Petition to replace Northern Colorado coal with Renewables

***In lieu of knocking on doors in these times we are asking folks to participate in our on-line actions and fundraising. Please remember that we are 100% funded by viewers like you. Thank you***

---

From our friends at Colorado Sierra Club…

Sign the petition calling on PRPA to chart the path to northern Colorado’s clean energy future!

When the city of Fort Collins committed to a goal of achieving 100% renewable electricity by 2030, it was the broad public support--and achievability--of that goal, that moved 6 out of 7 councilmembers to vote “yes.” On the night of the city vote in October of 2018, “dozens of people filled the council chambers” and called on Fort Collins city councilmembers to commit to charting a path for Fort Collins’ clean energy future.

Just 9 months prior to Fort Collins making its 100% renewable commitment, the city of Longmont committed to its own goal of achieving 100% clean energy by 2030. Along with sharing the same commitment to 100% clean energy, the cities of Fort Collins & Longmont share a regional electric power provider. That utility--Platte River Power Authority (PRPA)--serves the four cities of Fort Collins, Longmont, Loveland, and Estes Park. After more than a year of community-member led campaigning from all four cities, PRPA committed to their own goal of achieving a 100% non-carbon resource mix by 2030. Next, the cities of Estes Park & Loveland passed city resolutions supporting PRPA’s goal.

Fast forward to March of 2020, and PRPA is currently in the process of finalizing its long-term energy plan, or Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). With just 10 short years away from the 2030 clean energy target, PRPA’s IRP is critical to creating a plan for achieving its city & utility 100% renewable energy goals. Yet despite this fact, PRPA still has no plans to retire its 280 MW Rawhide coal plant. In fact, Rawhide is not slated to retire until 2046--16 years after the 2030 target. Furthermore, PRPA is even considering building a new gas plant in 2036, despite city commitments to achieving 100% renewable electricity by 2030. 

Fortunately, PRPA’s IRP is a window of opportunity for community members in all four cities to call on PRPA to honor its member city commitments to 100% renewable electricity by planning for the retirement of the Rawhide coal plant. Community members are also calling on PRPA to commit to not building any new fracked gas plants that will burden communities with fossil fuel debt and hinder the achievement of any 100% renewable goals. Additionally, community members are demanding that PRPA use the Social Cost of Carbon in this planning process to account for the true costs of climate change on our communities from natural disasters to weakened infrastructure. Unlike investor-owned utilities like Xcel Energy or Black Hills, PRPA is not required by the state to use the $46 per ton of CO2 Social Cost of Carbon in their resource planning. Yet including the Social Cost of Carbon in any resource planning is imperative to account for the community health, environmental, and economic burden of the continued burning of fossil fuels.

There are many things community members in Northern Colorado can do to make their voices heard through this process, but with PRPA’s IRP wrapping up by June, the window of opportunity is closing. 

Take action now:

1. Sign the petition calling on PRPA to chart the path to northern Colorado’s clean energy future!

2. Email your city councilmember & Mayor asking them to hold PRPA accountable to the city & utility 100% renewable goals! Find their contact information here.

Have a question or want to get more involved? Reach out to Sierra Club Beyond Coal Organizer Sarah Snead at sarah.snead@sierraclub.org or 443-974-6291

A conservative fights for Solar

Capitalist for Conservation by
Michael Pruznick

I am the proud owner of the premier privately funded free market residential rooftop net-positive solar array in the city. AT 32 KW, the array is rated to produce enough green energy to power more than five average homes for less than the government owned utility charges. My journey began in 2011, when the city created the Sustainability Department with the awesome goal to, "increase coordination, accountability, and collaboration amongst the three functions of sustainability." Armed with data showing residential rooftop solar would pay for itself over its lifetime, I went to the outreach roadshows and advocated for net-zero building codes. At the time, the city leaders were not ready for the shift, and in many ways, they still are not. I hope the success of my project will be their inspiration.

