By Suzy Friedman

Visiting my friend and Iowa corn farmer, Tim Richter.

Before installing a new heating system for your home, you’d want to conduct an analysis to make sure it’s worth the money, right? The same logic applies to farming – before a producer considers implementing conservation practices or new technologies, he or she will need to know how those practices will affect an operation’s bottom line.

Despite some good anecdotal information and several isolated field trial studies, the reality is we don’t have nearly enough information on the economic impacts – good or bad – of individual conservation practices. That means we cannot yet make an ironclad business case that will persuade the majority of farmers to implement conservation practices.

There are several key reasons for the dearth of information, and that’s partly my fault.

I’m hoping you can look past this and consider my call to work together to collect the necessary data to strengthen the case. Our food, livelihoods and landscapes depend on it.

A call to help strengthen the economic case for ag sustainability practices, via…
Click To Tweet

Someone else must be tracking the data, right?

For a number of years, my colleagues and I have been analyzing the big-picture costs and benefits of improving water quality in the Mississippi River Basin through practices like nutrient use efficiency, cover crops and filters (e.g., wetlands and buffers). Benefits include making farmland more resilient to the effects of droughts and floods, and reducing nitrogen fertilizer loss in order to improve water quality and reduce the severity of dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico.

We simply assumed that someone else was documenting the economic value that accrued to farmers or landowners who implemented these important conservation practices.

We were wrong.

I realize now what a lost opportunity this has been – not just for farmers but also for fellow environmental groups, which too often focus on the environmental benefits of certain practices without considering the economic burden to farmers.  As a result, we ended up with ad hoc, limited and siloed data.

Looking for data

Photo: © John Rae

My colleagues and I are now banging on doors to find more information on the economic outcomes of agricultural conservation practices.

We found some great information from land grant universities and initiatives like Iowa’s On-Farm Network, NCGA’s Soil Health Partnership, and the Illinois Corn Growers Association, which is leading a fantastic project called Precision Conservation Management that incorporates stewardship into a financial management platform.

But these data are only a drop in the bucket of what we really need. Very few institutions or organizations have consistently collected the data needed to make the sustainability business case to farmers, and even fewer have collected this information long enough to be meaningful.

Most of the time, economic data are collected for a single practice, viewed in isolation and evaluated over too short a timeframe.

We’re working on it – but need your help

I genuinely believe that conservation practices are good for farmers and landowners’ bottom lines. But faith isn’t a strong selling point, so I’m ready to dig in, roll up my sleeves and work with partners to piece together and develop the data we need to bring sustainable agriculture to scale.

This is no small task, and we can’t do it alone – so I’m asking for your help, farmers.

Do you have any data on how conservation practices affected your operation? Do you have a story to share that is backed up by numbers? Do you have any information sitting on your computer, or know where we can get more data?

I’d love to hear from you. Together, we can determine what conservation practices will mean for farmers’ economic well-being next year, in ten years, and in 20 years.

This post originally appeared on AgWeb and is used with permission.

Related:

Conservation relies on profitability >>

Why privacy is an essential piece of agriculture's big-data revolution >>

Farmers' voices are essential to figuring out sustainability. Let's listen up. >>

By Suzy Friedman

Visiting my friend and Iowa corn farmer, Tim Richter.

Before installing a new heating system for your home, you’d want to conduct an analysis to make sure it’s worth the money, right? The same logic applies to farming – before a producer considers implementing conservation practices or new technologies, he or she will need to know how those practices will affect an operation’s bottom line.

Despite some good anecdotal information and several isolated field trial studies, the reality is we don’t have nearly enough information on the economic impacts – good or bad – of individual conservation practices. That means we cannot yet make an ironclad business case that will persuade the majority of farmers to implement conservation practices.

There are several key reasons for the dearth of information, and that’s partly my fault.

I’m hoping you can look past this and consider my call to work together to collect the necessary data to strengthen the case. Our food, livelihoods and landscapes depend on it.

A call to help strengthen the economic case for ag sustainability practices, via…
Click To Tweet

Someone else must be tracking the data, right?

For a number of years, my colleagues and I have been analyzing the big-picture costs and benefits of improving water quality in the Mississippi River Basin through practices like nutrient use efficiency, cover crops and filters (e.g., wetlands and buffers). Benefits include making farmland more resilient to the effects of droughts and floods, and reducing nitrogen fertilizer loss in order to improve water quality and reduce the severity of dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico.

We simply assumed that someone else was documenting the economic value that accrued to farmers or landowners who implemented these important conservation practices.

We were wrong.

I realize now what a lost opportunity this has been – not just for farmers but also for fellow environmental groups, which too often focus on the environmental benefits of certain practices without considering the economic burden to farmers.  As a result, we ended up with ad hoc, limited and siloed data.

Looking for data

Photo: © John Rae

My colleagues and I are now banging on doors to find more information on the economic outcomes of agricultural conservation practices.

We found some great information from land grant universities and initiatives like Iowa’s On-Farm Network, NCGA’s Soil Health Partnership, and the Illinois Corn Growers Association, which is leading a fantastic project called Precision Conservation Management that incorporates stewardship into a financial management platform.

But these data are only a drop in the bucket of what we really need. Very few institutions or organizations have consistently collected the data needed to make the sustainability business case to farmers, and even fewer have collected this information long enough to be meaningful.

Most of the time, economic data are collected for a single practice, viewed in isolation and evaluated over too short a timeframe.

We’re working on it – but need your help

I genuinely believe that conservation practices are good for farmers and landowners’ bottom lines. But faith isn’t a strong selling point, so I’m ready to dig in, roll up my sleeves and work with partners to piece together and develop the data we need to bring sustainable agriculture to scale.

This is no small task, and we can’t do it alone – so I’m asking for your help, farmers.

Do you have any data on how conservation practices affected your operation? Do you have a story to share that is backed up by numbers? Do you have any information sitting on your computer, or know where we can get more data?

I’d love to hear from you. Together, we can determine what conservation practices will mean for farmers’ economic well-being next year, in ten years, and in 20 years.

This post originally appeared on AgWeb and is used with permission.

Related:

Conservation relies on profitability >>

Why privacy is an essential piece of agriculture's big-data revolution >>

Farmers' voices are essential to figuring out sustainability. Let's listen up. >>

Written by Moms Clean Air Force

Climate change needs bi-partisan voices. While the current administration denies climate change exists, and actively works to dismantle the EPA, citizens are taking the lead as climate activists, pushing congress to reduce air pollution and promote alternative forms of energy to combat our climate crisis. Here’s a conservative group making a strong case for climate action.

 

WATCH NewsHour Weekend Special Correspondent Stephanie Sy’s report:

 

 

 

 

 

TELL CONGRESS: NOBODY VOTED TO MAKE AMERICA DIRTY AGAIN

 

By Amanda Johnson

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) recently approved a settlement requiring Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to address environmental, as well as safety, factors when fixing natural gas leaks.

