agreeing to some
of that. However, yes, the leaks continue, and we know how much
more potent methane is than CO2, and we know that
when leaks get in the 10 percent range, that the benefits of
natural gas as compared to coal are drastically reduced.
Ms. DeGette. So let me ask you this. Would it be important
for all of these laws, the methane, the CO2, the
Safe Drinking Water Act, it is important to have Federal
legislation that sets some kind of minimum standards? Wouldn't
that be accurate?
Ms. Jones. Absolutely.
Ms. DeGette. Okay. I just have one last question for both
of our mayors, because in the light of Congress' unfortunate
inaction on climate change issues the last few years, which we
hope to change with all due expediency, local and state
governments really have stepped in, and your testimony today is
perfect evidence of how that has happened. But I am wondering
whether you can tell me, in your view, if local and state
governments can do it without some kind of strong national
standards.
Ms. Jones. Do you want to go first?
Mr. Troxell. You know, I think we have to work in
partnership with Federal, state, and local governments. I
represent my community, and we are committed, and we are
committed in a way that we keep our heads down and keep working
on what works for our community.
Ms. DeGette. Can you do it without us, though?
Ms. Jones. No.
Mr. Troxell. No. That is where it doesn't stop at our local
boundaries, and that is where working together--and that is
where I think there is state and Federal participation as well.
Ms. Jones. I would just add that we absolutely need your
help, please. We have a window of time that is shrinking if we
are going to avoid the worst impacts of climate, climate
change, and I will just note that local municipalities cannot
afford the extreme weather events that we are predicted to see,
right? So we definitely need national action, and I will note
that putting a price on carbon at the national level would be
one of the most useful things you could do, because it could
drive all the markets, the technology, the innovation in all of
our communities.
[Applause.]
Ms. DeGette. Thank you very much.
Chairwoman Castor. We will go to a second round of
questions, and thank you for your thoughtful questions,
members.
Congresswoman DeGette, when you said unfortunate, and you
were talking about Federal policy inaction, it struck me that
we have really struggled with the Trump Administration's
rollback of energy efficiency standards, rollback of fuel
economy standards for the cars that we drive. America has
always been a leader globally in pushing, pressing for the most
modern technology. Under the Obama Administration, again, we
set higher fuel economy standards for our cars, only to be
rolled back by the Trump Administration, and many of the
automobile manufacturers didn't want them to be rolled back.
Just last week California and a number of the automakers
decided, well, we can't recede, we can't cut and run in
America, we have to move forward because we have to compete for
the modern electric vehicles of the future. Otherwise, they
will be built in China and in Europe. No, this is the United
States of America, we have to continue to be the leaders.
You all--I am going to go to our mayors again--you have
been leaders here locally and have a lot of lessons that we can
take away when it comes to energy efficiency and cleaner
vehicles, electric vehicles. Can you share with us what you
have been doing and what you would reiterate again for the
record how important national policy is and what that would
mean to your communities and to communities across the country?
Mr. Troxell. Well, I will just start off. You know, we have
to do this in partnership as well, and I think regulatory
policy is important, but that is not the only thing. I see our
community and our citizens really doing the right thing.
Chairwoman Castor. I think citizens are hungry for it, and
they know they can put money back in their pocket; right? Yes.
Mr. Troxell. They can see that, and that is where I think
it is a partnership. That is why we focus on the climate
economy. With a global issue, we intend to build businesses
that serve the nation and the world. That is the way we do it
strategically in our community.
Ms. Jones. Well, I will note that, for example, take
electric vehicles, we are very proud that EVs make up about 10
percent of the new car sales in Boulder, high above the state
average and the national average. Part of that is because
people care, and people can look at the savings over the life
of the vehicle and realize that.
But the other reason is that we have state and Federal tax
credits that have made that much more affordable. We have also
done bulk purchasing programs with Boulder County in order to
deliver those savings to households. So we are working hard to
do that.
We also have building codes that require wiring to be in
place for charging. We are investing in infrastructure around
the city and working with our governor on the state level.
So I think this is a team effort, but I think the Federal
role in providing those tax credits is key. I will also note
that I believe there is a bill being proposed that would raise
the cap on the number of vehicles that a company can sell
before they lose that tax credit, and it seems to me that it
would be very useful to raise that cap so that the leaders in
the industry aren't penalized by their success, because that
help to even the playing field on this new technology is paying
off. It is paying off right here in Boulder.
Chairwoman Castor. So, Ms. VanGenderen, you were at DOE.
You know how important it is for America to continue to invest
in R&D and research so that we can maintain our leadership
position in the world and build the clean energy economy. What
recommendations do you have for us based upon your experience
here 10 years after the failed, unfortunate Waxman-Markey bill?
We are in a different place. This really is a climate emergency
and we don't have time to waste. What do you recommend?
Ms. VanGenderen. I recommend that the Congress of the
United States re-find its compass once again. As was noted by
Congresswoman DeGette, and as I also stated earlier, there has
been a lot of state and local action in the absence of Federal
action. I would agree absolutely with Mayor Troxell that this
is a partnership opportunity, that it absolutely has to be
coordinated between the Federal, state, and local levels.
We, for example, are in the midst of helping to forge the
transportation transformation in this region. This is a global
issue that is going to have absolute implementation at a very
local level. The transformation in transportation is going to
be a partnership between the city, the county, the private
sector, and the university in this region that looks at
strategically mapping where electric vehicle charging
infrastructure ought to be placed, what are the sequential
steps in the investment to further electrify, how much of the
transportation sector should be electrified. If you are still
plugging those electric vehicles into 52 percent coal power, we
are not getting to our emissions goals.
So there are many, many parts to this puzzle, and I would
really urge all of us to facilitate a more honest, open
dialogue that can result in a good business plan to get us to
sufficiently low carbon status.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you.
Ranking Member Graves, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Graves. Thank you.
Ms. Heidi----
[Laughter.]
Mr. Graves [continuing]. As chief sustainability officer,
if tomorrow you were told you have to go to 100 percent
renewables, can you give us just a few of the big obstacles
that you see in being able to do that?
Ms. VanGenderen. First I would counter that, quite
honestly, by saying we need to mine energy efficiency first and
foremost.
Mr. Graves. Okay.
Ms. VanGenderen. Let's be strategic about what our
sustainable energy plan looks like on this campus, in this
community, and----
Mr. Graves. ``Efficiency'' meaning bringing down overall
demand, therefore you can----
Ms. VanGenderen. The cheapest, least carbon-intensive
energy is the energy you don't use at all, and we have not put
that on the table sufficiently. It is a business opportunity,
again, to expand that. We have a campus where there is a very
old infrastructure. A lot of the buildings here were built--in
fact, the first building was built before the State of Colorado
became a state. So welcome to Old Main. Talk about a nightmare
for my boss who oversees facilities. It is like, oh my gosh,
what do you do with that? Many, many aspects of the energy
economy.
In terms of renewables, there is the whole of the
resilience consideration, so how much of the renewable energy
future is going to be at utility scale versus a distributed
scale. We are certainly looking strategically at how much we
can produce on this campus but know that regionally there is
going to be a broader play, again, to coordinate with our
partners in the city, the county, and the private sector
certainly, to get to a greater percentage of renewable energy.
We are looking at it. We are planning. We are trying to
figure out what our next--right now we are looking at the 2.3
megawatts that we'll add to the roughly 2.2 we already have,
and there are, as you know, many, many questions about how you
keep the reliability of the system the more renewable-reliant
it is.
Mr. Graves. Because the intermittent power and other things
where the solar works when the sun is out, the wind works when
the wind is blowing.
Ms. VanGenderen. Indeed.
Mr. Graves. I had a few other questions for folks, so if
you wouldn't mind, I would love it if you could just give us
something, nothing formal, any other thoughts you have on some
of the obstacles that you have. You have kind of this
microcosm, and it would be very interesting to hear some of
your other thoughts along those lines.
Ms. VanGenderen. Be glad to.
Mr. Graves. To all panel members, look, I get it. Everyone
is talking about we have to migrate to this 100 percent
renewable, and folks saying that we need to stop producing
fossil fuels. I want to throw out a few things. Number one, I
was reading a report a while back that talked about how, for
battery storage technology, it takes 50 to 100 pounds of mining
rare and critical materials, oftentimes from China, to produce
one pound of battery, one pound--50 to 100 pounds of mining,
one pound of battery.