As for me, I was ready, willing, and able. By 2013, I had my first net-positive design ready. Unfortunately, my design was too green for one of the greenest cities in the world. The city didn't want to make net-metering payouts nor did it want to upgrade my transformer. So, I downsized the project to meet these requirements and got the unofficial thumbs up. But, it came with an unexpected caveat. I had to comply with the 120% Rule first, a law that prohibits a home from using solar to offset natgas and gasoline use. Climate Change cannot be solved with such restrictions, so I spent the next few years trying to change this policy with no luck.

Eventually, the city unwittingly caved in. By changing their electric rate structure from expensive tiers to time-of- day with unlimited low-cost off-peak, they made it affordable for me to comply by converting from clean natgas to dirty coal-fired electricity. However, before I could complete the transition, they changed the law and cut the amount of solar I qualified for in half. This killed my fossil fuel free project. The Greening of America isn't a cost or technical issue, it is a political issue.

I wish I could find something good to say about the government's environmental agenda, but five council members that ran to protect the environment voted to harm it. I offered the two new council members, "I would like to invite both of you to my home to show you what I'm doing," and they declined. As part of HB19-1261, The State Climate Action Plan, I made my state legislators the offer, "Let me know if either of you would like a tour of my house and detailed presentation," but they too declined. With Climate Advocates like these, the Climate Deniers can retire.

I would like to thank CFORCE for understanding how my solution represents the moderate middle by giving the right the lower cost they want and the left more renewables sooner. Tired of waiting for the government to embrace renewables? Tired of hearing how it will cost more? Then, do your part to support residential rooftop solar for less by becoming a PruzLabs member today.

Dissecting Mayor Troxell's Embarrassing Emails

CforSE supporters are writing the Mayor asking him to direct Fort Collins Utilities (FCU) to research the idea of leasing roof space for the installation of utility owned solar panels, and to explore a partnership with Poudre School District (PSD) to lease their roofs.

This is the response that Mayor Troxell sent to citizens on over a dozen occasions in June:

---------------------------

"Hi (first name). The suggestion that Fred Kirsch, although ambitious, is lacking in specifics and voracity. Please see the attached memo that describes some of the shortcomings of Mr. Kirsch’s concept.

PSD has to be a willing partner and right now they have other issues. I encourage you to contact the PSD Board. From my perspective, the city has higher priorities to integrate a distributed energy system.

Regards,

Mayor Wade Troxell

...2017 Malcolm Baldridge Award - City of Fort Collins recognized for "an unceasing drive for radical innovation, thoughtful leadership, and operational excellence."

----------------------------

There's a few problems with this email. Let's start with grammar. In addition to poor sentence structure, voracity means "with great hunger". The word Wade (probably) meant to use was veracity - truthfulness. So the Mayor is calling me a liar. Yes, it's a personal attack from our Mayor and may amount to defamation. But more importantly, writers are asking the City to research something. How can a request for information be a lie?

The referenced memo and my response are available on our website. It turns out City staff needs a lesson in veracity (and probably voracity). They presented false information to City Council.

The Mayor's next point is that PSD does not want to partner with Fort Collins Utilities (FCU). FCU did ask PSD, "Would you like to lease your roof to us?" and PSD said "no". FCU didn't tell PSD that they could get thousands of dollars per month per roof. FCU admits that they haven't researched anything about a potential partnership with PSD. FCU set the question up for failure, they know it, and have since admitted it.

Wade goes on to tell citizens to take it up with PSD. This is classic passing the buck. Wade's staff hasn't done their job and he is telling us to take it up with someone else.

Wade has a right to his perspective but he has yet to illuminate that perspective and what those "higher priorities" might be. If there is a better way to accomplish our goals, then we are all about it!

Perhaps the most offensive thing about this email is Wade's sign off. The City spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to get the Malcolm Baldridge award. Their actions and Wade's words do not reflect "thoughtful leadership, operational excellence" and this is the opposite of "radical innovation".

On other occasions (in October) our illustrious Mayor wrote:

-------------------------

"Hi (first name). Thank you for your email. Nice story however CfoSE is not telling you the full story. PSD is not interested is such a proposal at this time. There are other and better options too."

-------------------------

That's the whole email. Again, ad hominem attack and poor grammar. In this case the "story" the writer told was that his daughter goes to school without air conditioning.

