Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Energy
 
Board
Department of Energy
 
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
7/23/18  5:23 pm
Commenter: Lee Williams RVA Interfaith Climate Justice League

Stranding assets in LNG vs investing in storage, rooftop solar and grid
 

We are concerned about climate change and Virginia’s continued dependence on fossil fuels. We have asked elected officials for policies to promote more clean and renewable sources of energy to conserve and to protect our environment, while also creating new economic opportunities for solar and wind workers and entrepreneurs in our Commonwealth.

I respectfully urge Governor Northam and the DMME to consider the following recommendations as part of the 2018 Energy Plan:

First, provide incentives for solar coupled with battery storage as a resiliency strategy.  Research proves that on-site solar energy together with battery storage is the best way to provide resilient power during extreme weather events.

Second, expand incentives and reduce barriers to customer-owned solar to create well-paying local jobs. 84% of Virginia’s solar jobs are in the ‘distributed’ rooftop solar sector. Rooftop solar, and the jobs it creates, depend on fair market access and incentives like net metering and third party ownership. It is hindered by utility-imposed standby charges, arbitrary limits on net metering and system size limitations.

Third, really commit to invest in Modernizing our grid. A truly modern grid will be an energy system that benefits consumers. Advances in rooftop solar, battery storage and electric vehicles now give consumers the ability to actively participate and control their energy consumption.

Lastly, to create jobs, Virginia needs to expand net metering, third party ownership and eliminate unnecessary barriers to customer-owned solar and invest in modernizing our grid around clean renewable energy technology. Unfortunately, Virginia is investing in one of the largest and potentially catostrophic energy infrastructure projects ever, which would continue the destructive paths of generating and consuming more fossil fuel, while doing little to create good-paying permanent jobs that will last beyond construction.

Our concerns over the two currently proposed pipelines include degradation of water quality and environmental assets; Risk to human health and property damage from explosions and methane gas leaks;  Aggressive use of eminent domain and loss of property value; Class- and race-based discrepancies in the locations selected for construction; And lack of economic justification for domestic use of fracked gas products.

The cost of natural gas power is tethered to the commodity price of natural gas, which is inherently volatile. The price of controllable, storable renewable energy is tethered only to technology costs, which are going down, Recent forecasts suggest that it will be cheaper to build new renewables+storage than to continue operating existing natural gas plants. Natural gas infrastructure built today will be rendered uncompetitive well before their rated lifespan. They could become “stranded assets,” saddling utility ratepayers and investors with the costs of premature decommissioning. Because of this forecast, conversations and recommendations for the 2018 Energy Plan must address the risks of natural gas pipelines as well.

Thank you for your consideration. 

Respectfully submitted,

Lee Williams

 

 

CommentID: 65824