||| FROM ARTHUR WINER |||
While I respect the intelligence and technical strengths of OPALCO’s Board members and the executive leadership, I’ve been troubled in recent years by a logical contradiction in OPALCO’s energy policies. On the one hand promoting and subsidizing the “electrification of everything” while at the same time threatening us with blackouts if we don’t give them a free hand to install whatever technologies they want, wherever they want to site them.
Frustrated by opposition to their approach, OPALCO now proposes to take away the last ability island residents and county government has to influence which technologies should be used to satisfy future electricity demand, the scope of those technologies, and where they should be sited.
With this essential public utility designation proposal, OPALCO is transforming itself from an accountable public utility, subject to the environmental protections that have preserved our islands for decades, to an autocratic institution that will brook no opposition to its determination to, for example, erect extensive solar facilities on multiple islands, install dangerous battery systems with a history of toxic fires and contamination, or resort to huge tidal machines with no demonstrated benefits over hydropower. In effect, OPALCO discounts the reasons why most of us have chosen to live here: for the beauty, serenity and quality of the natural environment.
OPALCO appears to have adopted the mainland attitude that unlimited growth is a social good, even though, as islands, our county is inherently and strictly limited in resources and available land area. They have adopted the position that no restrictions should be placed on the growth of electricity demand. This ignores the precedent set by water limitations across the U.S., especially in the Southwest, where new housing permits cannot be issued because the water is not available.
SJC government and OPALCO should pay attention to this precedent and, if necessary, consider a moratorium on new housing permits as we face a somewhat analogous situation with respect to electricity supply.
Actions Required:
OPALCO should withdraw their proposal until they hold a referendum of members on the future of electricity supply and demand, specifically presenting multiple options for meeting the relatively few hours a year of peak demand, including cost-effective and reliable options in addition to solar and batteries.
Since it cannot currently guarantee security of electricity supply going forward, threatening us with blackouts, OPALCO should immediately stop promoting and subsidizing the “electrification of everything” and revise downward its demand models accordingly.
OPALCO should join with other regional investor-owned utilities to lobby state-government to oppose the siting of data centers and chip foundries in the state of Washington on the backs of retail electricity rate payers.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
While I disagree that OPALCO is “threatening us with blackouts” or transforming into an “autocratic institution,” I do agree that the first step in finding solutions to the limited resources that we have is to stop pretending that we can actually accommodate more growth. The recent decision to expand the Eastsound Urban Growth Area (UGA) and upzone existing parcels to accommodate higher density is evidence of the county’s continued failure to protect what makes these islands unique.
A building moratorium, with reasonable exceptions, is urgently needed in San Juan County. The “unlimited growth” mindset that’s wrecking the planet is alive and well here, despite the official sheen of “respect for the land” preached by nearly every person who’s connected to our local government. Talk is cheap. Where are the results?
We must push back against the increasing commodification of these islands by speculative developers, off-island vacation rental investors, complicit realtors, and the rest of the pro-growth cabal that uses county tax revenue (LTAC) to attract growing numbers of tourists. Follow the money, folks. The landscapes that you love are viewed by a relatively small number of very wealthy people as a product that should be sold to the highest bidder.
We hope to see you at the Community Meetings this week! http://www.opalco.com/events
This is such a well written piece! It highlights many of the failings of current OPALCO leadership while offering actual solutions. One solution that OPALCO is completely resistant to is conservation. While I enjoyed almost all of what David Bowman said, I firmly disagree that OPALCO doesn’t use fear tactics. Look at the Decatur meetings (available on YouTube) and realise that they QUICKLY pivoted the Baylor Hill project to Decatur, an un-ferry serviced island with no fire protection and 1/14th the size! We have been trying to fight them as this involves ripping out a forest. (Please contact me if you want to see photos )why Decatur? Because it’s perfect for that use?!? No: it’s because they thought they could push it through without protest. The first meeting in February:
https://youtu.be/Bubyi3dogI4?feature=shared ,
was known by a small handful of residents (most of whom were predisposed to support solar as they had invested in the current micro grid.) They can contact me about a bill or send their magazine but not let me know about an important meeting?!?(Side note: I think none of those people are supporting OPALCO anymore) Please use Decatur as a cautionary tale. This is how they will deal with members if given that EPF distinction..
