Community Choice Energy as a Community Development Strategy for Oakland March 30, 2010

Today's Presentation The Problem: One Size Doesn’t Fit All The Opportunity: Electricity as a Community Development strategy Local and Regional Renewables are Cost Effective with Important Co-benefits Results of Jobs Analysis Administering & Structuring an East Bay program

The Problem: One Size Doesn’t Fit All Some of the highest rates in the country 10 planned rate increases totaling 30% increase in the next 3 years Only14% renewable power, mostly from large remote plants. Estimated $9 million per year in energy efficiency funds from Oakland ratepayers o Comes from utility bills every month o How much is spent in Oakland?

The Alternative: Community Choice Energy Community control over power mix and energy efficiency funds Can be tailored to meet community goals o Local sustainable economic development o Green job development o Greenhouse gas reduction Public power has been a great success o 24% of state is public power o 25% lower rates o Greener electricity Example: PG&E is 27% more expensive than Sacramento (SMUD) which has 20% renewable energy now

The Opportunity: Electricity as a Community Development Strategy Complement Oakland's existing initiatives to address economic and social issues The electricity sector can be part of the solution o Local GHG gas reductions o Sustainable economic development o Clean energy jobs Leading way to achieve ECAP goals Healthier communities Link low income resident to workforce development opportunities Improve low income assistance programs No new fossil fuel power plants or environmental degradation Focus on local generation and demand reduction

Local Generation of Power and Electrical Demand Reduction Local generation is now cost- effective o Sierra Club finds solar on rooftops 39% more cost effective than wind farms, 50% more than remote solar o State agency consultants found great potential for solar on large commercial properties Demand reduction is top state priority and least expensive way to meet electrical needs Labor intensive Local clean energy jobs

Oakland Rooftops Could Power 51MW (~50,000 homes) Courtesy of Black & Veatch

Financial Advantages of Community Choice Energy Ability to tap into low rate municipal bonds With nonprofit model, $14 million would stay in Oakland (PG&E shareholders received $1/2 billion in 2009 dividends) No exorbitant executive compensation: PG&E CEO took $9.4 million in 2009 Reduced rates to local consumers Revenues could fund local initiatives; Los Angeles' public utility sends $220 million to the general fund

Community Choice: Oakland GHG and Jobs Analysis Assumes 50% renewable energy by 2020, 75% of which is produced locally Aggressive EE programs Reduce GHG emissions 300,000 tons CO2-equivalent in Year 10 Used solar job intensity estimates from UCB's Renewable Alternative Energy Lab for distributed generation Within 10 years, will create 1,400 living wage jobs, 450 of which would be installing solar, EE or clean energy technologies

Administering an East Bay Community Choice Program JPA governs and tailors program to meet community needs Contracts with local and remote electricity provider(s) Managed by an Electric Service Provider o Large company like Shell (Marin Energy Authority) o Public utility like East Bay MUD o Public power company or association

Structuring an East Bay Community Choice Program Precedent: ECAP Stakeholder committee with clout o Identifies community needs and programs o Evaluates project performance and contracts o Vets proposals Foster accountability and inclusion Key stakeholders have seat at the table o Community o Labor o Green Business

The Next Steps… Support the resolution Prop 16 on 4/20 Determine the effects of Community Choice on organized labor When Marin or SF begins delivering electricity, Oakland should form a Task force o Monitor Community Choice Energy progress o Monitor cost competitiveness of local renewables o Identify Community Development needs and opportunities Lobby state utilities agency to allow cities more control over EE funds and require utilities to share a lot more data (to aid in strategic program resource planning)

March 30, 2010 Dave Room Local Clean Energy Alliance Bay Localize (510)

Image Credits irps.ucsd.edu/ greenaction.org racewire.org emcity.org lcv.org watthead.org thewere42.wordpress.com/2009/10/15/ communityhopefinancial.com edab.org Robert Her