Number two, in 2011--and we had a chance to talk a little
bit about this last night--in 2011 there was a moratorium on
offshore energy production because of the Deepwater Horizon
disaster that trashed much of our state. Don't get me started.
But as a result, we significantly reduced domestic energy
production. In 2011, the year after the BP disaster, one-half
of this nation's trade deficit, one-half of the entire trade
deficit, was attributable to us importing energy from other
countries. We have had witness after witness come testify
before our committees. So if we come in and say, hey, we are
going to just stop producing, it doesn't stop demand because
you have a system--I talked about the grid earlier, or the
trucks or planes or what have you, that continue to be
dependent upon these energy streams.
So we still have demand or dependence upon these streams.
So if we are going to be dependent upon those, it seems like it
makes more sense to produce it where we can do it safest and
cleanest, and that is the United States.
Mr. Wright, do you want to expand on that? I think you also
wanted to respond earlier to the question you received from Mr.
Neguse.
Mr. Wright. Yes, thank you. I will take both of those.
A real quick answer to your thing, it is best to have
honest accounting. We have a much more black-and-white dialogue
than really represents reality. There is 100 tons of coal
inside every wind turbine tower, 100 tons in the tower; roughly
another 100 tons used in the thermal process to get the coking
coal into the tower. The blades are made, in meaningful part,
out of oil and gas. They are mined in China, they are
transported and assembled and monitored--it is impossible to
have a wind farm without oil and gas, impossible.
So when we say zero emissions, we just have to do the full
accounting. They are reduced emissions, but we should try to
talk honestly about it.
And Representative Neguse's comments about VOCs, which are
definitely health hazards, absolutely, but as oil and gas
production has grown in Colorado, VOC emissions are going the
other way. More modern wells are more dramatically reducing the
emissions of VOCs such that total emissions from our sector,
with four times the production, is 40 percent lower.
And we talked about one bad day, which was an inversion in
Colorado, which is terrible, but we have those in Utah too, not
from pollution in Utah. Pollution coming from out of our state
into our state is a big issue, and we should account for and
look at that as well.
But I am for clean air, clean energy, clean environment,
the same things we want. I just wish we had a more honest,
sober dialogue about it.
Mr. Graves. Thank you.
Madam Chair, just begging your pardon, three quick points.
One, I just looked it up: 83 percent of VOCs come from non-oil
and gas sources in Colorado.
Number two, one of the things, when we talk about these
renewable energy jobs, I keep saying we have to get this right.
Ninety percent--in fact, we talked about this at NREL
yesterday. Over 90 percent of the solar panels are made in
China. They stole our technology and are sending it back to us.
So we have to think about how do we ensure that those jobs are
anchored here, how do we do that differently than we have seen
with those.
And lastly, under Waxman-Markey, if that had been enacted--
let me put it this way. Through our emissions regime so far, we
have actually reduced emissions greater than projected under
Waxman-Markey with cheaper energy prices by doing it without
Waxman-Markey, and it is an important thing to keep in mind. I
think we can keep building on these successes.
Chairwoman Castor. But how much farther would we have
gotten?
Mr. Casten, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Casten. Thank you.
I have a number of questions for you, Mr. Weiner, really
with a focus on rural America. In one of the presentations we
heard at NREL yesterday, we looked at this map of where
renewable resources are and, of course, where the load is,
which gets into this conversation about transmission and
storage, and those don't overlap real well, right? I mean, the
solar is primarily in the southwest, geothermal is primarily in
the northwest, wind is in a lot of places but primarily this
big stripe down the middle of the country.
Biomass is kind of everywhere, but it is particularly
concentrated in rural areas, and the sustainable portion of
biomass is inseparable from wildfire risk. Forestry managers
talk about wood on the forest floor as fuel. They don't mean
fuel for a power plant. They mean fuel when it is a dry summer
and a lightning strike comes along. But it is, of course, a
source of generation fuel if we could access it. And as the
only renewable source that is baseload and dispatchable, I
think it is pretty important that we find some way to get it.
And, by the way, their estimate was that that sustainable slice
of biomass, we could make about 100 gigawatts. That is about
the size of the whole U.S. nuke fleet, and it is about 10
percent of the U.S. grid. It is meaningful.
The challenge is that, as all of you know who have hiked in
the forests around here, that wood on the forest floor is not
necessarily near a road. It is on a steep slope, and it is
really hard to get it out. But if we could get it, it is a
fantastic job creation opportunity.
So I would just like your thoughts, with as much time as we
have left, and I suspect we have some, what could we be doing
federally to help ensure that we can cost-effectively and
sustainably get that fuel out of a place where it is going to
burn and just pollute the air into a place where we might use
it as a source of renewable energy?
Mr. Weiner. Thank you. That is a great question, and I know
that CSU has done some research on that. USDA did fund the
Bioenergy Alliance Network of the Rockies project. This was
maybe five years ago, a $10 million grant I believe through
USDA to help our researchers look into using fallen and dead
biomass as a liquid biofuel. So that work is ongoing, and I
think it is about to wrap up, so hopefully CSU has some
recommendations for the Federal Government to offer.
I agree with your assessment of the challenges, and I
suppose the one thing I would add is that I know the Forest
Service, the state Forest Service in particular, is looking at
opportunities to increase demand for biomass-based projects
like boilers and wood heaters. So to your point earlier about
supply and demand, I think if we see an uptick in demand and
something like a state or a Federal Forest Service helping to
facilitate that demand because of advantages financially or
environmentally, then perhaps the supply can follow from that.
Mr. Casten. Briefly, one of the companies that I used to
run was a bioenergy company out in California, and what we
found was really hard was that the cost of getting that
sustainable biomass out of the woods essentially scaled with
the cost of diesel, because we had to bring chippers into the
forest, diesel-fuelled chippers, run those, put it on trucks
that could haul it out, and it makes a very narrow radius
around where you can get it, and so as a result it is hard
economically to go after. But in the meantime you still sit
there and say leaving aside the self-interest of various
businesses out there, you fly over and you see all that fuel
waiting to catch.
So, much like the social cost of carbon, there is a
societal benefit in getting it out of there and not indexing
that to the cost of diesel, but I don't know that we have
tools. So are there tools you have seen in place to help give
people the right incentives to get that wood out of the forest?
Mr. Weiner. I personally can't speak to those tools. It is
not an area that I have had a lot of experience in, other than
to say there is a biomass plant in Colorado, in Gypsum,
Colorado, on the West Slope that has made it work for them. So
I am happy to find some resources for you and connect you with
them.
Mr. Casten. Thank you.
Ms. VanGenderen. I would note, Representative Casten, that
the fire hazard has changed that equation somewhat on what is
viewed as necessary and economic in recovering some of that
wood.
Mr. Casten. In what fashion?
Ms. VanGenderen. In that the fire hazard in the state is so
great because of that woody biomass, the dead trees that you
see along I-70, that the imperative has shifted a little bit in
terms of what is economic.
Mr. Casten. So let's find some ways to get it out.
Ms. VanGenderen. Yes. And as Cary noted, the Danes will
tell you it is best used for liquid fuel, not for generating
electricity from an efficiency standpoint.
Mr. Casten. Okay, thank you.
I yield back.
Chairwoman Castor. Representative Neguse, you are
recognized.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I do have a couple more questions for our mayors. But
before I do that, I just want to address a prior point with
respect to Mr. Wright's rebuttal, and that is I do think this
is a conversation that should be sober-minded and focused on
the data. So I will ask for unanimous consent to submit to the
record a publication from the Journal of Geophysical Research:
Atmospheres on ``Source Characterization of Volatile Organic
Compounds in the Colorado Northern Front Range Metropolitan
Area During Spring and Summer 2015.''
Chairwoman Castor. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
__________
Submission for the Record
Representative Joe Neguse
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
August 1, 2019
ATTACHMENT: Abeleira, A., I. B. Pollack, B. Sive, Y. Zhou, E. V.
Fischer, and D. K. Farmer (2017), Source characterization of volatile
organic compounds in the Colorado Northern Front Range Metropolitan
Area during spring and summer 2015, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 122, 3595-
3613, doi:10.1002/2016JD026227.
The article is retained in the committee files and available at:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016JD026227.
Mr. Neguse. And just suffice it to say that I think it
confirms the veracity of the statistics that I mentioned
earlier.
