Why ILSR’s 2019 Community Power Scorecard Matters

Date: 27 Feb 2019 | posted in: Energy, Energy Self Reliant States | 0 Facebooktwitterredditmail

Last week’s release of the 2019 Community Power Scorecard illustrates which states help and which hurt local renewable energy. Assessing state policy is especially timely/significant because in late 2018 the 100th U.S. city adopted an ambitious 100 percent renewable energy target. The success of commitments made by cities like Cincinnati, Ohio; Salt Lake City, Utah; or Minneapolis, Minn.; hinges on whether state policy gives them the power to take charge of their energy future and equitably share the economic benefits created by doing so.

There’s plenty of room for improvement.

Only four states received an A for energy democracy on this year’s Scorecard: California, Massachusetts, Illinois, and New York. An additional 11 states and the District of Columbia earned a ‘B’. The remaining 35 states must do more to increase the economic benefits from expanding renewable energy by granting more authority to cities and communities.


Click to view the 2019 Community Power Scorecard and infographics.


What’s in the Community Power Score?

Unlike scorecards that evaluate state energy policies on a single statewide outcome or measure (e.g., 50 percent renewable by 2030), our Community Power score focuses instead on the way state policy enables communities to choose their path toward these goals.

Most state legislators look at energy policy through a 100-year-old lens. Electric utilities have a monopoly granted decades ago, or, where competition has been introduced, certain companies have sole control over access to the grid. This outdated assumption contradicts a national commitment to free markets and allows increasingly unnatural private monopolies to persist.

Some states are passing policies that challenge this assumption.

ILSR’s Scorecard values state policies that build wealth and enable community ownership by creating choices for customers. These policies capture and support the ongoing structural and technological transformation in the energy sector — in other words, decentralized, distributed, democratized energy production. For example, nearly 800,000 California solar customers provide the equivalent power capacity of two nuclear power plants by generating energy on their rooftops. One in 10 new solar customers is adding energy storage. Minnesota energy customers have joined together to build enough community solar projects to power 100,000 homes. These individuals, acting alone and collectively, are building the low-carbon 21st century electricity system.


It takes supportive state policy to enable community solar projects like that on the Shiloh Temple, in Minneapolis, Minn., which provides economic returns and jobs for residents of a majority African American neighborhood in North Minneapolis.

States win points on the Community Power Scorecard for democratizing energy production and for dispersing the economic benefits beyond a few utility shareholders to the masses. States earn points for strong policies enabling customers to go solar, such as net metering, interconnection, or requirements for utilities to buy from distributed energy suppliers. Scores are higher for states that offer financing tools to expand access to capital, like property assessed clean energy. State grades also increase for policies enabling collective action, such as stretch building energy codes, community choice energy, and shared solar.

Consider community choice aggregation, adopted in seven states. In California, for example, this policy has allowed hundreds of communities to increase their renewable electricity share, while also focusing on local jobs and economic development.


Learn more about Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) and what different programs look like in states where they are allowed, by listening to the following podcasts:
The Leading Community Energy Aggregator” with Dawn Wiesz, Executive Director of Marin Clean Energy, a CCA program in California;
Same Price, More Renewables. San Diego’s Fight for Community Choice” with Lane Sharman, Chair of the San Diego Energy District Foundation; and
Ohio Residents Exercise Community Choice to Bill Themselves for Public Solar” with UpGrade Ohio’s Mathew Roberts about a program in southeastern Ohio.

The diverse set of policies we evaluate explains why renewable energy leaders like California and Massachusetts are joined in the top half of our rankings by unlikely states such as Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, and Colorado. And some states with a lot of renewable energy on the grid, like Texas, score low because they fail to enable energy democracy, either doing nothing to encourage local renewable energy or relying solely on forcing reluctant, shareholder-driven electric companies to change.

With many legislatures currently in session, now is the time to push for state policy changes to support a more local and resilient clean energy system. And maybe to earn a better grade next year.


This article originally posted at ilsr.org. For timely updates, follow John Farrell or Marie Donahue on Twitter, our energy work on Facebook, or sign up to get the Energy Democracy weekly update.

Facebooktwitterredditmail
John Farrell
Follow John Farrell:
John Farrell

John Farrell directs the Energy Democracy initiative at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance and he develops tools that allow communities to take charge of their energy future, and pursue the maximum economic benefits of the transition to 100% renewable power.

Marie Donahue
Follow Marie Donahue:
Marie Donahue

Marie Donahue works with the Institute for Local Self-Reliance’s Energy Democracy and Community-Scaled Economy Initiatives. She analyzes and writes about the implications of corporate concentration and monopoly in these sectors.