This comes on the heels of a similar settlement issued by the New York Public Service Commission in December. Together these decisions are ringing in a trend in which the environmental impacts of methane leaking from pipelines are being recognized.

Methane – the main component of natural gas — is responsible for about a quarter of current global warming, and awareness about the magnitude of methane that leaks from local pipelines has been mounting.

Earlier this year CPUC reported that in 2015, California pipelines leaked away 6.6 billion cubic feet of methane. Based on an average wholesale market price of gas, these losses mean ratepayers are paying approximately $18 million every year for gas that is never delivered. That’s more than the amount of gas released by the Aliso Canyon storage facility leak and over twice the amount emitted by all of the state’s oil and gas wells.

Fortunately, advancements in methane detection technology have made finding and fixing gas leaks more affordable than ever. This makes implementation a win-win for safety and integrity, and helps California meet its climate goals.

A mandate for modern tech, more inspections, and increased transparency

The settlement calls for PG&E is to continue to modernize its leak detection capabilities with affordable technologies that can find 80% more leaks in 40% of the time than with previous methods.

These technologies enable companies not only to find leaks, but recent literature suggests they can also estimate leak size. And that makes a big difference when it comes to prioritizing pipeline repair and replacement projects.

Utilities are required by law to fix leaks that pose a safety risk, but non-hazardous leaks – known as grade three leaks — may be allowed to persist often for months of years. In California, utilities including PG&E and Southern California Gas Company have racked up tens of thousands of grade three leaks on the books that they have in recent years begun to repair. These leaks may not pose an immediate safety risk, but they are detrimental to the climate.

That’s why the decision is so important. As part of the settlement, PG&E proposed to expand its use of these technologies across its entire distribution system, and agreed to repair grade three leaks and reduce the backlog of leaks they have already found. PG&E will also increase its leak survey frequency by 20% — from every five years to every four. More frequent surveys of pipeline systems will allow PG&E to find and fix leaks faster. This is particularly impactful when it comes to finding “super emitters” – the random, unpredictable leaks that are responsible for a significant portion of lost gas. Frequent detection is paramount to reducing emissions from these sources since utilities cannot predict where large leaks will occur.

Setting a New Standard

The CPUC decision will increase transparency and take leak data that was once held secret – and give it directly to the public in an easy, accessible way.

Under this new scenario, PG&E agreed to publicly display known leaks in a map form that is accessible through its website – not unlike the maps of gas leaks that EDF and Google pioneered in 2014.

This sets a new standard for transparency with utility companies, showing that it’s possible to provide leak information in a digestible format to the public, without compromising security. The utility is among the leading local distribution companies working to ensure the responsible delivery of natural gas.

Unfortunately, forward-thinking leak detection programs that increase transparency and prioritize the environment aren’t yet the standard across the board.

The CPUC’s decision is part of a general rate case between the Commission and utility. The Commission reviews rate cases every three years to determine if proposed increases are just and reasonable. In this case, the Commission determined that the environmental requirements are reasonable since they are affordable, they improve system integrity, and align with the state’s environmental policies like SB 1383 and SB 1371, which require a reduction of methane emissions and gas leaks.

PG&E is clearly ahead of the pack when it comes to reducing gas leaks, but there’s no reason other utilities shouldn’t be required to modernize their systems in order to protect public health and the environment.

Gas leaks aren’t unique to California. Our mapping data reveal leaks are a persistent problem across the country. Fortunately leak detection technologies are rapidly improving, and if utilities across the country are required to adopt them we could see improved system integrity, increased transparency and more climate protections a lot faster.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) recently approved a settlement requiring Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to address environmental, as well as safety, factors when fixing natural gas leaks. This comes on the heels of a similar settlement issued by the New York Public Service Commission in December. Together these decisions are ringing in a […]

The post Recent California decision indicates utility’s willingness to address climate pollution appeared first on Energy Exchange.

By Amanda Johnson

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) recently approved a settlement requiring Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to address environmental, as well as safety, factors when fixing natural gas leaks.

This comes on the heels of a similar settlement issued by the New York Public Service Commission in December. Together these decisions are ringing in a trend in which the environmental impacts of methane leaking from pipelines are being recognized.

Methane – the main component of natural gas — is responsible for about a quarter of current global warming, and awareness about the magnitude of methane that leaks from local pipelines has been mounting.

Earlier this year CPUC reported that in 2015, California pipelines leaked away 6.6 billion cubic feet of methane. Based on an average wholesale market price of gas, these losses mean ratepayers are paying approximately $18 million every year for gas that is never delivered. That’s more than the amount of gas released by the Aliso Canyon storage facility leak and over twice the amount emitted by all of the state’s oil and gas wells.

Fortunately, advancements in methane detection technology have made finding and fixing gas leaks more affordable than ever. This makes implementation a win-win for safety and integrity, and helps California meet its climate goals.

A mandate for modern tech, more inspections, and increased transparency

The settlement calls for PG&E is to continue to modernize its leak detection capabilities with affordable technologies that can find 80% more leaks in 40% of the time than with previous methods.

These technologies enable companies not only to find leaks, but recent literature suggests they can also estimate leak size. And that makes a big difference when it comes to prioritizing pipeline repair and replacement projects.

Utilities are required by law to fix leaks that pose a safety risk, but non-hazardous leaks – known as grade three leaks — may be allowed to persist often for months of years. In California, utilities including PG&E and Southern California Gas Company have racked up tens of thousands of grade three leaks on the books that they have in recent years begun to repair. These leaks may not pose an immediate safety risk, but they are detrimental to the climate.

That’s why the decision is so important. As part of the settlement, PG&E proposed to expand its use of these technologies across its entire distribution system, and agreed to repair grade three leaks and reduce the backlog of leaks they have already found. PG&E will also increase its leak survey frequency by 20% — from every five years to every four. More frequent surveys of pipeline systems will allow PG&E to find and fix leaks faster. This is particularly impactful when it comes to finding “super emitters” – the random, unpredictable leaks that are responsible for a significant portion of lost gas. Frequent detection is paramount to reducing emissions from these sources since utilities cannot predict where large leaks will occur.

Setting a New Standard

The CPUC decision will increase transparency and take leak data that was once held secret – and give it directly to the public in an easy, accessible way.

Under this new scenario, PG&E agreed to publicly display known leaks in a map form that is accessible through its website – not unlike the maps of gas leaks that EDF and Google pioneered in 2014.

This sets a new standard for transparency with utility companies, showing that it’s possible to provide leak information in a digestible format to the public, without compromising security. The utility is among the leading local distribution companies working to ensure the responsible delivery of natural gas.

