Renewable milestone

Chico Vice Mayor Alex Brown sees a path toward a greener future in Butte County.

Ranchers using their unused grazing land to generate and sell solar power. Local energy providers maximizing existing hydroelectric facilities to provide electricity. Governments setting policies to attract green businesses and sustain the economy.

A significant piece toward that future, Brown told the CN&R, is the Butte Choice Energy Authority (BCEA), a community choice aggregation (CCA) set up between the city of Chico and Butte County to procure electricity on behalf of electric customers in those jurisdictions, placing energy sourcing in the hands of local government, not PG&E.

“I think one of the major selling points that’s been discussed is this idea of cost savings … but what we can do from an infrastructure perspective—not just in sourcing energy, but in incentivizing local energy projects—is massive,” said Brown, who sits on BCEA’s board. She added: “I see it almost like a domino effect. You decide that the investment is going to be greater. You decide that you’re going to prioritize local projects. Then people see an economic opportunity.”

The BCEA on Monday (Dec. 16) took a significant step toward launching its service in 2021, approving an implementation plan that will be submitted for approval by the California Public Utilities Commission. Over the next year, BCEA will gear up, hiring a chief executive, staff and contractors for such things as data management and marketing.

One of the selling points of CCAs is the realization of cost savings. CCAs generally offer rates that are 2 percent to 3 percent lower than the existing utility’s rates. That’s the intention of the BCEA as well.

According to the implementation plan, which is subject to change but reflects the board’s current thinking and goals, the BCEA will offer rates that are lower than PG&E’s (see “Power provider,” Newslines, Nov. 21). It also plans to offer customers options “for a higher proportion of renewable energy and reduced [greenhouse gas emissions] relative to the incumbent utility, enhanced energy efficiency and customer programs, community focus and local investment and control.”

To that end, the BCEA, according to the implementation plan, intends to offer three options for customers: a “rate competitive” option that meets California’s prevailing renewable energy procurement mandates (about 35 percent at launch); a 50 percent renewable energy supply option; and a 100 percent renewable energy supply option.

Gary Saleba of EES Consulting Inc., the firm advising the BCEA, told the CN&R that the board—which comprises Brown, Chico City Councilman Scott Huber and Butte County Supervisors Debra Lucero and Doug Teeter—has signaled it may pursue automatically enrolling customers into the minimum renewable, rate competitive option. Customers could choose to enroll into one of the higher renewable energy supply options at any time, or opt out of the BCEA completely, sticking with PG&E as their power provider. Regardless, electricity will continue to be delivered through PG&E’s existing distribution infrastructure.

A public hearing on the matter is likely about a year out, preceding the expected 2021 launch, Saleba said.

“The fourth quarter of next year will be busy,” he said. “That’s when you buy your power. You know what the rates are going to be, so you can have an actual discussion about what the different prices are for the different levels.”

It’s likely the board, when it sends out requests for proposals to purchase power, will prioritize and/or offer incentives to local power providers, such as South Feather Water & Power in the Sierra foothills. Large hydroelectric facilities are not considered a renewable energy source by the state, Saleba noted, but they are carbon-free.

“All four of [the board members] thought that would be a good idea,” he said. “Buy local.”

For Brown, the BCEA policies and initiatives considered by the board also should explore opportunities for lower-income earners to participate in higher renewable energy supply options.

“PG&E already has programs dedicated to low-income earners,” she said, “so how do we facilitate—and perhaps incentivize—a greener mix in that same context?”

The board must balance its investment in green energy sources while making sure costs do not become a financial burden to customers.

In discussions at BCEA meetings, Brown said she was heartened to hear that the cost of renewable energy is going down, and it could be comparable to the price of nonrenewable energy supplies by the time the BCEA launches.

It may make sense for the board, she said, to explore enrolling customers in a higher renewable energy supply option at the jump. If such an option is determined financially feasible for the ratepayer, “why wouldn’t we pursue that?” Brown nevertheless reaffirmed that, regardless of the default option chosen, customers will have the ability to switch between the energy supply options offered by the BCEA.

“I don’t want us to get complacent at this idea of ‘2 percent savings, 2 percent savings,’” Brown said, “without looking at the long-term trajectory—the price of renewables going down, the impact of local investment and renewable energy—and really combining that to a vision for the future.”