I think we need to recognize that OPALCO (with all of its members) is caught between and among:.
1. The need to use clean energy as an alternative to contributing to global warming. As an organization whose concerns include the welfare of the local community as part of a larger scale problem, OPALCO’s concerns include such considerations. I recognize that for many this is a debatable or even false argument. But even granting this point, the conflicts don’t stop there:
2. Compared with the use of fossil fuels, electric power in place of fossil fuels saves money. Saving member money through delivery of a public service is a legitimate consideration for a non-profit member-owned utility. OPALCO cannot be accused of having a financial interest separate from its member-owners. Then there is:
3. It doesn’t matter how you come out on Issues1 and 2 because anyone who relies on OPALCO relies on the Northwest Grid which in turn is connected to the national grid. It also doesn’t matter whether you’re happy with fossil fueled transportation or prefer an EV, because it’s no longer just a question of amount. The possibility of an interruption of all power for a short or long period is increasing. OK, blow off steam at EV drivers data centers or AI, but when the steam is blown off, the question remains, what do you do? OPALCO’s efforts to establish a measure of self-reliance reflect its recognition of this situation.
4. Everything that OPALCO installs and uses takes space. Space is critical in small islands, and particularly where space hosts animals, vegetation and minerals that generate the message that nature and the life and conditions it contains are vital to the human spirit, a factor that is heavily and necessarily marketed because our current standard of living demands it. There are those who would revert to 1,000 AD, a condition that living on an island invokes. Not everyone is prepared or able to do that. But insofar as OPALCO is concerned, its need for space collides with micro and larger local biomes, and very real feelings of grief over what we’ve done already and (new housing excepted) the NIMBY factor for aesthetics (and consequent real estate and tourism values) supervene politically, forcing OPALCO and a few others to watch the inevitable approach some serious cold snap … and later be told they “should have done … something.” Resolution of this issue would require some application of triage, which is hotly resisted.
I cannot speak for OPALCO, but it is obviously seeking to educate its members on the situation and seek feedback. Responsible members would step up and contribute constructive suggestions. I might add that members vote for some measures to be taken by OPALCO every time they flip a switch, particularly on really cold days. Those switch actions speak louder than letters or votes, and are the signals to which OPALCO is required by law to respond to ensure electric service to its membership.
Something will have to give. It’s not whether, it’s when.
Left unsaid in all of the above comments and Arthur Winer’s fine article is the undeniable FACT that what really limits expansion on these fragile islands is not electricity or water but the WASHINGTON STATE FERRY “service,” which show no indications that it might expand accordingly. Ergo the problems with that service will only INCREASE as the population grows. That’s the real limiting factor.
I’m heartbroken to read what happened on Decatur Island and to Kendra Lamb’s family. If it happened on Decatur, it can/will happen on Orcas.
Also, thank you, David Bowman. Your response here and to Elizabeth Robson’s letter of concerns, many of which I share, was well reasoned and here, you point out the real culprit being ignored with every Comp Plan ‘review.’ Thank you for standing with us in Eastsound UGA – it’s horrifying, what will be done and I am not sure we can stop it or who even knows about it.
As to Bill Appell’s comment: just curious. Do you live in an “all electrified” UGA where the poorest people are expected to trudge through snow and bitter Arctic winds with pets in carriers to the nearest Urban fire station shelter in the midst of an outage in a Polar Express? If not, then stop speaking about which you know nothing, please. Many are poor or working poor. Because everyone is building all electric in our UGA, we have no backup heat. One solution is… drumroll… backup heat that is not electric. We should have a choice when it might be life or death in an extended outage. There are many elders here. One can put a candle in an upside down clay pot in a kitchen sink and be warm enough to survive if they stay in a small area and put up blankets – you know – like in the old days where everyone gathered in one room. Why are we not exploring backup heat options for all who are not offered the choice of alternative heat? I would NEVER leave my pet to go to a shelter if i couldn’t carry it there. I’d pile on the blankets and snuggle up with my animal companion. It is unthinkable to expect any of us to have to make that kind of choice.