Unfortunately, forward-thinking leak detection programs that increase transparency and prioritize the environment aren’t yet the standard across the board.

The CPUC’s decision is part of a general rate case between the Commission and utility. The Commission reviews rate cases every three years to determine if proposed increases are just and reasonable. In this case, the Commission determined that the environmental requirements are reasonable since they are affordable, they improve system integrity, and align with the state’s environmental policies like SB 1383 and SB 1371, which require a reduction of methane emissions and gas leaks.

PG&E is clearly ahead of the pack when it comes to reducing gas leaks, but there’s no reason other utilities shouldn’t be required to modernize their systems in order to protect public health and the environment.

Gas leaks aren’t unique to California. Our mapping data reveal leaks are a persistent problem across the country. Fortunately leak detection technologies are rapidly improving, and if utilities across the country are required to adopt them we could see improved system integrity, increased transparency and more climate protections a lot faster.

By Amanda Johnson

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) recently approved a settlement requiring Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to address environmental, as well as safety, factors when fixing natural gas leaks.

This comes on the heels of a similar settlement issued by the New York Public Service Commission in December. Together these decisions are ringing in a trend in which the environmental impacts of methane leaking from pipelines are being recognized.

Methane – the main component of natural gas — is responsible for about a quarter of current global warming, and awareness about the magnitude of methane that leaks from local pipelines has been mounting.

Earlier this year CPUC reported that in 2015, California pipelines leaked away 6.6 billion cubic feet of methane. Based on an average wholesale market price of gas, these losses mean ratepayers are paying approximately $18 million every year for gas that is never delivered. That’s more than the amount of gas released by the Aliso Canyon storage facility leak and over twice the amount emitted by all of the state’s oil and gas wells.

Fortunately, advancements in methane detection technology have made finding and fixing gas leaks more affordable than ever. This makes implementation a win-win for safety and integrity, and helps California meet its climate goals.

A mandate for modern tech, more inspections, and increased transparency

The settlement calls for PG&E is to continue to modernize its leak detection capabilities with affordable technologies that can find 80% more leaks in 40% of the time than with previous methods.

These technologies enable companies not only to find leaks, but recent literature suggests they can also estimate leak size. And that makes a big difference when it comes to prioritizing pipeline repair and replacement projects.

Utilities are required by law to fix leaks that pose a safety risk, but non-hazardous leaks – known as grade three leaks — may be allowed to persist often for months of years. In California, utilities including PG&E and Southern California Gas Company have racked up tens of thousands of grade three leaks on the books that they have in recent years begun to repair. These leaks may not pose an immediate safety risk, but they are detrimental to the climate.

That’s why the decision is so important. As part of the settlement, PG&E proposed to expand its use of these technologies across its entire distribution system, and agreed to repair grade three leaks and reduce the backlog of leaks they have already found. PG&E will also increase its leak survey frequency by 20% — from every five years to every four. More frequent surveys of pipeline systems will allow PG&E to find and fix leaks faster. This is particularly impactful when it comes to finding “super emitters” – the random, unpredictable leaks that are responsible for a significant portion of lost gas. Frequent detection is paramount to reducing emissions from these sources since utilities cannot predict where large leaks will occur.

Setting a New Standard

The CPUC decision will increase transparency and take leak data that was once held secret – and give it directly to the public in an easy, accessible way.

Under this new scenario, PG&E agreed to publicly display known leaks in a map form that is accessible through its website – not unlike the maps of gas leaks that EDF and Google pioneered in 2014.

This sets a new standard for transparency with utility companies, showing that it’s possible to provide leak information in a digestible format to the public, without compromising security. The utility is among the leading local distribution companies working to ensure the responsible delivery of natural gas.

Unfortunately, forward-thinking leak detection programs that increase transparency and prioritize the environment aren’t yet the standard across the board.

The CPUC’s decision is part of a general rate case between the Commission and utility. The Commission reviews rate cases every three years to determine if proposed increases are just and reasonable. In this case, the Commission determined that the environmental requirements are reasonable since they are affordable, they improve system integrity, and align with the state’s environmental policies like SB 1383 and SB 1371, which require a reduction of methane emissions and gas leaks.

PG&E is clearly ahead of the pack when it comes to reducing gas leaks, but there’s no reason other utilities shouldn’t be required to modernize their systems in order to protect public health and the environment.

Gas leaks aren’t unique to California. Our mapping data reveal leaks are a persistent problem across the country. Fortunately leak detection technologies are rapidly improving, and if utilities across the country are required to adopt them we could see improved system integrity, increased transparency and more climate protections a lot faster.

By Amanda Johnson

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) recently approved a settlement requiring Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to address environmental, as well as safety, factors when fixing natural gas leaks.

This comes on the heels of a similar settlement issued by the New York Public Service Commission in December. Together these decisions are ringing in a trend in which the environmental impacts of methane leaking from pipelines are being recognized.

Methane – the main component of natural gas — is responsible for about a quarter of current global warming, and awareness about the magnitude of methane that leaks from local pipelines has been mounting.

Earlier this year CPUC reported that in 2015, California pipelines leaked away 6.6 billion cubic feet of methane. Based on an average wholesale market price of gas, these losses mean ratepayers are paying approximately $18 million every year for gas that is never delivered. That’s more than the amount of gas released by the Aliso Canyon storage facility leak and over twice the amount emitted by all of the state’s oil and gas wells.

Fortunately, advancements in methane detection technology have made finding and fixing gas leaks more affordable than ever. This makes implementation a win-win for safety and integrity, and helps California meet its climate goals.

A mandate for modern tech, more inspections, and increased transparency

The settlement calls for PG&E is to continue to modernize its leak detection capabilities with affordable technologies that can find 80% more leaks in 40% of the time than with previous methods.

These technologies enable companies not only to find leaks, but recent literature suggests they can also estimate leak size. And that makes a big difference when it comes to prioritizing pipeline repair and replacement projects.

Utilities are required by law to fix leaks that pose a safety risk, but non-hazardous leaks – known as grade three leaks — may be allowed to persist often for months of years. In California, utilities including PG&E and Southern California Gas Company have racked up tens of thousands of grade three leaks on the books that they have in recent years begun to repair. These leaks may not pose an immediate safety risk, but they are detrimental to the climate.

That’s why the decision is so important. As part of the settlement, PG&E proposed to expand its use of these technologies across its entire distribution system, and agreed to repair grade three leaks and reduce the backlog of leaks they have already found. PG&E will also increase its leak survey frequency by 20% — from every five years to every four. More frequent surveys of pipeline systems will allow PG&E to find and fix leaks faster. This is particularly impactful when it comes to finding “super emitters” – the random, unpredictable leaks that are responsible for a significant portion of lost gas. Frequent detection is paramount to reducing emissions from these sources since utilities cannot predict where large leaks will occur.