The writer follows up, asking Wade what are the "better options too" and why PSD wasn't interested. Wade responds with the earlier email from June. Needless to say the writer and I are not satisfied with the actions of our Mayor.

All of this is publicly available on the City Council email database. I will be taking this up in front of City Council on January 7, 2020, 6:30pm during public comment.

Meeting with Fort Collins Utilities

On November 5th I met with Fort Collins Utility (FCU) employees John Phelan, Rhonda Gatsky, and Leland Keller to discuss progress on the Utility Owned Distributed Solar (UODS) project.

UODS is the utility leasing property upon which to install their own solar panels. This should be the most affordable way to do solar on rooftops and parking lots. We are asking FCU to thoroughly research and vet the idea. The goal is to find the most financially sustainable and socially equitable way for our public utility to expand solar without using green-spaces (undeveloped lands).

Quick recap:

In the summer of 2017 CforSE members asked City Council to direct FCU to explore UODS . Council did so in September 2017. FCU presented “results” in May 2018. CforSE challenged those results and members asked FCU to research a model for public schools. In April 2019 FCU asked Poudre School District if they could lease their roofs. FCU didn’t have any research or modeling to show them and PSD said “No”. I went to council in July 2019 and asked for FCU to develop modeling for commercial scale projects (roofs or parking lots over 20,000 sq ft, such as a school). The meeting on November 5th was to discuss FCU’s new modeling.

At the meeting:

FCU had not done the modeling we asked for. They did update some of their numbers which gained a little more accuracy. There were still basic mistakes in their formulas, out-dated inputs, and guess work in their assumptions. Worst of all they did not do calculations for medium and large size projects (the most important factor). Over two years since Council directed them to research the idea FCU had done very little and what they did do was inaccurate. I let them know that we are not satisfied.

I did, however, bring my own set of calculations derived by using National Renewable Energy Lab research. We discussed the differences and agreed that we would each seek out more accurate numbers. John committed to exploring medium and large size project potential and to begin to identify potential property owners to host those larger projects. We talked about funding possibilities and a timeline of 2023 -2024 to get the first project in the ground.

This meeting represented the greatest progress to date and I feel good that we can meet a 2023 timeline. But only if we keep up the pressure. City staff and leadership have demonstrated time and again that citizen pressure is continuously needed to get results. Thank you for your continued support!

Organizing in Longmont & Loveland

In Loveland & Longmont (as in most other places) our door to door organizing has revealed that people strongly value an energy policy that supports the local economy in an environmentally responsible and socially equitable way. That is why we are asking our public electric utility to thoroughly explore and vet the Utility Ownership of Distributed Solar (UODS) model.

UODS is different then current solar models - net metering and power purchase agreements (PPA). With net metering the utility buys power from a solar owner at the retail rate (limited to 120% of owner’s electric usage) . This is problematic because non-solar Longmont customers are paying a 100% profit margin to solar owning customers. That is not very socially equitable or financially sustainable as solar adoption grows. It also limits solar to those willing and able to expend capital. PPAs are cheaper but typically occur on remote open space or agricultural land and give our non-profit utility dollars to out of town investors. PPAs also rely on tax credits that are set to expire in 2022. Private investment in PPA’s might expire with the tax credits.

With UODS the utility leases space in town upon which to install their own solar panels. The property owner gets a rent check and the panels (and power they produce) belong to the utility. UODS is far cheaper than net metering and competitive with PPAs. UODS keeps our energy dollars in the community by leasing local roofs and parking lots (maybe schools). Because the solar resource is owned by the utility the costs and benefits are distributed equally among customers. Property owners can lease much more space for solar because they don’t have to invest the capital and are not limited to 120% of usage. The cost is that the utility has to find the capital and it takes more work to own the resource than to buy the power from someone else. But that’s why we have a municipal utility in the first place. We built a coal plant (in 1980) and transmission lines because it is cheaper to own the resource than to buy electricity from Xcel Energy.

So what’s the hold up? This is all pretty new. Just a few years ago solar was expensive and nobody thought it would become cheap this soon. Platte River Power Authority (PRPA, owned by Longmont, Fort Collins, Estes Park ,and Loveland) provides our electricity and is convening a study group to explore distributed solar strategies. We need to make sure that Longmont utility leaders ask the study group to include UODS.