I will also just quote from an article. This is two days
ago. ``Emissions from oil and gas wells account for about 12
percent of Colorado's total release of greenhouse gases,
according to the state's best estimate, which it has
acknowledged is flawed. The industry is the top producer of
volatile organic compounds along the Front Range, a region that
has failed to comply with Federal air quality standards for
more than a decade.''
That article cites--and this is one of the benefits of
having a field hearing here in Boulder, is it cites the
science, which is from a study that was published in July of
2017 by scientists at NCAR, which is, of course, here in
Boulder which we were fortunate enough to visit just yesterday.
So with that, I would just again submit those into the
record and proceed to my questions with the mayor.
[The information follows:]
----------
Submission for the Record
Representative Joe Neguse
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
August 1, 2019
ATTACHMENT: Process-Based and Regional Source Impact Analysis for
FRAPPE and DISCOVER-AQ 2014. National Center for Atmospheric Research;
Atmospheric Chemistry Observations and Modeling Laboratory, July 2017.
The report is retained in the committee files and available at:
https://www.colorado.gov/airquality/
tech_doc_repository.aspx?action=open&file=FRAPPE-
NCAR_Final_Report_July2017.pdf.
So, the question to the mayor of Boulder and the mayor of
Fort Collins, you both mentioned in your written testimony and,
I believe, Mayor Troxell, you mentioned it in your oral
testimony, the work that is being done with the coalition of
cities in Colorado, I wonder if you could expound upon that a
little bit. It just is fascinating to me, and I suspect maybe
to some of my colleagues on the committee, that cities are very
diverse, very different, and I am curious as to how those
interactions have gone and how you were able to build a
coalition of cities that are perhaps politically different,
obviously in very different ways, to come together around this
common goal of bold climate action.
Ms. Jones. I will jump in there. We are proud to be one of
the initial entities bringing this together, realizing that we
all breathe the same air, we all like to ski in our mountains,
and some of the entities that are participants are mountain
communities that are very much dependent on a robust snow pack
and not having it melt too quickly and things like that. So
there is a lot to bring us together, and there was a
recognition that working together across party lines, across
geography, across sizes of towns, that we would get a lot more
done at the state legislature, and that is certainly borne out.
So with the 28 cities and counties, it represents a
sizeable portion of the population of Colorado, so suddenly we
are getting a little bit more attention. But I will just note
that there are a lot of commonalities, and we touched on some
of them, which is that the impacts we are already feeling from
climate are real, they are costly, they are dangerous to our
citizens, and they affect both our quality of life and our
economy, and that is the same regardless of whether you are
Republican, Independent, or Democrat.
Mr. Troxell. And I would add to that that there are a lot
of similarities between the communities, and I think by coming
together we can also share best practices. Although we might be
neighboring communities, oftentimes we don't know exactly what
is going on in each other's community. So being able to share
those best practices and clearly the impacts, we can discuss
those, but also what are the solutions and what are we doing,
because a lot of it, at least from my perspective, is
translating the challenges into real solutions at a local
level, because it might be land use policies in terms of
heating, or it might be transportation policies, or it might be
other sorts of things that we can translate what is the
challenge into what we can do at the local level.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you both again for your leadership. Thank
you to each of the witnesses for their testimony. And knowing
that we are getting closer to the conclusion of the hearing, I
would just reiterate again my thanks to the Chairwoman and to
my colleagues who traveled a great distance, Representative
Graves and Representative Casten, for coming to Boulder.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairwoman Castor. Thank you, Congressman Neguse.
Congresswoman DeGette, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. DeGette. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Mr. Wright, I heard you talking, and I do agree that some
of these emissions, the CO2, the methane, if there
is groundwater contamination, that doesn't just stop at state
boundaries or municipal boundaries, and I think that is what I
heard you say. Is that correct?
Mr. Wright. That is correct.
Ms. DeGette. So therefore, in Colorado for example, the oil
and gas industry, they comply with the Colorado rules around
fracking and emissions; is that right?
Mr. Wright. Yes.
Ms. DeGette. Would you agree with the governor and me and
others that Colorado has one of the strictest methane rules of
any place in the country? Is that right?
Mr. Wright. That is right.
Ms. DeGette. And the industry in Colorado, to your
knowledge, tries to comply with that methane rule; is that
right?
Mr. Wright. That is correct.
Ms. DeGette. And so wouldn't it seem to you that probably
if we want to stop methane contamination all around the
country, we should reinstate the Federal methane rule?
Mr. Wright. As I talked about----
Ms. DeGette. A yes or no will work. [Laughter.]
Mr. Wright. Not as currently----
Ms. DeGette. You don't think so, even though methane
emissions from other states may come into Colorado's local
government?
Mr. Wright. There are right ways and wrong ways to do
things. But, yes, reducing methane emissions is a positive
thing to do. I will mention----
Ms. DeGette. But you don't think we should renew the
Federal methane statute; is that right?
Mr. Wright. In its current form, no.
Ms. DeGette. Okay, thank you.
Now, I wanted to ask you, Ms. VanGenderen, in your opening
statement and in your written testimony you talked about a
number of fabulous studies that are going on about ways to
promote renewable energy and all kinds of carbon sequestration
and electrification. How close are we to being able to enact
those requirements, or how close are we to actually realizing
that research and being able to bring it into our daily lives?
Ms. VanGenderen. It is dependent on the specific research
underway. I think that it is also dependent on the devoted
resources that are given to the realization of those. Again, we
are working on the campus to make it a living, learning
laboratory. Each breakthrough energy technology needs to be
deployed in demonstrated fashion in order to prove its efficacy
in the marketplace.
Ms. DeGette. So if you get the Federal funding that you
need to support your research projects, will that help expedite
the implementation?
Ms. VanGenderen. It could absolutely speed it up.
Ms. DeGette. Will some of this research actually help us as
we try to move to a zero carbon emissions economy?
Ms. VanGenderen. There are some--if brought to scale, many
of these could be game changers, absolutely.
Ms. DeGette. Thanks.
I want to follow up, actually, on something that Mr. Graves
was talking about, because we have really seen in Colorado how
having a commitment to shifting from fossil fuels has really
worked. I would like to talk to our colleagues in Washington
about this.
In Colorado, the legislature tried for some years to pass a
renewable energy standard, and they were unable to do so
because of the opposition of the utilities and the oil and gas
industry. So finally, by voter initiative, in 2004, we passed
the first renewable energy standard in the country by
initiative, and it was 3 percent by 2007 and 10 percent by
2015. This was so wildly popular--the people in the audience
know this--that the legislature has now increased the standard
three times since 2004 with the support of the utilities and
the industry. HB-1001 set a standard of 30 percent by 2020,
still not enough, but I am going to guarantee you, with the
commitment of our citizens and our businesses working together,
that we are probably going to exceed that and we are going to
have to go in and do more.
Xcel Energy, which is one of our big, big energy companies
here, has made a commitment to zero carbon emissions by 2050,
again not fast enough, not close enough, but this shows how
fast this economy is moving, and it also shows that when you
have a commitment by local governments and by a state to
actually do something, and you can do it in a way that benefits
the energy industry and that really benefits the constituents
and the economy.
So that is why we can't just sit around in Congress and
say, well, if we would have passed Waxman-Markey, then that
wouldn't have been enough. We have to be bold, we have to be
aggressive, and we have to have strong energy standards that
are going to not only save our planet but also improve our
economy.
[Applause.]
Ms. DeGette. So thanks again, Madam Chair. Thanks for
having us.
Chairwoman Castor. I think that is a great statement to end
on, but I want to thank everyone for attending today.
It is clear that Colorado is a leader, but we need your
passion and your energy, your commitment, because we cannot do
it alone, as I think was established here today. We can have
all the terrific climate action here on the local and state
level, but unless we have a bold Federal climate action plan,
we are not going to be able to reduce carbon pollution, we are
not going to be able to adapt as we need to adapt our
communities. We are all in this together.
So I invite you all to follow the work of the committee,
follow us on social media, be an engaged citizen, help us
develop this climate action plan. It is only through working
together that we will be able to develop the bold solutions
that we need.
So at this time, I would like to advise the witnesses that
you may get some follow-up questions. Please work as
expeditiously as possible to relay your answers to the
committee.
Thank you again to the University of Colorado-Boulder, and
I will recognize the Ranking Member for a unanimous consent
request.
Mr. Graves. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent to enter
into the record a document developed by CIRES, UC-Boulder,
titled ``Accounting for Ozone,'' showing the ozone non-
attainment since 2007 and some of the causes.