Setting a New Standard

The CPUC decision will increase transparency and take leak data that was once held secret – and give it directly to the public in an easy, accessible way.

Under this new scenario, PG&E agreed to publicly display known leaks in a map form that is accessible through its website – not unlike the maps of gas leaks that EDF and Google pioneered in 2014.

This sets a new standard for transparency with utility companies, showing that it’s possible to provide leak information in a digestible format to the public, without compromising security. The utility is among the leading local distribution companies working to ensure the responsible delivery of natural gas.

Unfortunately, forward-thinking leak detection programs that increase transparency and prioritize the environment aren’t yet the standard across the board.

The CPUC’s decision is part of a general rate case between the Commission and utility. The Commission reviews rate cases every three years to determine if proposed increases are just and reasonable. In this case, the Commission determined that the environmental requirements are reasonable since they are affordable, they improve system integrity, and align with the state’s environmental policies like SB 1383 and SB 1371, which require a reduction of methane emissions and gas leaks.

PG&E is clearly ahead of the pack when it comes to reducing gas leaks, but there’s no reason other utilities shouldn’t be required to modernize their systems in order to protect public health and the environment.

Gas leaks aren’t unique to California. Our mapping data reveal leaks are a persistent problem across the country. Fortunately leak detection technologies are rapidly improving, and if utilities across the country are required to adopt them we could see improved system integrity, increased transparency and more climate protections a lot faster.

By Amanda Johnson

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) recently approved a settlement requiring Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to address environmental, as well as safety, factors when fixing natural gas leaks.

This comes on the heels of a similar settlement issued by the New York Public Service Commission in December. Together these decisions are ringing in a trend in which the environmental impacts of methane leaking from pipelines are being recognized.

Methane – the main component of natural gas — is responsible for about a quarter of current global warming, and awareness about the magnitude of methane that leaks from local pipelines has been mounting.

Earlier this year CPUC reported that in 2015, California pipelines leaked away 6.6 billion cubic feet of methane. Based on an average wholesale market price of gas, these losses mean ratepayers are paying approximately $18 million every year for gas that is never delivered. That’s more than the amount of gas released by the Aliso Canyon storage facility leak and over twice the amount emitted by all of the state’s oil and gas wells.

Fortunately, advancements in methane detection technology have made finding and fixing gas leaks more affordable than ever. This makes implementation a win-win for safety and integrity, and helps California meet its climate goals.

A mandate for modern tech, more inspections, and increased transparency

The settlement calls for PG&E is to continue to modernize its leak detection capabilities with affordable technologies that can find 80% more leaks in 40% of the time than with previous methods.

These technologies enable companies not only to find leaks, but recent literature suggests they can also estimate leak size. And that makes a big difference when it comes to prioritizing pipeline repair and replacement projects.

Utilities are required by law to fix leaks that pose a safety risk, but non-hazardous leaks – known as grade three leaks — may be allowed to persist often for months of years. In California, utilities including PG&E and Southern California Gas Company have racked up tens of thousands of grade three leaks on the books that they have in recent years begun to repair. These leaks may not pose an immediate safety risk, but they are detrimental to the climate.

That’s why the decision is so important. As part of the settlement, PG&E proposed to expand its use of these technologies across its entire distribution system, and agreed to repair grade three leaks and reduce the backlog of leaks they have already found. PG&E will also increase its leak survey frequency by 20% — from every five years to every four. More frequent surveys of pipeline systems will allow PG&E to find and fix leaks faster. This is particularly impactful when it comes to finding “super emitters” – the random, unpredictable leaks that are responsible for a significant portion of lost gas. Frequent detection is paramount to reducing emissions from these sources since utilities cannot predict where large leaks will occur.

Setting a New Standard

The CPUC decision will increase transparency and take leak data that was once held secret – and give it directly to the public in an easy, accessible way.

Under this new scenario, PG&E agreed to publicly display known leaks in a map form that is accessible through its website – not unlike the maps of gas leaks that EDF and Google pioneered in 2014.

This sets a new standard for transparency with utility companies, showing that it’s possible to provide leak information in a digestible format to the public, without compromising security. The utility is among the leading local distribution companies working to ensure the responsible delivery of natural gas.

Unfortunately, forward-thinking leak detection programs that increase transparency and prioritize the environment aren’t yet the standard across the board.

The CPUC’s decision is part of a general rate case between the Commission and utility. The Commission reviews rate cases every three years to determine if proposed increases are just and reasonable. In this case, the Commission determined that the environmental requirements are reasonable since they are affordable, they improve system integrity, and align with the state’s environmental policies like SB 1383 and SB 1371, which require a reduction of methane emissions and gas leaks.

PG&E is clearly ahead of the pack when it comes to reducing gas leaks, but there’s no reason other utilities shouldn’t be required to modernize their systems in order to protect public health and the environment.

Gas leaks aren’t unique to California. Our mapping data reveal leaks are a persistent problem across the country. Fortunately leak detection technologies are rapidly improving, and if utilities across the country are required to adopt them we could see improved system integrity, increased transparency and more climate protections a lot faster.

By: Mandy Warner, Senior Manager, Climate and Air Policy

This weekend is Memorial Day – the unofficial start to summer. That means kids across the country – and adults too – are counting down the days until summer vacation.

Whether your plans include going to a beach, visiting a national park, or just letting your kids play outside in the sprinklers, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plays an important role in making your summer healthier and safer – in ways you might not realize.

Here are four examples of how EPA improves summers for all Americans:

1. Reducing deadly smog

Smog comes from pollution emitted from cars, power plants, and other sources. It can lead to asthma attacks, heart attacks and even deaths.

The summer smog season has already started in most parts of the country. A number of “code orange” days – the terms for days when the air may be too dangerous for some people, like children with asthma and seniors with heart conditions, to be outdoors – have already been issued.

Smog has improved significantly in recent decades, thanks to EPA and state leadership, but air quality in the U.S. continues to be a serious problem that can jeopardize public health and limit many individuals’ freedom to spend time outdoors. The American Lung Association estimates that more than a third of Americans live in areas with unhealthy levels of smog.

EPA has worked for decades to reduce smog, most recently when the agency issued new standards for smog in 2015. Once they're in effect, those standards will prevent 230,000 asthma attacks among children every year. That doesn’t include the benefits for California, which EPA calculated separately – the smog standards will prevent another 160,000 asthma attacks among children in that state alone.

Unfortunately, smog standards are under attack in Congress. Several bills to delay and fundamentally alter how these and other air pollution standards are set are now moving through the Senate. Additionally, President Trump’s proposed budget for 2018 cuts funding for the air monitoring that warns families about “Code Red” and “Code Orange” days – the days when air quality reaches unhealthy levels – by almost one third. 

2. Safer, cleaner beaches

Many of us look forward to summer for the opportunity to spend time on the beach.