If you live in Longmont please email Mayor Bagley and ask him to direct the PRPA distributed energy strategy group to explore UODS. If you live in Loveland please email Mayor Jacki Marsh.

Thank you!

Presenting our solar proposal to City Council

On July 16th, 2019 I gave this presentation during public comment at the Fort Collins City Council meeting. Councilmembers Ross Cunniff and Julie Pignataro asked staff to follow up in advance of next Tuesday’s more in depth discussion. We’re making progress!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsMPjQWaslo&feature=youtu.be

2 min, 30 sec

A Better Solar Policy for Fort Collins

In the past year CforSE has generated over 1,000 citizen letters to city council asking them to explore leasing roofs and parking lots to install City owned solar panels. This is the most affordable way for the community to maximize our solar potential without covering undeveloped land with panels. There are roughly three square miles of available roof/parking lots in town (the size of Horsetooth Reservoir). Last September council directed staff to explore the leasing idea.

 Seven months later staff presented little more than a request for two more years to research options. This might sound reasonable until you consider that they’ve had ten years to evolve the solar program and haven’t substantially changed a thing.

 The result of our ten-year-old policy is that lower income residents who don’t have solar are subsidizing a profit margin for residents and businesses that do have solar. The City could adopt policies now that fairly compensate solar owners and encourage solar development on parking lots, rooftops, and marginal lands like the landfill.

 The longer the City delays, the more “greenfields” will be covered with solar. In fact the City has already contracted with a project on agricultural land in north Fort Collins. You can see this project from the Horsetooth foothills. Imagine an area of solar panels the size of the reservoir. Those panels should be on rooftops and parking lots, not agricultural land and greenfields.

 As citizens, we need to hold the city council accountable to holding the city staff accountable to implementing policy that reflects our values. Your short email will make a difference!

Tell our City Leaders that you want City staff to move quickly to adopt solar policy that maximizes the potential for rooftop and parking lot solar.

Send your email to: cityleaders@fcgov.com

Please cc: cforse.fred@gmail.com

Thank you!

Rush Hour Commuter Rail Update

We’re making progress! It appears that letters from CforSE members are making a difference at the Boulder County Commissioners’ office. We will be sending letters directly to RTD now and keeping up the pressure on the county to continue to advocate for Rush Hour Rail.

Your help is needed! Please email the RTD Board of Directors barbara.mcmanus@rtd-denver.com. Ask them for their response to the letter from Commuting Solutions dated Aug. 21, 2018 concerning Peak Service Northwest Rail.

Let me know if you get a reply and we will do the same. RTD needs continuos poking to prioritize this project. Thank you!

---

August 21, 2018

Mr. Doug Tisdale
Chair, RTD Board of Directors 1600 Blake Street
Denver, CO 80202

Dear Chair Tisdale,

Commuting Solutions and the US 36 Mayors & Commissioners Coalition communities of Adams County, Boulder, Boulder County, Louisville, Superior, City & County of Broomfield, Longmont, Lafayette, Erie and Westminster submitted to the RTD on November 8, 2017 a letter, requesting you proceed with further evaluation of the Option 1 Peak Service Northwest Rail as the preferred scenario. In addition, we urged the RTD to proceed with engaging the BNSF in the exploration so they could provide a cost estimate necessary to implement Peak Service Northwest Rail.

We understand RTD met with the BNSF in May 2018 to discuss the scenario and to ask for a cost estimate. We also understand a follow-up letter was sent to the BNSF in June.

We write today to ask that you expedite conversations with the BNSF, as it has almost been a year since we selected Option 1 as the preferred scenario. We wish to continue to partner with the RTD and explore creative options to deliver Northwest Rail sooner than the 2040 timeframe. Continuing the evaluation is of particular importance this year, as the state considers a ballot issue that could ultimately be used as seed funding to further the Peak Service Northwest Rail exploration. We are already receiving comments and concerns from the public as we begin our advocacy efforts for the ballot issue’s successful passage and would like to have recent information to provide in response to these comments.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. We look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,

David Driscoll Board Chairperson

cc: US 36 Mayors & Commissioners Coalition