Re: Bill’s comments about climate change: We must remember that climate change is just one of many crises we face in the poly-crisis of overshoot. It is probably not even the worst–I’d put pollution and habitat loss leading to the sixth mass extinction as greater crises. As you point out Bill, so-called “renewables” (actually, rebuildables) take a lot of space, and along with that, do a lot of damage to the environment, damaging habitat in the process. From the mining of the materials to make them to installation, the damage is done.
We must also realize that the push for so-called “renewables” hasn’t changed the global trajectory of CO2 emissions, which are going up at record levels every year. The reason for that is, as so well-described in Jean Baptiste’s book More and More and More, that more energy is *added* to the global energy supply; it does not *replace*. So more solar electricity here frees up more fossil fuels to, say, run data centers elsewhere in the PNW. As just one example.
More energy leads to more development which leads to more growth which then demands more energy.
Again, I must come back to my over-riding point in all of my articles and comments: why, as a county, is a discussion of de-growth never allowed on the table?
I get it; this global economy depends on growth. But at some point growth will cause failure of our community. Someone said on another article that “The history of the world is that it rarely goes back in time.” This is demonstrably not true. Many civilizations have preceded this (final) global one, and each and every one of them collapsed and forced populations “back in time”. I was recently researching the collapse of the Soviet Union, which indeed put Russian citizens “back in time” to a small degree for a time. Perhaps the first instance of going back in time that we know of in human history was when Cro Magnon people of the Upper Paleolithic learned how to hunt with improved tools and eradicated the mega fauna and big animals on every continent except Africa where a few large mammals managed to hang on. They “went back in time”–they stopped drawing art and making jewelry, something you can only do when you have a life of relative luxury that allows the time to do that. After killing off the mega fauna they had to rely on small game for hunting and more gathering (leading, eventually to agriculture), far more time intensive and they had no extra time for luxuries like art.
Going back in time has happened many many times to various human societies since then. We will not be immune to this, if we continue down the path of idolizing growth at the expense of the natural environment: flourishing ecosystems, clean water, clean air, etc.
We face many crises in this county, that most don’t see because we are a wealthy county. But just because most people don’t see these crises doesn’t mean they don’t exist. And the root cause of ALL of them is growth. We must be willing to have a community discussion about this, or we will continue to grow into failure.
I’m in full support of backup heat, which as time passes and the “do nothing” forces continue to speak from their separate quadrants, may become increasingly necessary.
The poor working (as you describe them) are in a tough spot, all the more reason that OPALCO should not be unreasonably impeded in its efforts to serve all at the lowest rates consistent with the fact that its mainland power supply may fail at critical times and temperatures. As an elder myself I support OPALCO’s efforts in this regard.
Having lived many years on Waldron relying entirely on wood heat, we lived well, with sweaters indoors in winter. City traditions prevail in many homes on ferry-served islands where inhabitants dress lightly indoors, relying on virtually full-time heating throughout the winter.
The matter of pets is tricky, but pets are lives for which the owner is responsible. Those with pets cannot assume that OPALCO will solve their problem, which, having pets, they voluntarily assumed, while OPALCO is prevented from all sides from carrying out its mission.
I hope everyone reading this attends one of the series of OPALCO presentations now underway.