Last year, U.S. beach attendance was almost 360 million (more than the entire U.S. population!).

Unfortunately, beaches can be shut down by pollution – including raw sewage, which can expose swimmers to harmful microorganisms called “pathogens” that can make people sick.

An analysis done by the Natural Resources Defense Council a few years ago looked at water samples from 3,485 coastal U.S. beaches – and found that 10 percent of them were above EPA’s benchmark for swimmer safety. The analysis also notes that an estimated 3.5 million people are sickened every year from contact with raw sewage.

EPA – in partnership with states, local governments, and others – works to protect our nation’s beaches. The agency enforces laws and administers programs that regulate sources of water pollution at beaches, conducts leading scientific research on pathogens and sets national standards and criteria, funds grants to states and local governments to help protect our beaches, provides information to the public about water quality, and more. This work helps ensure that America’s beaches stay safe, clean, and open for visitors.

Here are a few examples of beach monitoring and cleanup grants distributed by EPA:

• Lakeview Beach Green Infrastructure Project in the Great Lakes. The City of Lorain, Ohio got a $250,000 grant to construct a “green” stormwater treatment system at the city’s Lakeview Park, located on Lake Erie. The new system will reduce the E. coli bacteria in stormwater from being directly discharged into Lake Erie at Lakeview Beach, and will reduce the frequency of bacteria-related beach closures.

• South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Monitoring. The Department got a $587,000 grant to monitor beach sites and other similar points of access to coastal waters for enterococi bacteria, which causes meningitis.

• Development of a Beach Advisory Smart Phone App in the Great Lakes. This project will support development of an app to provide the public with notices about beach closures and other environmental information.

President Trump’s proposed budget for EPA would eliminate the beach monitoring grants program, among many other things that could impact the health of our nation’s beaches.

3. Cleaning up the air in our national parks

National parks are a popular destination for summer vacationers across the country.

According to the National Park Service, there were over 307 million visits to our national parks last year and those visitors spent $16.9 billion in surrounding communities. This spending supported 295,000 jobs and contributed $32 billion to economic output nationally.

EPA and other agencies monitor visibility at 155 national parks and wilderness areas across the country. Unfortunately, many national parks suffer from haze – a form of pollution – that can tarnish scenic vistas and create health problems for visitors.

EPA’s program to reduce haze and other pollution harming our parks has led to measurable improvements in visibility. However, according to the National Parks and Conservation Association, three out of four of our most iconic national parks struggle with unhealthy air, and visitors miss about 50 miles of scenery because of haze.

EPA’s work to reduce the pollution affecting our parks is under threat by Administrator Scott Pruitt, who sued EPA over a plan to reduce haze when he was Attorney General of Oklahoma.

4. Reducing the pollution contributing to climate change

Climate change affects virtually every facet of our lives and can exacerbate all of the problems listed above – more smoggy days, rising sea levels and more pathogens potentially spreading at beaches, and worse haze in our parks.

Extreme summer heat can also cause illness and death, and climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of those potentially deadly heat waves.

EPA has provided essential leadership to address climate change – including setting standards that would reduce pollution from power plants, cars, trucks, oil and gas operations, and more. Actions underway by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and severe budget cuts in President Trump’s proposed EPA budget could significantly harm the progress we’ve made and delay urgently needed protections for public health and our climate.

President Trump and Administrator Pruitt have indicated they will seek to unravel numerous climate protections, including the Clean Power Plan. Their proposed budget for EPA and other agencies undermines climate research and policies, including by zeroing out the U.S. Climate Action Plan.

Protecting the things that we love about summer

EPA’s work protects our air, our water, our beautiful beaches and parks – and most important, the health and safety of our families. As you enjoy your summer, please remember how important it is to protect the qualities that make summer great.

We need a strong EPA – now and all year long. More than just our summers are at stake.

Click here to see our @firstenergycorp bailout ticker - and watch the $ add up edf.org/energy/firsten…

By Martha Roberts

Wikimedia Commons

Earlier this year, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt announced an effort to seek public input on EPA safeguards that should be revoked or rolled back to “reduce regulatory burden.”

What was the overwhelming message he heard in response?

Let EPA do its job and protect Americans from dangerous pollution.

Numerous news articles have detailed the tens of thousands of responses EPA received from individual Americans decrying Pruitt’s biased, predetermined effort to gut important safeguards. These public comments are still being uploaded onto an official website — but already there are more than 183,000 of them, and the overwhelming majority are in favor of strong EPA safeguards.

As one comment reminded Pruitt:

Future generations are counting on us to leave an environment that supports good health, and a world worth living in. Don’t jeopardize the progress that has been made by rolling back regulations that are taking us in the right direction. Your job is to protect the environment for the benefit of all, not to squander progress for the financial gain of a few.

Another citizen noted during a listening session:

I actually enjoy breathing clean air and drinking clean water and would find it quite burdensome not to.

It’s well documented that EPA safeguards are an incredible American success story, saving countless lives and improving health across the country. We’ve made tremendous strides in improving air quality, reducing toxic lead and mercury pollution, addressing acid rain, and other remarkable achievements — all while the economy has grown and added jobs.

We still have more work to do though. According to the American Lung Association, more than 125 million Americans live in communities with unhealthy levels of air pollution.

Industry pushes for rollbacks

EPA senior officials are due to present a report to Pruitt today on their progress in identifying safeguards to repeal or roll back – not even two weeks after the rushed public comment period ended.

It’s hard to know if this report will be made public, but we are starting to get a glimpse of the input that Pruitt and his team are hearing from those who oppose vital safeguards.

For instance, the American Petroleum Institute’s (API) 25-page list of requests includes weakening protections against smog and undercutting common-sense standards to curb harmful methane and toxic air pollution from oil and gas production.

API’s list also complains that EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Panel is “biased” because “it can be difficult for industry representatives to be included on the committees.”

As we wrote about in an earlier post, these industry requests come on top of an earlier solicitation by the Trump Administration for industry proposals to roll back protections — one where trade associations brazenly asked for cuts to important health studies and safeguards.

Politicians target safeguards against mercury, smog, and other dangers

One remarkable letter to EPA came from eight state politicians. As has been well documented, while Scott Pruitt was Oklahoma’s Attorney General he spearheaded an intertwined alliance between state attorneys general and major fossil fuel industries — going so far as to submit industry requests to EPA on Oklahoma letterhead and later noting that’s “actually called representative government in my view of the world.”

In the new letter, Pruitt’s attorney general allies detail a list of twenty bedrock safeguards to weaken or eliminate. These include protections against mercury pollution, smog, soot, and many others.

These eight politicians even ask EPA to reject the agency’s science-based conclusion that greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare — a conclusion based on an extensive, exhaustive record that was upheld by a federal court of appeals several years ago. Their letter makes no mention of the citizens who would be sickened and harmed by these roll backs.

