Clean Energy Program FAQs

A: Texas leads the nation in total electricity consumption, and, on a per capita basis, Texans consume more electricity than the national average. Widespread use of air conditioning and a relatively heavy reliance on electricity for residential energy needs contribute to the high consumption levels.

Texas also has a high percentage of large, energy-intensive industries, including petroleum refining and petrochemical production, aluminum and glass manufacturing, and the paper and wood industries.

Both residential and commercial electricity consumption have increased in recent years as the Texas population and economy have grown. Industrial consumption has shown little growth, fluctuating year to year due to economic conditions, energy prices, and efficiency improvements.

To date, Texas has not pursued significant energy efficiency measures as aggressively as other states. The Electricity Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), an independent 501(c)(3) governed by a board of directors and subject to oversight by the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the Legislature, manages the flow of electric power to 23 million Texas customers (representing 85 percent of the state’s electric load).

ERCOT has recently declared that electricity shortages are not expected to be an issue in the near-term, although the organization has established that summer reserve margins can be too low to prevent blackouts during peak demand. During the hot, dry summer of 2011, the grid operator implored Texans to cut back on electricity demand. Residents responded much more vigorously than expected, demonstrating a significant capacity to conserve energy under the right circumstances.

A: The Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation’s Clean Energy Program focuses on the following priorities:

1. Promote policies and initiatives that increase cost-effective energy efficiency activities, both at the power plant level and within individual buildings.
2. Encourage the development of renewable energy markets to help fill the gap in electricity demand after reductions from efficiency.
3. Promote the denial of permits for traditional coal plant construction.

The foundation continues to fund and support the non-partisan Texas Clean Energy Coalition’s efforts to bring an array of diverse, centrist-thinking communities to bear on these policy issues.

A: Texas has a tremendous opportunity to benefit from a green economy based on clean energy sources and proven energy efficiency measures. With abundant sun and wind, Texas is blessed with plentiful natural resources for clean energy generation, a vibrant high technology industry, and impressive potential for increasing energy efficiency. Texas can dramatically cut its greenhouse gases and still meet its projected growth in demand for electricity while simultaneously adding new jobs in the state and conserving the precious water resources required for coal plants to function.   

Analyses commissioned by the foundation’s grantees, and confirmed by a state report on energy efficiency potential in Texas, conclude that half of the predicted load growth due to a growing population and increased demand for electricity can be met utilizing efficiency measures. These include more energy efficient buildings and incentive programs, which would also provide tens of thousands of jobs.
 

A: The practice of energy efficiency is the least costly, most abundant “resource” in Texas, and it is an obvious solution to meeting much of the state of Texas’s future energy needs. The state can meet half of its load growth with energy efficiency practices, but there are a number of obstacles that are keeping this from happening.

Industrial energy consumers—the real driver of energy policy in Texas—vigorously oppose public policy that mandates or provides incentives for energy efficiency.

Yet, research shows that energy efficiency

1. pays for itself quickly;
2. reduces healthcare costs through reduced air emissions;
3. cuts water demand in an era of scarcity; and
4. saves billions of dollars for retail customers.

A: Energy efficient building codes and appliance standards are important for the following reasons:

1. The state of Texas leads the nation in the generation and consumption of electricity.
2. Buildings and homes represent 40 percent of the state’s overall energy use and are recognized as a key opportunity for efficiency gains.
3. Building codes for new construction are improved on a regular basis, but the state has to follow a Byzantine and inefficient system of adopting the new codes at the state and local levels.
4. Retrofitting existing buildings to be more energy efficient is an important step in reducing the electricity load in Texas and creating stable, skilled jobs.

A: The motivation to cut reliance on coal is driven simply by environmental and health protection while benefiting the state’s economy.  Mr. Mitchell has been a vocal advocate for research and planning for a more sustainable planet since the early 1970s.  

With greater energy efficiency, new low-cost natural gas supplies, and expanded renewable resources, the state of Texas no longer needs to rely on coal for power generation supply. Significant progress could be made in improving air quality and reducing water use in Texas if

1. no more coal plants were built in the state of Texas;
2. Texas regulators would reject all new permit applications for traditional coal-fired power plants; and
3. Texas would mandate the closure of the nation’s three largest, dirtiest coal plants (all located in Texas).

The foundation is confident this approach will add to, rather than subtract from, job gains in the state of Texas.

Increased natural gas production is already creating thousands of incremental jobs for Texans. Increased renewable energy production will do the same. Increased building efficiency standards will create jobs retrofitting existing buildings. In addition, coal workers and miners can be retrained for other energy industry-related jobs, such as in Texas’s natural gas industry.

A: The reality is that the United States government has long subsidized many industries, including all forms of energy, helping private sector energy markets to innovate, evolve, and drive our economy.

Coal is simply outdated, and few, with the key exception being coal producers and their lobby, would argue differently. Just as human society transitioned from burning manure, to burning wood, to burning coal, to burning oil, to burning natural gas, to using nuclear and renewables, the time is right for the U.S. to complete this transition and stop burning carbon intense fuels.

(Note: According to the Cato Institute, the energy sector is subsidized much less than housing, defense, agriculture, or healthcare. For example, the U.S. currently pays an estimated $20 billion annually to farmers as “farm income stabilization.”)
 

A: The price tag for coal generation does not reflect its full cost to its workers or the general consumer. Coal’s price tag does not include externalities, such as healthcare costs and the short-and long-term costs to the environment.

Texans are already bearing substantial costs by continuing to rely on coal. The high cost of dirty energy includes: (1) high medical costs, (2) the high cost of insurance, and (3) the significant short- and long-term damage to our environment.