Slashdot Mirror
Washington State Commits To Running Entirely On Clean Energy By 2045 (gizmodo.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo: On Thursday, the Washington state legislature officially passed one of the most ambitious clean energy bills in the nation. Washington is now committed to making the state's electricity supply carbon neutral by 2030 and 100 percent carbon-free by 2045. The bill makes the fourth state to commit to 100 percent clean energy and adds a feather to the cap of Governor Jay Inslee who requested the bill be introduced. Inslee is running as a climate candidate for president that can get things done in the District if elected, and this bill is a very tangible accomplishment he can now point to.
The bill previously passed the state senate 28-19. After passing the house 56-42 on Thursday, the legislation goes back to the senate for a final vote. Once signed into law, Washington will join, Hawaii, California, and New Mexico as the fourth state committed to 100 percent clean energy. Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico have also made similar commitment as well as more than 90 cities, according to tracking by the Sierra Club. The bill shuts the door on coal, saying it "is the policy of the state to eliminate coal-fired electricity." By calling for energy to come from carbon-free sources by 2045, it leaves the door open for nuclear power. [...] In addition to committing to cutting emissions, the bill is also designed to ensure the transition to renewables and any bumps in energy prices aren't shouldered by the poor. The bill calls says utilities "must make funding available for energy assistance to low-income households."
The bill previously passed the state senate 28-19. After passing the house 56-42 on Thursday, the legislation goes back to the senate for a final vote. Once signed into law, Washington will join, Hawaii, California, and New Mexico as the fourth state committed to 100 percent clean energy. Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico have also made similar commitment as well as more than 90 cities, according to tracking by the Sierra Club. The bill shuts the door on coal, saying it "is the policy of the state to eliminate coal-fired electricity." By calling for energy to come from carbon-free sources by 2045, it leaves the door open for nuclear power. [...] In addition to committing to cutting emissions, the bill is also designed to ensure the transition to renewables and any bumps in energy prices aren't shouldered by the poor. The bill calls says utilities "must make funding available for energy assistance to low-income households."
https://www.investopedia.com/t...
Largest default in municipal bond history. I guess either memories or short or it was profitable enough for some people that a new generation wants to try again.
...
this is the year for the Linux Desktop!
flying cars by 2015!
free tibet!
make america great again!
goooo saints!
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
I can finally get better than shotgunned 128K ISDN in Seattle.
everyone will be dead. This planet is doomed.
Yours,
Jor-El
A commitment to run on clean energy by a given date that doesn't require breaking the laws of physics. This also appears to give enough time to adapt without bankrupting household and companies alike. This is long term enough thinking that the politicians proposing it can't get political benefit within a few election cycles? This appears to be at least somewhat feasible.
What the hell happened?
It isn't that hard. We're already in the 85%+ range as it is because most of our state's power is hydro-electric.
For example, here is the info on Tacoma: https://www.mytpu.org/about-tp...
> the bill is also designed to ensure the transition to renewables and any bumps in energy prices aren't shouldered by the poor.
You're about to get "shouldered!"
If you don't support fission you don't support clean energy.
I live in central Washington, where most of the state's hydro-electric power comes from. I pay less than $.03 per kilowatt/hr for power here, but that price has been steadily rising because of cryptocurrency operations setting up shop in the area. In the past we have always had a large surplus of power that was sold to California at a higher rate, but not anymore. The mining operations will have to go before this plan will happen, as I think more and more of them will be moving here. One of the small local airports is even adding direct flights to SanFrancisco because of all the mining operation employees that come up here from that city. Normally that airport only has flights to/from Seattle.
I do not belong to the church of the lowercase 'i'
This legislation has not passed as yet, and the governor has not signed it. You may be announcing this a bit prematurely.
Inslee's State, Washington, tolls interstate roads with "pay to play" lanes. The option was voted in IF it would
1- raise $17m
2- AND maintain minimum speeds on the other lanes at a minimum of 45 MPH
The result raised $31M and brought the other lanes (on the I405) to a complete crawl, yet, unshockingly, the state refuses to undue the debacle it created (even after it fired the engineer who designed it). More and more roads are being tolled as the State hands out more gimmies to homeless, mentally ill, drug users - it pushes free needles for heroin users and wants to have open "safe injection sites" staffed by doctors.
Our state legislature is planning to fuel us 100% by the smell of their own farts.
Ahh, the San Francisco way!
If that doesn't work, you can run off of smugness.
It's not really that heavy a lift, Washington State has a number of counties which already generate high levels of renewable energy, it's more a matter of phasing out dying coal energy from nearby states. If you look at the entire West Coast, you'll see that, at present, CA OR WA BC are all aiming for 100 percent RPS (Renewable Portfolio Standard) energy, and since we all have interties, there's a surplus of green energy sloshing around somewhere.
At this rate, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Arizona, and Mexico will soon be part of people doing things, rather than coming up with excuses for why they use expensive power from non-renewables.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
It is no longer renewable, but clean. That is the smart way. It is foolish to commit just to wind/solar with storage. We need an.energy matrix. We also need to quit adding natural gas power plants. Last year, we went up a couple of %, and that was due in large part to nat gas electricity.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Soon enough to make it appear that they are doing something about a problem, but still far out enough in the future to make it someone else's problem. Perfect!
As is usually the case, promises are made but those who make promises never get to be held accountable.
...is a college in Pullman.