The signatories are the attorneys general from Michigan, Oklahoma, Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas, West Virginia, Louisiana, and South Carolina.

Scott Pruitt: don’t put Americans’ health at risk

With EPA’s help, we’ve made remarkable progress in cleaning up our air and water. The American public just delivered a clear and overwhelming message to Scott Pruitt – don’t risk that tremendous progress, or the health of our families, by rolling back EPA safeguards.

Administrator Pruitt should listen.

By Martha Roberts

Wikimedia Commons

Earlier this year, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt announced an effort to seek public input on EPA safeguards that should be revoked or rolled back to “reduce regulatory burden.”

What was the overwhelming message he heard in response?

Let EPA do its job and protect Americans from dangerous pollution.

Numerous news articles have detailed the tens of thousands of responses EPA received from individual Americans decrying Pruitt’s biased, predetermined effort to gut important safeguards. These public comments are still being uploaded onto an official website — but already there are more than 183,000 of them, and the overwhelming majority are in favor of strong EPA safeguards.

As one comment reminded Pruitt:

Future generations are counting on us to leave an environment that supports good health, and a world worth living in. Don’t jeopardize the progress that has been made by rolling back regulations that are taking us in the right direction. Your job is to protect the environment for the benefit of all, not to squander progress for the financial gain of a few.

Another citizen noted during a listening session:

I actually enjoy breathing clean air and drinking clean water and would find it quite burdensome not to.

It’s well documented that EPA safeguards are an incredible American success story, saving countless lives and improving health across the country. We’ve made tremendous strides in improving air quality, reducing toxic lead and mercury pollution, addressing acid rain, and other remarkable achievements — all while the economy has grown and added jobs.

We still have more work to do though. According to the American Lung Association, more than 125 million Americans live in communities with unhealthy levels of air pollution.

Industry pushes for rollbacks

EPA senior officials are due to present a report to Pruitt today on their progress in identifying safeguards to repeal or roll back – not even two weeks after the rushed public comment period ended.

It’s hard to know if this report will be made public, but we are starting to get a glimpse of the input that Pruitt and his team are hearing from those who oppose vital safeguards.

For instance, the American Petroleum Institute’s (API) 25-page list of requests includes weakening protections against smog and undercutting common-sense standards to curb harmful methane and toxic air pollution from oil and gas production.

API’s list also complains that EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Panel is “biased” because “it can be difficult for industry representatives to be included on the committees.”

As we wrote about in an earlier post, these industry requests come on top of an earlier solicitation by the Trump Administration for industry proposals to roll back protections — one where trade associations brazenly asked for cuts to important health studies and safeguards.

Politicians target safeguards against mercury, smog, and other dangers

One remarkable letter to EPA came from eight state politicians. As has been well documented, while Scott Pruitt was Oklahoma’s Attorney General he spearheaded an intertwined alliance between state attorneys general and major fossil fuel industries — going so far as to submit industry requests to EPA on Oklahoma letterhead and later noting that’s “actually called representative government in my view of the world.”

In the new letter, Pruitt’s attorney general allies detail a list of twenty bedrock safeguards to weaken or eliminate. These include protections against mercury pollution, smog, soot, and many others.

These eight politicians even ask EPA to reject the agency’s science-based conclusion that greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare — a conclusion based on an extensive, exhaustive record that was upheld by a federal court of appeals several years ago. Their letter makes no mention of the citizens who would be sickened and harmed by these roll backs.

The signatories are the attorneys general from Michigan, Oklahoma, Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas, West Virginia, Louisiana, and South Carolina.

Scott Pruitt: don’t put Americans’ health at risk

With EPA’s help, we’ve made remarkable progress in cleaning up our air and water. The American public just delivered a clear and overwhelming message to Scott Pruitt – don’t risk that tremendous progress, or the health of our families, by rolling back EPA safeguards.

Administrator Pruitt should listen.

RT @dickmunson: The more the @PUCOhio regulators delay, the more Ohioans pay. New FirstEnergy newsletter: edf.org/8ZF https://t…

This weekend is Memorial Day – the unofficial start to summer. That means kids across the country – and adults too – are counting down the days until summer vacation. Whether your plans include going to a beach, visiting a national park, or just letting your kids play outside in the sprinklers, the Environmental Protection […]

By Mandy Warner

This weekend is Memorial Day – the unofficial start to summer. That means kids across the country – and adults too – are counting down the days until summer vacation.

Whether your plans include going to a beach, visiting a national park, or just letting your kids play outside in the sprinklers, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plays an important role in making your summer healthier and safer – in ways you might not realize.

Here are four examples of how EPA improves summers for all Americans:

1. Reducing deadly smog

Smog comes from pollution emitted from cars, power plants, and other sources. It can lead to asthma attacks, heart attacks and even deaths.

The summer smog season has already started in most parts of the country. A number of “code orange” days – the terms for days when the air may be too dangerous for some people, like children with asthma and seniors with heart conditions, to be outdoors – have already been issued.

Los Angeles in 1948 USC Libraries Special Collections – Los Angeles Examiner

Smog has improved significantly in recent decades, thanks to EPA and state leadership, but air quality in the U.S. continues to be a serious problem that can jeopardize public health and limit many individuals’ freedom to spend time outdoors. The American Lung Association estimates that more than a third of Americans live in areas with unhealthy levels of smog.

EPA has worked for decades to reduce smog, most recently when the agency issued new standards for smog in 2015. Once they're in effect, those standards will prevent 230,000 asthma attacks among children every year. That doesn’t include the benefits for California, which EPA calculated separately – the smog standards will prevent another 160,000 asthma attacks among children in that state alone.

Los Angeles now — Alamy

Unfortunately, smog standards are under attack in Congress. Several bills to delay and fundamentally alter how these and other air pollution standards are set are now moving through the Senate. Additionally, President Trump’s proposed budget for 2018 cuts funding for the air monitoring that warns families about “Code Red” and “Code Orange” days – the days when air quality reaches unhealthy levels – by almost one third. 

1. Safer, cleaner beaches

Many of us look forward to summer for the opportunity to spend time on the beach.

Last year, U.S. beach attendance was almost 360 million (more than the entire U.S. population!).

Unfortunately, beaches can be shut down by pollution – including raw sewage, which can expose swimmers to harmful microorganisms called “pathogens” that can make people sick.

An analysis done by the Natural Resources Defense Council a few years ago looked at water samples from 3,485 coastal U.S. beaches – and found that 10 percent of them were above EPA’s benchmark for swimmer safety. The analysis also notes that an estimated 3.5 million people are sickened every year from contact with raw sewage.

