Quantcast

North Bay Business Journal

Monday, April 4, 2011, 4:45 am

First Marin, now Sonoma moves on energy program

By

Print Friendly Print Friendly    

Share this item

    SONOMA COUNTY — The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors has allocated $150,000 for a study on community choice aggregation (CCA), which would allow the sale of power directly to residents and businesses, bypassing PG&E.

    The board also approved up to $100,000 for Rusty Klassen, formerly a Water Agency employee and now affiliated with Marshall-based energy consultancy Local Power to develop the water agency’s renewable energy programs. 

    “We’ve been gathering data on developing lower carbon energy resources in Sonoma County, among other regions, for RESCO, the non-profit wholesaler of electricity for rural areas,” said Paul Fenn, founder and president of Local Power.

    The water agency had received a $1 million grant from RESCO for advance work on what is known in energy circles as a “soft landing” scenario.

    “That refers to as painless as possible transition to energy conservation and sustainable production,” he said.

    Sonoma County, he believes, is ripe for a CCA and uniquely positioned to develop its own sources of green power.

    “The county will have to begin by partnering with a provider of wholesale electricity, as the Marin County Energy Authority did with Shell. But the goal is to wean itself from large power producers.”

    Mr. Fenn points to Sonoma’s geothermal resources, which are not limited to the Geysers steam field.

    “Drill anywhere in the region and you’ll hit hot rock very quickly. It’s not hot enough to generate steam and turn a turbine, but it can provide heating and hot water to residences,” he said.

    The county is home to more than 30 solar voltaic companies, the latest arrivals attracted by the promise of project funding by the Sonoma Energy Independence program.

    “A CCA is SCEIP cubed, with all county residents and businesses having the opportunity to benefit from local innovators,” he said.

    Because of its agriculture the county has biomass resources as well, and access to wind from nearby regions.

    “Wind is hard to permit and implement within the county, but can be obtained from, say, the Delta, where it looks very promising.”

    The largest gains in energy conservation, the ones that will bring the county into compliance with state goals, will be from smart grid and demand-response technologies.

    Wind, solar voltaic, solar thermal and geothermal energy are not yet competitive with gas and oil, and must be subsidized to make them affordable.

    So how will the county tap its green sources of energy and bring them to the citizens at a competitive price?

    He envisions a combination of revenue bonds and private equity, the latter investment attracted to the county by innovative green technology.

    More immediately, competitive pricing without debt – key to selling the program in the county – can be achieved by other means.

    In Marin County, the Energy Authority makes money from the one cent per kilowatt hour it saves from not having to pay off shareholders, according to director Dawn Weisz.

    “Already we have about $2 million in a reserve fund, which we’ll use for energy conservation programs,” she said.

    The oldest CCA in the country, Cape Light Compact in Massachusetts, was initially funded by county money.

    “Barnstable County subsidized us at the rate of $150,000-$250,000 for ten years,” said administrator Maggie Downey. Cape Light currently charges its 163,000 subscribers a small surcharge to keep the program local, she said.

    Both women stressed that a successful CAA must enroll most or all of its municipalities.

    Large companies, schools and hospitals, and in the case of Marin, San Quentin prison, buy their energy wholesale and won’t be customers.

    Marin County, unlike other CCAs, was subjected to an intensive anti-CCA campaign. That resulted in an especially high opt-out rate in Marin of 20 percent.

    “I strongly doubt that will happen in Sonoma County,” said Mr. Fenn.


    AMPLIFICATION, April 4, 2011: The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors approved up to $100,000 for Rusty Klassen of Marshall-based Local Power to develop the Sonoma County Water Agency’s renewable energy programs. The original story had a less-precise figure.

    Copyright © 1988–2014 North Bay Business Journal
    View the policy for linking to website content.

    Print Friendly Print Friendly    

    Comments

    1 Comment

    1. April 4, 2011, 1:54 pm

      by Sandy LeonVest

      While Marin County, to its credit, did form a CCA, it is inaccurate to say that it “weaned itself” from “large power producers,” and it is hardly “bypassing PG&E.” Marin County residents are still dependent on PG&E for transmission, distribution, billing and maintenance. Worse still, Marin Energy Authority (MEA), the “purchasing arm” of Marin Clean Energy, now purchases its “green energy” from an even bigger corporation than PG&E, Shell Energy North America, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell. This multinational oil company has an even worse reputation for poor “corporate citizenship” than PG&E, and it has earned a reputation for being one of the worst environmental polluters and human rights abusing corporations on the planet. Thus, MEA is is hardly a model example of “community choice” or even “clean energy policy.” The energy mix MEA is purchasing from Shell (and now another “large power producer,” G2 Energy) may qualify for Renewable Energy Credits (RECs), under current legislation, but it is still a very corporate project, providing no local generation thus far, few, if any local jobs or contracts for small local solar companies. And, although MEA is very good at promoting its “green-ness,” these large providers actually provide very little (real) green energy. Forming a real CCA is an arduous, and often frustrating process. MEA made a lot of “green promises” here in Marin, and to that extent, it is understandable that it felt forced to “go corporate” in order to keep those promises — at least on paper. But, Sonoma County residents should watch very carefully to make certain that Sonoma does not subvert its CCA to “corporate infiltration,” as our officials did here in Marin. Sadly, at least so far, Marin Clean Energy is proving to be far better at greenwashing than it is at generating green energy.

      Sandy LeonVest
      Editor/Publisher
      SolarTimes (www.solartimes.org)


    Submit Your Comments

    Required

    Required, will not be published

    Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive. For more information, please see our Comments and Letters Policy. To share this item by email or social media, use the links above.

    Do not use this form to contact people, companies or organizations mentioned in this story. Contact them directly. Private messages left here will be deleted.