Chairwoman Castor. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
__________
Submission for the Record
Representative Garret Graves
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
August 1, 2019
ATTACHMENT: McDuffie, E. E., et al. (2016), Influence of oil and
gas emissions on summertime ozone in the Colorado Northern Front Range,
J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 121, 8712-8729, doi:10.1002/2016JD025265.
The article is retained in the committee files and available at:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/2016JD025265.
A release and summary regarding the publication from CIRES is
available at: https://cires.colorado.edu/news/accounting-ozone.
Chairwoman Castor. And without objection, all members have
10 business days within which to submit additional written
questions for the witnesses. Please respond as promptly as you
are able.
The hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
[Applause.]
[Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]
__________
United States House of Representatives
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
Hearing on August 1, 2019
``Colorado's Roadmap for Clean Energy Action:
Lessons from State and Local Leaders''
Questions for the Record
The Honorable Jared Polis
Governor of Colorado
the honorable kathy castor
1. In your testimony, you noted that Colorado has adopted Low Emission
Vehicle standards and is considering adopting Zero Emission
Vehicle standards. You also noted that Coloradans could save
$43 billion from a transition to electric vehicles by 2050.
From your perspective as Governor, why is the proposal to
rollback the Federal standards and slow automaker investments
in new technologies a mistake?
We Coloradoans place a high value on our natural environment and
the health of our communities. That is why as Governor, I have made
protecting and improving air quality one of my top priorities.
Achieving dramatic reductions of air pollution from the transportation
sector will be critical to addressing this priority. Currently,
transportation emissions are the largest contributor to unhealthy
levels of ozone in the Denver metro area, and with the great strides
that Colorado is making in transitioning to renewable forms of electric
generation, transportation will soon be the largest source of
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and will persist as the top GHG emitter
for the foreseeable future.
To achieve the deep reductions in transportation emissions
necessary to achieve our air quality and climate goals will require us
to transition to lower emitting gasoline vehicles and ultimately zero
emission vehicles. Accomplishing this transition won't be easy. We
currently have over five million registered vehicles in Colorado, and
turning over this existing fleet to cleaner burning and zero emission
vehicles will take time. But given the critical nature of the problem
and the opportunity presented by a swift transition, we must pursue all
reasonable strategies to accelerate this work.
Fortunately, there is a path forward. Thanks in large part to the
new vehicle standards adopted by the Obama administration, automakers
are well on their way to developing and implementing technologies that
will achieve deep reductions in vehicle emissions. Every credible
analysis that has been undertaken has shown that these standards will
not only dramatically reduce emissions, they will also result in
significant cost savings to consumers in the form of lower gasoline
bills. Colorado's analysis shows that for model years 2022-2031, the
Obama era standards will save Colorado consumers nearly 8 billion
dollars, while eliminating over 31 million tons of greenhouse gas
emissions to the atmosphere from Colorado vehicles. These standards,
along with the revolutionary advances in electric vehicle technologies,
and automakers commitments to producing and selling a rapidly expanding
fleet of electric vehicles, means the future of a much cleaner vehicle
fleet should look bright.
Unfortunately, the current administration in Washington not only
refuses to lead us to this bright future, but is actively trying to
undermine our progress. In seeking to roll-back technically feasible
and cost-effective standards, the current administration is engaging in
an unprecedented attack on our environment, our health and our
pocketbooks. And it is doing so without any reasoned support. Analysis
after analysis, along with the statements of the Environmental
Protection Agency's own technical staff, have shown that the
justification for the roll-back is based on unsupported and unrealistic
factual assumptions, and analytical sleight-of-hand.
Further, in seeking to eliminate the rights of states to establish
their own standards as expressly provided for under the Clean Air Act,
the current administration is seeking to upend nearly a half century of
precedent allowing states to go beyond the federal government in
protecting their citizens from unhealthy air. Such an action
demonstrates that the passionate pleas for protecting states' rights
and preserving cooperative federalism that we so often hear from
Washington are little more than empty slogans.
Finally, and almost unbelievably, this attack on our environment
the health of our communities, our legal precedent, and reasoned
decision-making, is being undertaken in the face of stiff opposition
from the automakers themselves. This is an industry that relies on long
lead times for developing its products, and as such regulatory
certainty on applicable standards is absolutely essential. By seeking
to roll-back these standards so late in the product development cycle,
the current administration is creating regulatory chaos that severely
undermines the ability of automakers to plan for and develop the next
generation of vehicles.
We note that just this August the Colorado Air Quality Control
Commission voted to adopt Zero Emission vehicle standards, pursuant to
the authority granted by the Clean Air Act--and both the Alliance of
Automobile Manufacturers and the Alliance of Global Automakers worked
with the state on crafting the language proposed to the Commission, and
supported adoption of the standard. The federal government should be
seeking to foster and expand upon this type of cooperative effort
between the states and the automobile industry to support advanced
technology vehicles, reduce emissions and provide clear rules of the
road allowing manufacturers to make long term investment decisions.
Ultimately, there is nothing positive about the current
administration's attack on the current new vehicle standards. It's bad
for the environment, bad for the health of our communities, bad for
consumers, and bad for business.
2. In your testimony, you mentioned that Colorado signed on to a
Memorandum of Understanding with several other states in the
Intermountain West on electric vehicle charging stations. Many
of these states do not yet have targets to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. What are the anticipated economic benefits from
building out corridors for electric vehicle charging?
There are enormous economic benefits that come from a widespread
transition to electric vehicles (EVs). These benefits included
significant consumer savings on fuel costs, consumer savings on vehicle
maintenance, and downward pressure on electric rates leading to
consumer savings for all electric ratepayers. In addition, there are
benefits associated with the public health benefits of reduced criteria
emissions, as well as the benefits that come from reduced emissions of
greenhouse gases.
In order to achieve these benefits, widespread adoption of electric
vehicles is required. There are four key things that are necessary to
achieve this--adequate charging infrastructure; availability of models
that meet consumer needs; marketing to ensure consumers are aware of
electric options; and financial incentives such as federal tax credits
to address the up-front cost barriers during the early years of the
market. The Regional Electric Vehicle agreement among 8 western states
(AZ, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, UT, WY), known as the REV West MOU, commits
the states to working together to address charging infrastructure along
the interstate highways linking our states, thus addressing one of the
key issues required in order to realize these benefits.
The State of Colorado has examined the net benefits associated with
transportation electrification in some detail. Our analysis is based
upon studies by the consulting firm MJ Bradley,\1\ by the International
Council for Clean Transportation,\2\ and work done by the state Air
Pollution Control Division in preparation for state adoption of a Zero
Emission Vehicle standard.\3\ The MJ Bradley Study examined the net
economic benefits to vehicle owners (lifetime fuel savings minus cost
differential for EV purchase), the monetized value of avoided carbon
emissions, and the benefits to electricity ratepayers. This 2017
analysis found that under a moderate EV growth scenario, Colorado could
experience a net present value of $7.6 billion in cumulative net
benefits by 2050. Under a high growth scenario, these could grow to
more than $43 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Plug-in Electric Vehicle Cost-Benefit Analysis: Colorado, MJ
Bradley & Associates, April 2017.
\2\ Electric Vehicle Costs and Consumer Benefits in Colorado in the
2020-2030 Time Frame, International Council on Clean Transportation,
June 2018.
\3\ Colorado Air Pollution Control Division, Final Economic Impact
Analysis for Colorado Low Emission Automobile Regulation, pp. 20, 22.
(Nov. 15, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One important issue to explain is why EVs provide a broad benefit
to all utility ratepayers. The reason is that most EV charging takes
place at night, during off-peak periods when the utilities have
significant excess generation and transmission capacity. Adding off-
peak load spreads fixed costs over a larger number of kilowatt-hours,
which reduces the average cost per kilowatt-hour. The MJ Bradley
reports concludes that each additional EV in Colorado generates a $600
net benefit to utility customers.
In December 2018, a similar study was conducted in Arizona, which
found $31 billion NPV in net benefits by 2050 in a high EV adoption
scenario.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Plug-in Electric Vehicle Cost-Benefit Analysis: Arizona, MJ
Bradley & Associates, December 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these quantified benefits, there are other important
but harder to quantify benefits, including the creation of advanced
vehicle technology jobs, the furtherance of EV tourism, and the extent
to which having advanced technology and clean air can help to attract
high quality employers and employees. I believe that Governors across
the West, regardless of partisan affiliation, understand this broad
range of benefits, and that is why we are all working together to
enable widespread transportation electrification across the west.