EPA – in partnership with states, local governments, and others – works to protect our nation’s beaches. The agency enforces laws and administers programs that regulate sources of water pollution at beaches, conducts leading scientific research on pathogens and sets national standards and criteria, funds grants to states and local governments to help protect our beaches, provides information to the public about water quality, and more. This work helps ensure that America’s beaches stay safe, clean, and open for visitors.

Here are a few examples of beach monitoring and cleanup grants distributed by EPA:

• Lakeview Beach Green Infrastructure Project in the Great Lakes. The City of Lorain, Ohio got a $250,000 grant to construct a “green” stormwater treatment system at the city’s Lakeview Park, located on Lake Erie. The new system will reduce the E. coli bacteria in stormwater from being directly discharged into Lake Erie at Lakeview Beach, and will reduce the frequency of bacteria-related beach closures.

• South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Monitoring. The Department got a $587,000 grant to monitor beach sites and other similar points of access to coastal waters for enterococi bacteria, which causes meningitis.

• Development of a Beach Advisory Smart Phone App in the Great Lakes. This project will support development of an app to provide the public with notices about beach closures and other environmental information.

President Trump’s proposed budget for EPA would eliminate the beach monitoring grants program, among many other things that could impact the health of our nation’s beaches.

1. Cleaning up the air in our national parks

Shenandoah National Park on a clear day and a hazy day — National Park Service

National parks are a popular destination for summer vacationers across the country.

According to the National Park Service, there were over 307 million visits to our national parks last year and those visitors spent $16.9 billion in surrounding communities. This spending supported 295,000 jobs and contributed $32 billion to economic output nationally.

EPA and other agencies monitor visibility at 155 national parks and wilderness areas across the country. Unfortunately, many national parks suffer from haze – a form of pollution – that can tarnish scenic vistas and create health problems for visitors.

EPA’s program to reduce haze and other pollution harming our parks has led to measurable improvements in visibility. However, according to the National Parks and Conservation Association, three out of four of our most iconic national parks struggle with unhealthy air, and visitors miss about 50 miles of scenery because of haze.

EPA’s work to reduce the pollution affecting our parks is under threat by Administrator Scott Pruitt, who sued EPA over a plan to reduce haze when he was Attorney General of Oklahoma.

1. Reducing the pollution contributing to climate change

Climate change affects virtually every facet of our lives and can exacerbate all of the problems listed above – more smoggy days, rising sea levels and more pathogens potentially spreading at beaches, and worse haze in our parks.

Extreme summer heat can also cause illness and death, and climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of those potentially deadly heat waves.

EPA has provided essential leadership to address climate change – including setting standards that would reduce pollution from power plants, cars, trucks, oil and gas operations, and more. Actions underway by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and severe budget cuts in President Trump’s proposed EPA budget could significantly harm the progress we’ve made and delay urgently needed protections for public health and our climate.

President Trump and Administrator Pruitt have indicated they will seek to unravel numerous climate protections, including the Clean Power Plan. Their proposed budget for EPA and other agencies undermines climate research and policies, including by zeroing out the U.S. Climate Action Plan.

Protecting the things that we love about summer

EPA’s work protects our air, our water, our beautiful beaches and parks – and most important, the health and safety of our families. As you enjoy your summer, please remember how important it is to protect the qualities that make summer great.

We need a strong EPA – now and all year long. More than just our summers are at stake.

By Mandy Warner

This weekend is Memorial Day – the unofficial start to summer. That means kids across the country – and adults too – are counting down the days until summer vacation.

Whether your plans include going to a beach, visiting a national park, or just letting your kids play outside in the sprinklers, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plays an important role in making your summer healthier and safer – in ways you might not realize.

Here are four examples of how EPA improves summers for all Americans:

1. Reducing deadly smog

Smog comes from pollution emitted from cars, power plants, and other sources. It can lead to asthma attacks, heart attacks and even deaths.

The summer smog season has already started in most parts of the country. A number of “code orange” days – the terms for days when the air may be too dangerous for some people, like children with asthma and seniors with heart conditions, to be outdoors – have already been issued.

Los Angeles in 1948 USC Libraries Special Collections – Los Angeles Examiner

Smog has improved significantly in recent decades, thanks to EPA and state leadership, but air quality in the U.S. continues to be a serious problem that can jeopardize public health and limit many individuals’ freedom to spend time outdoors. The American Lung Association estimates that more than a third of Americans live in areas with unhealthy levels of smog.

EPA has worked for decades to reduce smog, most recently when the agency issued new standards for smog in 2015. Once they're in effect, those standards will prevent 230,000 asthma attacks among children every year. That doesn’t include the benefits for California, which EPA calculated separately – the smog standards will prevent another 160,000 asthma attacks among children in that state alone.

Los Angeles now — Alamy

Unfortunately, smog standards are under attack in Congress. Several bills to delay and fundamentally alter how these and other air pollution standards are set are now moving through the Senate. Additionally, President Trump’s proposed budget for 2018 cuts funding for the air monitoring that warns families about “Code Red” and “Code Orange” days – the days when air quality reaches unhealthy levels – by almost one third. 

1. Safer, cleaner beaches

Many of us look forward to summer for the opportunity to spend time on the beach.

Last year, U.S. beach attendance was almost 360 million (more than the entire U.S. population!).

Unfortunately, beaches can be shut down by pollution – including raw sewage, which can expose swimmers to harmful microorganisms called “pathogens” that can make people sick.

An analysis done by the Natural Resources Defense Council a few years ago looked at water samples from 3,485 coastal U.S. beaches – and found that 10 percent of them were above EPA’s benchmark for swimmer safety. The analysis also notes that an estimated 3.5 million people are sickened every year from contact with raw sewage.

EPA – in partnership with states, local governments, and others – works to protect our nation’s beaches. The agency enforces laws and administers programs that regulate sources of water pollution at beaches, conducts leading scientific research on pathogens and sets national standards and criteria, funds grants to states and local governments to help protect our beaches, provides information to the public about water quality, and more. This work helps ensure that America’s beaches stay safe, clean, and open for visitors.

Here are a few examples of beach monitoring and cleanup grants distributed by EPA:

• Lakeview Beach Green Infrastructure Project in the Great Lakes. The City of Lorain, Ohio got a $250,000 grant to construct a “green” stormwater treatment system at the city’s Lakeview Park, located on Lake Erie. The new system will reduce the E. coli bacteria in stormwater from being directly discharged into Lake Erie at Lakeview Beach, and will reduce the frequency of bacteria-related beach closures.

• South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Monitoring. The Department got a $587,000 grant to monitor beach sites and other similar points of access to coastal waters for enterococi bacteria, which causes meningitis.

• Development of a Beach Advisory Smart Phone App in the Great Lakes. This project will support development of an app to provide the public with notices about beach closures and other environmental information.

President Trump’s proposed budget for EPA would eliminate the beach monitoring grants program, among many other things that could impact the health of our nation’s beaches.

