Saving the planet for...7 bucks?

Yesterday I got my latest bill from Portland General Electric. As usual, it included a $3.50 charge for clean wind energy, something I signed up for a couple years ago. I've often wondered exactly what that $3.50 buys: my entire electricity, or just a tiny portion?

So I called PGE to get the scoop. It turns out that $3.50 buys the equivalent of 200 kilowatt hours of power. This month I used 298 kWh, so wind power accounted for all but 98 kWh. But the PGE representative I talked to said that in the winter time, my usage is closer to 400 kilowatt hours. In other words, I'm getting almost half of my power from wind. If I were to add another 200-kWh unit for $3.50 per month, I'd easily be getting all my energy for a measly $7 per month.

(I happen to be gating my green power from wind, but any other alternative energy source such as solar or geothermal is of course fine too.)

Granted, I have a smaller residence than some. It's about a 1,000 square foot apartment. But even if you lived in, say, a 4000 square foot house, and were a PGE customer, you could probably get all wind or other green power for under $30 per month.

Because of Bonneville Dam, I believe Oregon also has somewhat cheaper electricity rates than many other states.

Still, for all the endless talk of a world energy crisis, I would have thought getting all my electricity from a green source would have been a lot more expensive. My power bills average $40-$50 per month, so paying $7 extra is about one-sixth or one-seventh of the total cost. Would it really be so ludicrous to imagine every citizen of Portland doing the same? Of course PGE would probably not be able to deliver alternative power at this point to all 500,000 of us in the Rose City or the other half-million in outlying suburbs. Even so, if I can get green electricity for 7 dollars a month, I can't help but feel encouraged that weening our society off fossil fuels is a doable proposition.

Or am I just chasing windmills?

Comments

[Nikos]

This all sounds nice, however, the math doesn't add up. Say we all signed up for it, then PGE would have to provide 100% of energy from wind, geothermal, solar etc which they are not prepared to do. The NW gets 2/3 of its energy from renewable sources anyway (Hydropower). I suspect PGE is using the "wind energy" money to build more coal fired plants to meet increasing energy needs. True? False? If there was a way to guarantee that your specific electricity feed is generated by carbon neutral sources I would be less suspicious.

Having said all that, am I for PGE using that money to DEVELOP more energy sources that are "clean"? Yes! But I am not convinced they are doing that either. Correct me if you think otherwise, I would love to be worng.

[Rob]

I have worked on green energy issues for a long time. I cannot believe the Oregon Public Utility Commission allows surcharges for green energy. Conservation and renewable sources are are cheaper than gas turbines, the usual way in this region to add capacity. Gas turbines will become more expensive when carbon taxation comes in. So why should customers pay more for something that costs less?

Bonneville is a great, carbon-neutral source, but Bonneville capacity goes first to public power systems like Seattle, Clark County, WA and Eugene by law. Once that capacity is consumed by the public utilities, Portland's PGE will have to buy expensive power at market rates.

In summary, public power is a more effective green strategy than private power surcharges in the Northwest.

It's kWh, as in Watt, by the way.

[PG]

There's something deeply wrong about charging people extra money for the privilege of being "green." It should be available to anyone for the same price or less, as is the case in Germany.

[eagerdrone]

How about taking the $7 fee for green power that PGE charges, putting it into a Fund? Or investing in your own individual energy independence?

If there were a fund of some sort, the fund could be managed by a non-profit based, community directed group and used to invest in clean and green energy infrastructure/power sources. The ownership of that infrastructure would remain with the group or be transferred to local government (for liability reasons).

The idea, to ween ourselves from profit based energy service providers from some other state to a local, community based, non-profit with the interests of the service users better represented.

Recall a few years ago the City of Portland bid on PGE for purchase through Enron. The result after an expensive election and lawyers was for PGE to transfer from Texas based Enron to a publicly traded stock company.