3. In your testimony, you mentioned that shifting to clean energy has
helped created clean energy jobs in Colorado. Which Federal
policies would help expand clean energy job opportunities
across the United States?
Bold climate action and a transition to a clean energy economy is
not only a moral imperative, it's also a significant economic and job
growth opportunity. As the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported
earlier this year, solar installers and wind turbine service
technicians are the two fastest growing occupations in the country.\5\
A recent study conducted by Advanced Energy Economy, derived from data
collected for the 2019 U.S. Energy and Employment Report, revealed that
in Colorado clean energy jobs grew 4% last year, twice the rate of the
state's overall jobs growth.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2017/article/occupational-
projections-charts.htm.
\6\ https://www.aee.net/articles/colorado-advanced-energy-jobs-
exceed-those-in-hospitals-9-growth-expected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While there is growing evidence that investing in the clean energy
economy promotes significant job opportunities, federal and state
employment statistics and other economic data could improve
substantially and support enhanced policy development. In Colorado, we
strive to ensure state policies are data driven and are continuing to
improve data collection related to the clean energy economy. However,
without federal investment in our labor market measures to keep pace
with an evolving economy, we are left without sound data to fully
illuminate the job impacts of policy in this area. Specifically, we
would advocate for the Bureau of Labor Statistics to reinstitute
tracking of ``green jobs,'' including data on employment by industry
and occupation for businesses that produce green goods and services;
data on the occupations and wages of jobs related to green technologies
and practices; and green career information publications.
Furthermore there is a need for increased investment in federally
funded workforce programs. Over the past decade the states have seen
significant cuts to the Workforce Investment Act and Workforce
Innovation and Opportunity Act formula funds, Perkins Career and
Technical Education and Adult Education funding. These cuts create
challenges for states to fully harness the potential of the clean
energy economy. These cuts have left businesses struggling to find
skilled workers and left workers without pathways to better paying
jobs. In Colorado, a recent survey revealed that 54% of employers find
it very difficult to identify qualified candidates for advanced energy
jobs.\7\ Our rapidly changing economy requires investing in education
and workforce programs now and in the future to realize the full
potential of our clean energy future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ https://www.aee.net/articles/colorado-advanced-energy-jobs-
exceed-those-in-hospitals-9-growth-expected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. In your testimony, you mentioned the just transition policies that
were recently enacted by the Colorado legislature. What
recommendations do you have for Federal policy that could
accomplish the same goals?
This past spring, I signed into law House Bill 19-1314: Just
Transition from Coal-based Electrical Energy Economy.\8\ This bill
establishes a Just Transition Office tasked with aligning and
delivering programming and funding to communities and workers impacted
by a changing energy economy, in addition to disproportionately
impacted communities who have borne the costs of pollution. Over the
next year, an advisory committee will develop a draft Just Transition
Plan for submission to the Governor and the General Assembly by
December 31, 2020. The advisory committee is comprised of a diverse set
of perspectives, ranging from impacted workers and communities, the
private sector, legislative partners, economic and workforce experts,
and government representatives. While it is premature to articulate
specific Federal policy recommendations at this time, we have initiated
an inclusive and proactive process to support and inform a just
transition in Colorado. The Federal Government will no doubt be an
integral partner in this work and we look forward to maintaining an
open line of communication over the coming months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb19-1314.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions for the Record
The Honorable Suzanne Jones
Mayor of Boulder, CO
the honorable kathy castor
1. In your testimony, you mentioned that the City of Boulder and
Boulder County have jointly launched initiatives focused on
soil-based carbon sequestration. What Federal policies would
help local governments carry out these types of initiatives?
As mentioned in the Mayor's testimony, Boulder and Boulder County
have launched a collaborative effort around soil sequestration. This
partnership is aimed at experimenting with emerging strategies, such as
innovative tillage, enhanced soil health practices and other
regenerative agricultural techniques, to accelerate carbon drawdown and
enhance local ecosystem productivity. When fully implemented, we
believe these approaches could conservatively sequester 10% to 20% of
local emissions. They also provide significant agricultural and
ecosystem benefits such as increased resistance to drought and extreme
weather events.
The city recommends the following federal policies to support local
initiatives:
Increase cost share funding to United States United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA)-natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) to foster increased adoption of climate smart agricultural
practices, e.g., reduced tillage, cover cropping, etc.
Enhance crop insurance programs offered by USDA-Farm
Service Agency (FSA) that create disincentives for cover cropping.
Increase USDA-Agriculture Research Service (ARS) funding
in Colorado toward soil-carbon sequestration research priorities fitted
to high plains agroecosystems (irrigation, soil health principles and
their economic implications).
Support research and pilot projects in developing carbon
credit marketplace for agriculture
Increase funding for the NRCS Conservation Innovation
Grants Program, which is one of the most important mechanisms to foster
multi-party collaboration and innovation around emerging soil health
and carbon drawdown strategies.
Increase funding into National Institute of Farm and
Agriculture (NIFA) sustainable agriculture and environmental resource
and economic programs.
Increase funding into Foundation for Food and Agriculture
Research (FFAR) programs.
Increase funding for Agricultural Extension Services.
Reintroduce the Healthy Fields and Farm Economies Act.
Amend the 45Q Tax Credit to include biochar and compost
producers.
Ask NRCS to work with ARS and private sector initiatives
to standardize soil health protocols, as lack of standardization is
causing a confusing set of non-comparable claims.
Increase funding to USDA for soil health research and
knowledge dissemination.
Significantly increase funding to efforts that support
young, veteran and socially disadvantaged farmers to gain access to
land ownership and farm establishment support such as the Conservation
Reserve Program-Transition Incentive Program (CRP-TIP).
2. In your testimony, you explained that the City of Boulder's
investments in residential energy efficiency leveraged almost
ten times that amount in private investment. What Federal
policies would help cities like Boulder continue to leverage
private sector investments to reduce carbon emissions?
Electrification
In cities across North America, fossil fuels that provides heating,
cooling and hot water in buildings account for a significant portion of
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions--accounting for between 15% and 40% of
emissions in a typical U.S. city. According to the Building
Electrification Initiative (BEI), reaching ``deep decarbonization''
goals of 75% or greater reduction in greenhouse gas emissions will
require eliminating most of the CO2 produced by furnaces and
water heaters across the country, alongside other measures across the
economy.
In the long term, major utility investments and state regulatory
action will be needed to fully transition buildings away from fossil
fuels. In the short term though, city action can spark the development
of new markets and equitable approaches for transitioning to high
efficiency electric building systems. This action will deliver
immediate GHG and air pollution reductions, while also providing
information on best practices and laying the groundwork for more
ambitious efforts that will be needed at all levels of government.
Given the scale, voluntary market development alone will probably
not be sufficient to achieve these goals; it will require robust local,
state, regional and federal policy regimes to transition away from
fossil fuel-based building systems. Supporting market development
activities will also be necessary to improve existing heat pump
products, train and qualify contractors who can install them, and
ensure there are customers who want heat pumps and understand their
value.
In its 2018 report, The Economics of Electrifying Buildings \1\ the
Rocky Mountain Institute suggests that regulators, policymakers and
utilities will need to make adjustments to energy efficiency programs
and targets in order to accommodate beneficial electrification.
Historically, most energy efficiency programs have focused on reducing
electric energy consumption (in kWh) and natural gas energy consumption
(in therms). Unfortunately, this approach risks providing a
disincentive to beneficial fuel switching, either for buildings or
transportation, if a utility will be penalized for adding kWh of
electric consumption to the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Rocky Mountain Institute, The Economics of Electrifying
Buildings, based on data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
https://rmi.org/insight/the-economics-of-electrifying-buildings/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 Electricity Journal article ``Environmentally Beneficial
Electrification: The Dawn of ``Emissions Efficiency'' \2\ suggests that
energy efficiency targets should either be measured on a total energy
basis--combining electricity, natural gas and other fuels--or on the
basis of total emissions associated with the energy consumption.