1. Cleaning up the air in our national parks

Shenandoah National Park on a clear day and a hazy day — National Park Service

National parks are a popular destination for summer vacationers across the country.

According to the National Park Service, there were over 307 million visits to our national parks last year and those visitors spent $16.9 billion in surrounding communities. This spending supported 295,000 jobs and contributed $32 billion to economic output nationally.

EPA and other agencies monitor visibility at 155 national parks and wilderness areas across the country. Unfortunately, many national parks suffer from haze – a form of pollution – that can tarnish scenic vistas and create health problems for visitors.

EPA’s program to reduce haze and other pollution harming our parks has led to measurable improvements in visibility. However, according to the National Parks and Conservation Association, three out of four of our most iconic national parks struggle with unhealthy air, and visitors miss about 50 miles of scenery because of haze.

EPA’s work to reduce the pollution affecting our parks is under threat by Administrator Scott Pruitt, who sued EPA over a plan to reduce haze when he was Attorney General of Oklahoma.

1. Reducing the pollution contributing to climate change

Climate change affects virtually every facet of our lives and can exacerbate all of the problems listed above – more smoggy days, rising sea levels and more pathogens potentially spreading at beaches, and worse haze in our parks.

Extreme summer heat can also cause illness and death, and climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of those potentially deadly heat waves.

EPA has provided essential leadership to address climate change – including setting standards that would reduce pollution from power plants, cars, trucks, oil and gas operations, and more. Actions underway by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and severe budget cuts in President Trump’s proposed EPA budget could significantly harm the progress we’ve made and delay urgently needed protections for public health and our climate.

President Trump and Administrator Pruitt have indicated they will seek to unravel numerous climate protections, including the Clean Power Plan. Their proposed budget for EPA and other agencies undermines climate research and policies, including by zeroing out the U.S. Climate Action Plan.

Protecting the things that we love about summer

EPA’s work protects our air, our water, our beautiful beaches and parks – and most important, the health and safety of our families. As you enjoy your summer, please remember how important it is to protect the qualities that make summer great.

We need a strong EPA – now and all year long. More than just our summers are at stake.

Many experts anticipate the electric utility industry evolving more in the next 10 years than it has in the past 100. So noted the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC), when it recently initiated the “NextGrid” Utility of the Future Study. NextGrid is a statewide, collaborative effort to rethink the roles of the utility, the customer, and […]

By EDF Blogs

By Christie Hicks, Manager, Clean Energy Regulatory Implementation

Many experts anticipate the electric utility industry evolving more in the next 10 years than it has in the past 100.

So noted the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC), when it recently initiated the “NextGrid” Utility of the Future Study. NextGrid is a statewide, collaborative effort to rethink the roles of the utility, the customer, and energy solution providers in a 21st-century electric grid.

The ICC invited stakeholders to participate in NextGrid, welcoming suggestions for how the process should work. Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), partnering with the Citizens Utility Board (CUB), recommended NextGrid ensure that upcoming technological advances enable a more dynamic grid – one that is cleaner, affordable, reliable, equitable, and more responsive to customer needs. But how do we get there?

Smart evolution

Over the last several years, Illinois has taken steps that put it on the forefront of the smart grid revolution. In 2011, Illinois’ Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act propelled the state’s two largest electric utilities, Commonwealth Edison (ComEd) and Ameren, to undertake billions of dollars in smart-grid investments, like AMI (advanced metering infrastructure). As a result, smart meters will be deployed throughout most of the state by 2019, and customers are anxious to start enjoying the benefits, like easier access to energy-use data and enhanced efficiency.

What’s next for NextGrid – Illinois’ ‘Utility of the Future’ process
Click To Tweet

Further underlining its role as a clean-energy innovator, Illinois passed the bipartisan Future Energy Jobs Act (FEJA) in December of last year. Utilizing the new smart grid infrastructure in the state, FEJA encourages the adoption of distributed energy resources such as rooftop solar; expands the state’s existing energy efficiency standard; and includes a focus on economically-disadvantaged groups (like through the new solar job training program). The historic legislation provides exciting opportunities for Illinoisans to enjoy the economic, health, and societal benefits of clean energy advances.

The NextGrid journey

FEJA takes effect on June 1, and the ICC is responsible for implementing many of the new law’s requirements. To kick-start the law into action, ICC will use NextGrid as an 18-month customer-focused and collaborative study led by an outside, expert facilitator. Here’s what NextGrid will do:

• Identify and explore future technological advancements and utility and regulatory models;
• Inform policymakers on potential issues and challenges of the quickly-evolving energy landscape; and
• Provide recommendations to the ICC and Illinois legislators on actions that ensure customers and communities benefit.

Charting a path

Numerous innovations in energy-related technology are on the horizon, and many new, innovative products and services are already available. Meanwhile, customer expectations for utilities are evolving: Customers want more information about, and greater control over, their energy sources and use.

Fortunately, a changing energy system presents many opportunities for building a smarter, more connected electric grid. For example, system reliability – which was a key selling point of advanced metering investments – can be improved using a number of tools, from solar panels to microgrids to battery storage. Rooftop and community solar are largely nonexistent in Illinois right now, but the Future Energy Jobs Act will facilitate significant growth in the next decade (it’s already starting to take off in Chicago).

The ICC should prioritize system reliability, as well as equitable access to these new opportunities.

First, we recommend an educational process to develop a “problem statement” that provides guidance and establishes a sound analytical foundation. EDF and CUB warned against putting the cart before the horse – i.e. before the Commission can make policy decisions or identify potential areas of consensus or disagreement, everyone should have a strong knowledge base for the emerging technologies, system trends, opportunities, and challenges. This phase of NextGrid should be facilitated by a neutral third-party, such as a university, who will invite local and national experts to provide input on identified trends and possible future scenarios.

While some customers put reliability at the top of their list, others say affordability is most important, and still others focus on reduced air and water pollution.

Once the problem statement has been created, working groups can be established to identify, evaluate, score, and test possible future scenarios. Scenarios could include significant adoption of rooftop solar, innovative energy efficiency measures, or increased electric vehicle adoption, and the impact of each will be measured against the possibility of maintaining the status quo.

Led by a process management facilitator with expertise in energy system regulatory processes, this phase would consider what customers expect and desire out of the energy system. This will be different for different people: While some customers put reliability at the top of their list, others say affordability is most important, and still others focus on reduced air and water pollution. Environmental sustainability, energy affordability, system reliability, customer satisfaction, and equity should all be considered. Then, the parties should consider how to use new technologies, services, third parties, market designs, and other solutions identified in the first phase to achieve their goals.

The formal process should kick off this summer. EDF and CUB are excited to engage in NextGrid and will work to ensure that it paves the way for a cost-effective, environmentally sustainable energy future for Illinois.