There, fixed that headline for you.
"Inslee is running as a climate candidate for president that can get things done in the District if elected, and this bill is a very tangible accomplishment he can now point to." It'll be tangible when (or rather, if) it succeeds by 2045; right now, it's a pledge and nothing more. So is Inslee planning on running for president in the 2048 election? (I'm also not clear what the District has to do with it; that's the *other* Washington.)
Are you sure it wasn't the smell of their policies?
Unless Seattle is getting ready to add nuclear to their side of the sate.
Probably nonsense? "Washington State Commits To Running Entirely On Clean Energy By 2045"
I'm guessing: Maybe no one in the WA state government has an understanding of energy technology.
Other issues that show a lack of understanding:
1) In many places, Seattle doesn't have modern internet connections, as the parent comment indicates. One story: Seattle's low-income residents are 5-7 times more likely to be without internet (March 5, 2019)
2) Washington State hasn't fixed the problems with traffic in Seattle. Fixing traffic congestion 'impossible,' says Washington transportation chief. (July 26, 2018)
3) The Washington State laws are, in many cases, very poorly written. Three terrible initiatives in Washington State this year, plus a good one. (Oct. 18, 2018)
That's the sound of my energy bill skyrocketing. Screw you, Inslee.
Washington states electricity source is already over 85% renewable so the remaining 15% could be achieved with mostly wind power. Maybe some Geothermal.
Watch your utility rates SKYROCKET!
What does it actually mean to commit in this situation? Is it any more than saying that they think its a good idea? (I think its a good idea, but don't know how a bill now enforces things in the future)
It's like this. Lawmakers make laws. New laws automagicly supersede older laws.
Soooo, as soon as a future legislature decides this law doesn't make sense (for whatever reason - they are anti-solar, they are pro-nuclear, they're getting kickbacks from Big Coal, whatever), it vanishes in a puff of new law.
Net effect: it looks good on the Governor's Presidential bid, gives the Washington State pols something to tell their constituents about next election, and doesn't commit either the Governor or the legislators to do a damn thing....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Trees are some of the greatest renewables, and over time they're fully carbon-neutral - You can grow them with sunlight and water (transferring carbon from the ground and air into the trees), chop them down and burn them (putting the carbon into the air and ground) , and repeat.
Steam engines love to run on burning trees, and steam trains have gone pretty fast, so it's ideal for high-speed rail service.
Nuclear is not renewable.
Solar is not green when you consider all the strip mining and toxic chemicals needed to make them and all the problems disposing of them at EOL.
Wind is similarly dependent upon strip-mined rate earth metals for any generator that's reasonably efficient.
Hydro is no longer considered acceptable by environmentalists who love fish or oppose impacting rivers.
Wood fires win!
2) Washington State hasn't fixed the problems with traffic in Seattle.
Yeah it’s amazing how the rest of the US and the rest of the world have solved their traffic problems, leaving Seattle as the only place which has to deal with bad traffic.
#DeleteChrome
Or were you just karma whoring for the anti-enviro whackos infesting slashdot?
What else did you think a matrix was? It's an interlocking infrastructure that fits where the others are failing. When it's winter it is usually windy. When it's still, it is usually clear skies too. As for "but yuh backups!!!!", EVERY SINGLE FUCKING GENERATOR NEEDS BACKUP. Every one. And we already have it. Fuck, hydro was promoted massively because of nuclear variation could take off GW of production at a moment's notice and any other backup generator needs an hour to ramp up, and even fast responders need many minutes to do so. So hydro was used to brigde the power gap of GW. One reason why hydro has massive capacity factors is because it is only going to run for a couple of hours tops at rated speed before it runs out of water, so unless it entirely fails to operate, it will generate at full capacity.
...Washington state can collect it from all the bullshit their liberal constituents spew.
Follow B.C.â(TM)s lead and build a world class transit system.
Other places raise the cost of fuel and fund public transit. Look across the border at Vancouver BC: expensive fuel, nice transit.
You forgot (it doesn't work).
Where I live in Washington state, I pay 6.8 cents per KWh. 96% is hydro. 3.5% is a mix of nuclear, wind and solar and the rest coal. A lot of the state has similar stats. Getting electricity to 100% non-coal is not a difficult thing.
1. That is Seattle's issue not the state.
2. Mostly bad planning by King County back in the 70's. It is nearly impossible to fix now.
3. Initiatives are not a Washington State government written law. It is written by private citizens and voted on by private citizens. By the way, just because you disagree doesn't make them bad.
Not one of those complaints has anything to do with energy management.
numbnuts
Where I live in Washington state, I pay 6.8 cents per KWh. 96% is hydro. 3.5% is a mix of nuclear, wind and solar and the rest coal. A lot of the state has similar stats. Getting electricity to 100% non-coal is not a difficult thing.
The massive amount of wind farms that have been up for many years in Eastern Washington shows this is nothing new. It is not some grand, pie in the sky plan. It is happening with or without this commitment.
Washington is not some backwards shithole like Alabama that would die without aid from states like Washington and without coal.
numbnuts.
Over 85% of the statewide energy is renewables or nuclear and already is one of cheapest electricity rates in the country.
The states with the highest rates are the ones dependent on coal.
numbnuts
There is at least one reactor on the west side of the state.
numbnuts
by cancelling the Columbia River Treaty on Sepember 17, 2024.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_River_Treaty#Termination