Otherwise, successful electrification could penalize utilities for not
reducing electricity demand, even when it provides cost and carbon
benefits. Additionally, policies that prohibit utilities from promoting
fuel switching should be reevaluated to consider the benefits
electrification could provide in meeting policy goals, including carbon
reduction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Dennis, Keith, Ken Colburn and Jim Lazar, ``Environmentally
Beneficial Electrification: The Dawn of ``Emissions Efficiency','' The
Electricity Journal, Volume 29, Issue 6, July 2016, Pages 52-58,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1040619016301075
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rocky Mountain Institute report further identifies the
importance of removing ``barriers to aggregated demand-side resource
participation in wholesale market products, including energy, capacity
and ancillary services.'' These barriers include prohibitions on
aggregated demand-side resource participation in some products and
large minimum resource size requirements for individual loads or
aggregations. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is
currently considering action to remove such barriers by requiring
markets it regulates to allow aggregated resources to participate
alongside traditional resources.
Finally, the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
Agency programs compare the performance of appliances to other models
that use the same type of fuel. This approach diminishes the economic,
environmental and grid benefits of switching from a fossil-fuel
appliance to an electric one. States that follow these federal
standards should be aware that the same-fuel-only comparison can reduce
the ability to electrify. One solution is to update those standards to
compare appliances across all fuel types.
Federal Preemptions
Federal policy currently prevents local jurisdictions from
requiring installed appliances, such as heating and cooling equipment,
to perform better than federal baselines. This requires jurisdictions
to invest significantly in rebate and other incentive programs to drive
more efficient choices by residents and businesses. Jurisdictions must
be able to mandate better appliance efficiency through code, which
would allow limited rebate dollars to be freed up to further leverage
investment in deeper savings opportunities. This would also prevent 15-
to 20-year stranded investments by residents and businesses in lower-
performing equipment.
Financing
Efficiency and local energy generation are critical for reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and for enabling a successful transition to a
post-carbon future. However, particularly in states like Colorado where
current energy costs are among the lowest in the country, the payback
for efficiency and renewable investments is often too long (5 or more
years) to motivate residents and businesses to make substantial
investments. This ultimately has the impact of tying up cash reserves
or creating longer-term personal financial obligations. Options that
allow efficiency and renewable improvements to be made with lower
financial obligation and that allows the obligation to transfer with
the property at time of sale would greatly accelerate efficiency and
renewable adoption. Examples of mechanisms include property assessed
clean energy (PACE) where low-to-no interest loans can be spread over
20 years of property taxes. Similarly, tariff-based financing, where
utilities front the cost of the investment and recover that investment
through utility rates would help drive adoption.
3. You mentioned that the Colorado Communities for Climate Action
supports expanding the focus of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service to include regional-scale land management
to improve resilience to climate impacts. Could you please
describe this recommendation in more detail?
PLEASE NOTE: The following recommendations originate from the City of
Boulder rather than the Colorado Communities for Climate Action
Recent reports from the IPCC and other sources confirm that
significant impacts from climate change are now inescapable in the next
10 to 30 years. According to a recent Union of Concerns Scientists
analysis, these changes will result in dramatic impacts across the US
\3\ including:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2019/07/
killer-heat-analysis-full-report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average number of days per year with a heat
index above 100 +F will more than double, while the number of
days per year above 105 +F will quadruple
More than one-third of the area of the United States
will experience heat conditions once per year, on average, that
are so extreme they exceed the current NWS heat index range
(above 137 +F)
Nearly one-third of the nation's 481 urban areas
with a population of 50,000 people or more will experience an
average of 30 or more days per year with a heat index above 105
+F, a rise from just three cities historically (El Centro and
Indio, California and Yuma, Arizona).
These findings underscore the critical importance of significantly
expanding research and technical assistance for cities to address the
way these conditions will be mitigated or aggravated by urban
development and urban landscape management.
Less recognized is the interrelationship between urban heat impacts
and the management practices in landscapes which surround cities. There
is growing evidence that factors like soil moisture levels in areas
surrounding cities dramatically impact the incidence and intensity of
urban heat extreme events.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.climatechangepost.com/news/2019/2/18/when-soil-
dries-out-europes-heat-waves-will-become/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional funding and pilot project development is needed to
explore strategies for utilizing land conservation and management
policies to shape climate extreme resilience in both rural and urban
communities. The NRCS provides a logical platform for managing
resources directed to this purpose. The NRCS platform grew out of the
original Soil Conservation Service established in 1935 at the height of
the Dust Bowl. It has a history of conducting landscape scale
assessment and conservation strategy development to address large scale
environmental and social challenges.
In more stable and prosperous times, NRCS's work focuses more on
parcel-level technical assistance and incentives; however, in eras of
disruptive change, NRCS has been on the forefront of landscape-scale
strategy and action. In the 1930s, this included deploying hundreds of
thousands of workers implementing soil conservation actions like
erosion control or planting windbreaks. In the farm crisis of the
1980s, NRCS was able to launch the Conservation Reserve Program which
created connected networks of conservation areas across broad areas of
the Plains states.
Congress should empower and resource the NRCS to explore how it can
use both its existing tools and programs and new management systems to
develop landscape-scale assessments. These assessment would identify
how to enhance the capacity of landscapes to drawdown significant
volumes of carbon, increase water holding and infiltration capacities,
provide enhanced regional cooling services to metropolitan areas and
increase the fertility and productivity of lands that are now
significantly degraded due to climate change and past management
practices. This would start with a comprehensive soil assessment using
standardized soil inventory procedures (see previous recommendations on
soil health for more detail). The work identified through these
assessments would then form the foundation for exploring Green New
Deal-scale reinvestment strategies that could provide employment
opportunities for a large-scale workforce.
Questions for the Record
The Honorable Wade Troxell
Mayor of Fort Collins, CO
the honorable kathy castor
1. In your testimony, you referenced the Bus Rapid Transit system in
Fort Collins. What Federal policies would help expand Bus Rapid
Transit systems in cities like Fort Collins?
The primary consideration when implementing MAX Bus Rapid Transit
centered around funding. The Federal Transit Administration Section
5309 Capital Investment Grant funding for Small Starts funded the MAX
Bus Rapid Transit project. Small Starts is a result of the publication
of the Major Capital Investment Projects Final Rule in January 2013 (49
CFR Part 611). Through the MAX Bus Rapid Transit project, the City of
Fort Collins hired consultants to assist in navigating the complex
regulatory process required for a project of this size.
Moving forward, the following policies and considerations could
assist scaling Bus Rapid Transit in communities like Fort Collins:
A combination of increased funding dedicated to
planning and design, continued support of the Small Starts
program or similar, and continued backing for funding to
maintain infrastructure and ongoing operations into the future,
and
Review of current federal policies to determine
where existing requirements can be streamlined to reduce the
regulatory and application burden for communities.
2. You mentioned that the City of Fort Collins received an award for
its work to expand the benefits of energy efficiency to low-
and moderate-income renters by promoting energy efficiency in
rental homes. Are there Federal policies that would expand the
ability of cities like Fort Collins to develop and implement
such programs?
In Fort Collins' testimony, we referenced our recent $1M award from
Bloomberg Philanthropies to launch the Epic Homes program, which
targets renter-occupied homes for efficiency upgrades. One of
Bloomberg's goal with each of these awards is to fund projects that
create replicable, scalable products and solutions.
In that process, we found one key barrier to implementing
efficiency projects in rental homes, benefiting low- and moderate-
income residents, is the availability of low-cost long-term capital.
The success of the federal program Rural Energy Savings Program (RESP)
could be replicated for non-rural communities such as Fort Collins.
Senator Merkley (OR) has proposed a Community Energy Savings Program
with input and experience from Fort Collins on-bill financing efforts.
The ability to access low or no interest long-term capital expands the
opportunity for efficiency to many more homes and could be replicated
across the country.
In addition, the federal government could extend the 2017 Renewable
Energy Tax Credit to include residential (non-commercial) rental
properties. Currently principal residences and 2nd homes are eligible,
residential rental properties are not.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.energystar.gov/about/federal_tax_credits/
2017_renewable_energy_tax_credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. In your testimony, you mentioned that systems-thinking and grid
integration must be an important part of any clean energy
strategy. How should Federal policies incorporate these
considerations?
The ability to integrate electric grid elements from generation and
transmission to distribution systems and customer facilities generally
requires transparent market mechanisms. Federal policies which support
the establishment and operation of electricity markets would also
support enhanced systems-thinking and grid integration. The Department
of Energy has led effort to modernize electricity systems, e.g.,
through their Smart Grid Investment Program, and these types of
national investments will be critical to achieving a national clean
energy system.
