Follow this blog:
RSS

San Francisco’s 100% renewable energy plan

By | September 20, 2012, 5:51 AM PDT

San Francisco is one step closer to offering residents the option to switch to 100 percent renewable energy after the city’s Board of Supervisors voted 8-3 in favor of the program that would lead to significant cuts in carbon emissions.

CleanPowerSF, a $19.5 million program run by Shell Energy North America, will automatically opt-in half of San Francisco residents and then give them the option to opt-out. It’s a roundabout way of giving people choice, but the five-year program will need 90,000 of 375,000 residents to make the switch to make the program worthwhile.

If the city is successful at getting residents to buy into the program (and stick with it) CleanPowerSF could do more than previous efforts to reduce carbon emissions. According to the city, it would see a cut 10 times greater than the amount the city has already cut.

The program will also provide competition to Pacific Gas and Electric Company, which currently operates utilities in San Francisco. The city is able to do this because of a 2002 state law that allows municipalities to choose their electricity provider. A community-choice aggregation system, as it’s called, is also available in Marin County, California.

But choice and carbon emissions reductions will come at a price. Residents who stay in the program will see their utility bill rise by $9 a month while the commercial increase will be about $18 a month. If customers decide that’s too much then San Francisco could owe Shell as much as $15 million. If residents are willing to pay more for green power, the city will profit and use the money to build city-owned renewable energy facilities.

It’s a risk the city seems willing to take. Although The San Francisco Chronicle is skeptical in an editorial:

There’s nothing wrong with offering renewable power in a city that prides itself on its environmental record. Were it offered alongside PG&E’s electrons, the renewable alternative probably would create a stampede.

But the details of this deal - a single bidder, city subsidies and automatic sign-up - aren’t fair or sensible. There’s the added factor of the road ahead. The renewable backers plainly want more than the green label. If the plan gets rolling, San Francisco residents should prepare for an even bigger challenge: taking over PG&E operations.

The plan now goes to the city’s Board for a vote. If approved, it will go into place next spring. Then it will be up to residents to decide if it’s a good idea or not.

[Via SFist, Chronicle]

Photo: Flickr/davidpc_

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Tyler Falk

About Tyler Falk

Tyler Falk is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Tyler Falk

Tyler Falk

Contributing Editor

Tyler Falk freelance journalist based in Washington, D.C. Previously, he was with Smart Growth America and Grist. He holds a degree from Goshen College.

Follow him on Twitter.

Tyler Falk

Tyler Falk

Tyler does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what he covers.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
7
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
-1 Votes
+ -
San Francisco's 100% renewable energy plan
And it may not cost $9 if they use negative carbon liquid fuels, see www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkYVlZ9v_0o&feature=youtu.be
Posted by MikeSmith12345
20th Sep
+1 Vote
+ -
Automatic opt-in
In most places in Texas you can choose your electric provider, and most providers have partial or 100% renewable options. I chose 100% renewable at about a 0.4c/KWH premium because I want to see more development in that area, and because the cost was negligible in my opinion. But to automatically opt-in half of the homes? That doesn't seem right.
Posted by AlanLaRue
20th Sep
+1 Vote
+ -
Seriously. This is San Fran we are talking about.
Does anyone honestly think it will only increase bills by $9 on a household?

They already pay among the highest urban electricity rates in the nation.

http://www.bls.gov/ro9/cpisanf_energy.htm

If they did not expect the increase to be steep they would not have forced it on half the people. And who says they will stop at half? Does anyone trust them to ONLY force half the people?

If we look back on this in 2 years I will bet they under estimated the increase by 200 or 300% ($18 to $27) and they hope enough people will not realize they have the option to opt out.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 20th Sep
+2 Votes
+ -
That is why I like such experiments to happen elsewhere...
...instead of being inflicted upon everyone at once. At least San Franciscans almost universally elected the politicians who will inflect this upon them.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
20th Sep
0 Votes
+ -
There you go with those negative waves again, Moriarity
I will give San Francisco credit for having the nerve to even try to fly the idea. As long as there are naysayers, progress will not happen. I'm not sure if the $9 number is accurate or not, but I would also expect that if this idea gets moving, those claims will be investigated by many before it gets allowed to proceed.
Posted by patch.elect@...
20th Sep
+1 Vote
+ -
Just because there are naysayers...
...doesn't make something a good idea.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
20th Sep
0 Votes
+ -
Left Coast leads the by Innovation again!
Kudos San Francisco!
It will be fun to watch the wave of initiatives roll eastward like so many other ground breaking policies.
Posted by Wil Fluewelling
20th Sep
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!