Response to Bill Appell (and Michael Riordan about unreliable ferry traffic stopping or slowing growth)
Michael first: Lack of reliable ferry service isn’t stemming the tide of growth at all. It is bringing in a whole new level of upper class as well as more people with their own airplanes. I live under the airport and can tell you that private and commercial plane use here has exponentially grown in the last 10 years; hence the work to dial back the monstrous DOWL Master Plan starting in 2018, and getting involved in Port elections. Luckily, we have commissioners who understand this, and a great manager. They also want to keep our airport from becoming Friday Harbor, which is impossible anyway due to land mass in our two-shoreline-one-mile-wide UGA. More and more people fly. There is great demand for more hangars for the many private jets and small planes here now, besides the increased commuter plane trips. It’s not uncommon to hear planes taking off at 6:30 am on a Sunday morning and late into the nights. There’s an uptick in private helicopters too. (and deafness, and safety risks to the clustered housing below the flight paths that were built before all this runaway growth)
BIll,
I wrote about how the realities of living in one of the ever-increasing numbers of all-electric housing complexes for the poor and low income working class are impacting us. You are making presumptions and putting words out that I never wrote. You hope we all go to the presentations. I’ve been to plenty of presentations – by the time we get to ‘presentations,’ things have already been decided and we have no real voice and it’s too late to stop them from doing whatever they’re hellbent on doing.
How is working toward creative backup heat for the many without it, impeding OPALCO’s mission? By allowing OPALCO EPF status, we’ll be stuck with a top-down dictatorship that doesn’t belong in a cooperative that, up til now, had some responsibility to at least hear out and answer members’ questions and concerns and follow the ever-weakening land use environmental requirements.
True, some of us get ‘poor people help’ from OPALCO – for which I am grateful. I couldn’t pay my bill without it. I wonder if there will be repercussions for daring to pose my concerns or protests – along with people like yourself misunderstanding and even subtly blaming us. Will OPALCO remove our ‘entitlements’ for speaking against their policies? They are a private utility, after all. I think this is why so many of us are silent all too often. We feel powerless and vulnerable because we know what it means.
But my question is still not answered: How can we keep ignoring the fact that in the UGA, almost all the new apartments and homes for the middle class and poor contain no alternative backup heat? And how is granting OPALCO the EPF status going to help us have any voice at all, when we already have none? Is the mission monoculture-energy production, encouraging maximum kwh usage, and proliferation of large-scale solar panel and battery storage facilities that are not even effective energy generators in our area?
You wrongly assume that pet owners expect OPALCO to take care of their pets and that people with pets are somehow hamstringing OPALCO’s mission. No offense, Bill, but you come off as out of touch with the fact that we can’t sustain dressing lightly in winter and expect to have heat 24-7. Heat Pumps are not energy efficient, nor are they modestly priced, including in kwh usage. Charging ‘peak’ energy rates will only hurt those who HAVE to work; the very people who can’t afford any more of the burden, yet carry too much of it.
Until we were urbanized, we understood Island Life and what it entailed – which was Risk. Today, people are so risk-averse,; we’ve traded resiliency for a false sense of security and safety. But life IS risky. And we die. Yes, to protecting vulnerable people who need to feel safe and secure. But DO we all need this? Are we being ‘protected’ to death at the expense of our own resiliency, the environment, and the stripping of civil rights that comes with ‘safety? ‘
My concern is that OPALCO is making more problems than it’s solving. I say this with some trepidation… but there has been lack of transparency on many levels.
Some of us still remember the owner of Rock Island who sold R.I. to OPALCO, and was gag-ordered to silence (no doubt, threatened with a lawsuit) to never speak of what happened to make him leave his contract early. It behooves us to remember, and try to prevent more secrecy withheld from the Members, due to absolute top-down power of a monopolistic utility company.
OPALCO is not ‘prevented from all sides’ from carrying out its mission. Please cease and desist with the wrongful assumptions. In a PUBLIC Utility, we have the right to do FOI records requests and the right to our records. We don’t have that right in a PRIVATE utility. Why grant them the power to be even less transparent and to have that kind of top-down power? I feel uneasy about this and so do others. I don’t think we’re as in the minority as is assumed by some here.