In addition, energy storage is critical to a clean energy strategy
and supports community and national resilience. FEMA is increasingly
funding implementation of preparedness planning as part of All Hazard
Mitigation Plans (not just disaster response funding), which include
energy storage and grid resilience strategies.
Questions for the Record
Cary Weiner
State Energy Specialist, CSU Extension
Director, CSU Rural Energy Center
Colorado State University
the honorable kathy castor
1. In your testimony, you mentioned that the Rural Energy for America
Program and the Rural Energy Savings Program should be updated
and revised. Could you please describe in more detail how these
programs could be improved?
The Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) has incentivized energy
improvements across the country by offering grant funding for projects,
energy audits, and renewable energy development assistance. Colorado
State University Extension has been the recipient of two REAP grants in
the last five years that have allowed us to provide renewable energy
development assistance to farmers in Colorado. Specifically, we have
conducted economic feasibility assessments for solar and wind energy at
60 farms across the state. These assessments provide detailed estimates
of the financial costs and benefits of installing solar or wind on-
farm, including a 20-year cash flow, identification of potential tax
implications, and phone calls to discuss results.
I believe that interest has been high in our assessments for a
number of reasons such as falling solar prices, tax credits that will
decrease in coming years, and perceived cost savings from solar energy
when compared to utility electricity. I also believe that the free cost
to participate has played a significant role in attracting farmers to
the assessment program. Because energy efficiency often offers a
quicker return-on-investment than renewable energy, we have considered
expanding our offerings from just renewable energy development
assistance to include energy audits through REAP. But we have decided
not to apply for a REAP grant to conduct energy audits because
participating agricultural producers and small businesses would be
responsible for a 25% cost share.
Although it seems reasonable to ask for producers and business to
contribute to the cost of audits, I believe that the cost share
requirement may actually prohibit these entities from participating. If
we were to charge $1,000 for an audit to recoup costs from travel and
staff time, for example, a 25% cost share would mean that a farm or
rural small business would have to pay $250. But because few small
businesses rural Colorado have received and acted upon energy audits,
it is difficult to convince them that a $250 investment is worthwhile.
A simple change to the REAP energy audit program eliminating or
reducing the 25% cost share requirement could result in demonstrations
of the effectiveness of energy audits as effective tools in managing
energy costs. Once audits become more established as valuable tools in
areas where they are currently not mainstream, perhaps the federal
government could reinstate a 25% cost share.
In addition, of the 60 economic feasibility assessments we
conducted for on-farm renewable energy, four went on to apply for REAP
grants to install projects on their farms. Of these four applicants,
only two were successful. Although the economic feasibility of the two
farms that were rejected was comparable or better than the two
successful recipients, they were not funded. And like with energy
audits in some parts of rural Colorado, renewable energy projects on-
farm are still in need of demonstration and successful case studies.
Expanded REAP funding for on-farm renewable energy projects in
particular would allow for more projects to be installed and more case
studies to be established, which in turn will increase interest and
further the goal of the program.
As far as the Rural Energy Savings Program (RESP), the program can
have tremendous benefits for rural energy users. Rural electric
cooperatives can borrow funds from USDA's Rural Utilities Service at 0%
interest for re-lending to cooperative members for energy improvements.
Some utilities can use this program to start on-bill financing programs
for members, which can make energy improvements more financially
attainable and seamless than other options such as borrowing from
another lender.
My suggestion regarding RESP comes from discussions with two rural
electric cooperatives who have participated in the program. In both
cases, the utilities pointed out that while reasonable precautions were
taken by USDA around the application process, once the applications
were approved there is a very significant time lag before funds are
received by the utilities (as borrowers). In the case of Highline
Electric Association, for example, there was a two year period between
when they were approved into RESP and when they could access the funds
(1). Looking into ways to expedite access to funds for approved RESP
participants would both make funds available for energy projects in a
more streamlined manner and also incentivize participation from more
utilities that perhaps are put off by the current lengthy process.
2. You also suggested that the USDA-USDOE State Extension Energy
Partnership Program should be restarted. Could you please
describe this pilot program, its successes, and your
recommendations for how this program should be implemented if
it were to be restarted?
The State Energy Extension Partnership (SEEP) program was developed
based on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the US Department
of Energy (DOE) and the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National
Institute of Food and Agriculture. This effort was a project of the
State Energy Advisory Board, which was established by the State Energy
Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 1990 to advise DOE on the
operation of its federal grant and clean energy programs (2). The
explicit purpose of SEEP was, ``. . . to identify issues, develop
solutions, and share promising practices collaboratively across
organizational, geographic, and programmatic boundaries to promote
energy efficiency and renewable energy.'' This partnership funded an
initial cohort of State Energy Office and Extension collaborations in
Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Kentucky with DOE awards of $200,000-$250,000
over a three-year period from 2012-2015 (3).
The Wisconsin SEEP program formalized the collaboration between
Wisconsin's State Energy Office and UW-Madison Extension with an MOU to
better integrate their roles in helping create transformational change
toward a clean energy economy in the state. UW Extension engaged local
governments, tribes, businesses, farms, and county-based Extension
educators in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and bio-energy
education and projects. By training Extension agents and supporting
community leaders, the partnership between UW Extension and the
Wisconsin Energy Office built capacity for energy education and
community planning as well as a formal structure for collaboration on
energy issues which continues today (4).
SEEP programs in Nebraska and Kentucky also increased the capacity
of Extension to have local impact and forged meaningful partnerships
with State Energy Offices. In addition to engaging over 2,000 farmers
and crop consultants on irrigation energy efficiency, Nebraska
Extension drafted a strategic cooperation document for future
cooperation between UNL and the Nebraska Energy Office (5). In
Kentucky, an Energy Efficiency Awareness and Action program expanded
the capacity of Extension agents to engage in energy work, including
helping residents and businesses better manage their energy bills and
helping 4-H youth make their households more energy efficient (6).
If a SEEP program was to be restarted, it should focus on the
unique strengths of State Energy Offices and Extension to build
capacity for community-driven energy solutions. Both State Energy
Offices and state Extension energy programs vary widely in size, scope,
and focus. But in general, State Energy Offices excel at prioritizing
energy issues of importance to state leaders and providing funds to
implement priority projects. State Extension energy programs tend to
focus on empowering residents, businesses, agricultural producers, and
community leaders to address sustainable energy issues through
planning, education, and technical assistance. Working together, State
Energy Offices and state Extension energy programs can engage
stakeholders in collaborative energy initiatives and provide funding
for implementation of those initiatives. This work is critical to help
communities of all kinds reduce greenhouse gas emissions in ways that
respect unique local situations.
Both past SEEP pilot projects and existing Extension programs have
provided a solid foundation from which to grow this community-based,
collaborative approach. The University of Minnesota Extension's Clean
Energy Resource Teams have conducted energy planning and implementation
with local governments throughout the state. Colorado State University
Extension has conducted numerous community energy assessments that
identify and help acquire funding and technical assistance for local
governments based on broad stakeholder input and community needs. A
renewed SEEP program could build lasting relationships between State
Energy Offices and Extension in order to broaden and deepen the impact
of community-based collaborative energy planning and implementation
across the country. Leveraging Extension's background to focusing on
collaborative community energy planning and implementation in rural
America could be an especially effective strategy for SEEP.
I would also make two more technical suggestions for a future SEEP
program. First, it is my understanding that funds for the three pilot
projects came from DOE. It may be worth revisiting the MOU between DOE
and USDA to see how each agency might contribute more equally to future
projects. Second, State Energy Offices were the only eligible primary
applicant in the first SEEP Request for Proposals. I would recommend
that either State Energy Offices or Extension programs could be listed
as the primary eligible applicant in future SEEP RFPs.
references
1. Phone conversation with Dennis Herman, General Manager of
Highline Electric Association. July 26, 2019.
2. State Energy Advisory Board. US Department of Energy. [Online]
[Cited: September 5, 2019.] https://www.energy.gov/eere/steab/state-
energy-advisory-board.
3. Email correspondence with Lissa Pawlisch, Director, University
of Minnesota Clean Energy Resource Teams. September 4, 2019.
4. Email correspondence with Sherrie Gruder, University of
Wisconsin Extension. September 4, 2019.
5. Email correspondence with John Hay, University of Nebraska
Extension. August 29, 2019.
6. University of Kentucky College of Agriculture. Kentucky
Cooperative Extension recognizes Energy Awareness Challenge leaders.
[Online] [Cited: September 5, 2019.] https://news.ca.uky.edu/article/
kentucky-cooperative-extension-recognizes-energy-awareness-challenge-
leaders.
Questions for the Record
Heidi VanGenderen
Chief Sustainability Officer
University of Colorado-Boulder
the honorable kathy castor
1. In your testimony, you mentioned that public-private partnerships
are needed to gather the capital required to facilitate a
transition to clean energy. What types of partnerships with the
public and private sector would help universities like yours
achieve their climate and clean energy goals? What Federal
policies could help facilitate these partnerships? \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ My responses to these QFRs represent views stemming from my
professional background in energy and sustainability policy, and do not
represent the official positions of the University of Colorado Boulder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There remain a large number of technologies requiring discovery and
development to fully realize clean energy goals. These are not only in
clean energy generation, but also in transmission, storage,
distribution, usage, monitoring, etc. Additionally, these needed
technologies span numerous disciplines. While the private sector has
commercial interest in the clean energy economy, industry's ability to
fund this necessary technology development is insufficient for all that
is needed to realize the clean energy future. The public sector can
support development of these technologies by encouraging and funding
partnerships where government, industry, and academia come together to
investigate and solve the hard problems and help these technologies
``cross the chasm'' from lab to commercialization. Additionally, the
Federal Government could support these partnerships by driving a
system-level approach for all of the technologies and systems that will
be required to realize the clean energy future. Silo'd development will
result in incremental change, but revolutionary change requires system-
level requirements, development, and interoperability. Individual
technologies can be powerful, but engaging all of the required
disciplines together in these partnerships will drive realization of
these goals more quickly.
The October 2018 IPCC report that focused, in part, on the
investment required to keep warming under 1.5 degrees C noted that the
transformation to a world powered almost entirely by clean energy will
require a global investment in clean energy and infrastructure of $1.6
trillion to $3.8 trillion a year (in 2010 U.S. dollars) with an average
of about $3 to $3.5 trillion per year from 2016 to 2050. (This is
compared to an estimated $2.4 trillion a year that would otherwise be
invested in energy systems).
Unleashing private sector capital in this investment need is vital
to achieve sufficient scale. However, the private investors have
learned over the past decade that investment in clean energy will not
be simple given technological, economic, and political uncertainties.
Public-private partnerships are one strategy that, when designed well,
can attract greater net investment, unlock new management expertise and
efficiencies, and, importantly can help strike the balance between
protection of the public interest and generating strong return on
investment (for both the public and private partners). Public policy
and endorsement of emerging clean energy technology can drastically
reduce the uncertainty of private investment. We witnessed this in
Colorado through multiple city and state-level endorsements of the
emerging wind and solar industries.
Universities are distinctly positioned to provide a platform for
innovation and to serve as a test bed of both individual technology
demonstration, and more broadly, through the integration of new and
existing technologies at a systems level. The resources that exist to
do either or both of these rarely, if ever, exists within a university
alone. Universities can effectively collaborate with the municipalities
in which they are embedded to demonstrate the feasibility and
scalability of clean energy and energy efficiency solutions. Further,
universities are often the source of innovations that need the support
of both local and federal policy in order to gain access to funding. A
cross-fertilization between private sector and university partners
toward research (theoretical and applied), financial capacity,
implementation capacity, and data tracking and analytics between the
private sector and university partners can help facilitate the required
array of assets to achieve adequate clean energy and climate goals.
Because universities often house faculty studying the economic, policy,
and technological impediments, and inducements, to clean energy
adoption, they can provide a natural facilitation role between early
stage technology, public entities, and private investors.
Many, such as the National Conference on State Legislatures, have
noted that policies governing Public Private Partnerships (P3's) should
remain largely at the state level, with the federal government
providing overarching guidance. The federal government, however,
importantly, can forge policies that will result in expanded funding
for the development of technologies, its deployment and financing of
low carbon strategies. A federal tax on carbon emissions, or the
reduction of subsidies for fossil fuel production are two of the
simplest potential policies that would fuel innovation and adoption in
clean energy. Recent research has shown that both federal regulation of
coal-fired emissions, and policies encouraging adoption of clean energy
have had a significant impact on accelerated coal-fired electricity
unit retirements. There are a number of current bills before Congress
that address strategies to expand the ``seed'' and partnership capital
that could be devoted to effective public/private/university
partnerships working to achieve a sufficiently low-carbon economy.
Federal endorsement can change the economic calculus of private
investment through not only tax incentives, but also through creating a
sense of support for new, cleaner energy technologies, sowing the seeds
from more localized state, county, and city-level P3s.
Well-structured, transparent, and focused partnerships between
universities, the public sector and the private sector are imperative
if we are to achieve our climate and energy goals. In the university
world, expanded funding for research, and demonstration of that
research on the university campuses and in the communities in which
those universities reside is a critical element. Our ability to harness
emerging research into economically sustainable industries is critical
not only to addressing climate change, but to our nation's economic
future.
2. You referenced some examples of innovative new technologies
developed by CU Boulder researchers that could improve
monitoring of CO2 emissions and create opportunities
to re-use CO2. How should Federal R&D investments be
expanded to maximize these opportunities?
Federal R&D investments shape the research landscape. To fully
leverage the game-changing tools and methods that can emerge from
university labs, the government can consider:
Additional investment in ARPA-E and DARPA-style funding
for high risk/high reward projects in clean energy, resilience, and
decarbonization. For instance, an ARPA-E grant funded a team of
researchers from CU Boulder, CIRES, NOAA, and NIST to adapt Nobel
Prize-winning laser technology developed at CU Boulder into an
inexpensive, portable, robust instrument that can detect methane and
other gas leaks from oil and gas operations as they occur, allowing
operators to catch and control leaks. A startup company is now
commercializing the technology. (https://cires.colorado.edu/news/
detecting-methane-miles-away)
Robust funding of NSF, NASA, NOAA, DOE, and other federal
funding sources that invest in R&D, paired with a recognition that
multidisciplinary research can often yield the most innovative results.
Federally funded research is transforming every aspect of the energy
landscape, including emissions detection, carbon and methane capture,
reuse of carbon in fuels and building materials, battery storage, grid
optimization, and many others. For example, CU Boulder researchers have
developed nanobio-hybrid organisms that capture CO2 and
nitrogen from the air to produce fuels and plastics (https://
www.colorado.edu/today/2019/06/11/these-nano-bugs-eat-co2-and-make-eco-
friendly-fuel). Another CU Boulder team developed an innovative
wastewater treatment process called Microbial Electrolytic Carbon
Capture (MECC), which purifies water in a way that absorbs more
CO2 than it releases while creating renewable energy, all in
a potentially lower-carbon, lower-cost way than that provided by
existing carbon capture technology (https://www.colorado.edu/today/
2015/08/03/cu-boulder-researchers-use-wastewater-treatment-capture-co2-
emissions-and-produce-energy). Adequate funding--in a stable funding
environment--can maximize the potential of this type of research.
Secure, sustainable funding for baseline monitoring
projects in federal agencies on which our university research often
depends. For example, CU Boulder laboratories are part of the Global
Greenhouse Gas Reference Network within the NOAA framework (https://
www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/index.html). The program collects air
samples from locations around the world to measure the distribution and
trends of the three main long-term drivers of climate change (carbon
dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) and carbon monoxide that is an
indicator of air pollution. Samples are regular, not random; and that
steady collection of data is what makes these long term records of
Earth's atmospheric composition so fundamentally important. It provides
critical diagnostic information on sources and sinks of greenhouse
gases. It is already becoming a valuable tool to validate carbon
emission targets across continental and national boundaries, which may
play an important role for enforcement of agreements. (For example:
https://news.agu.org/press-release/new-monitoring-system-identifies-
carbon-dioxide-from-fossil-fuel-burning/) Many of our federally funded
scientists conduct innovative research on emissions detection,
monitoring, and modeling based on this ground truthed data. Yet, many
years of flat or decreased funding have translated to significant
virtual cuts, as rents and operational costs continue to rise unmatched
by funding. Similar Congressional cuts have been made to virtually
every baseline monitoring project in the environmental sciences.
By setting a priority on funding decarbonization, resiliency, and
clean energy efforts, expanded Federal R&D investments can unlock the
discoveries and innovation that can help move us forward to a clean,
resilient future.
[all]