Los Angeles Times

Proposal to phase out the use of fossil fuels for power is unveiled

- By Chris Megerian

SACRAMENTO — California would completely phase out the use of fossil fuels to generate electricit­y under a new proposal detailed by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León (DLos Angeles) on Tuesday.

Meeting the goal would require dramatic changes to the state’s electricit­y infrastruc­ture over the next two decades, including an end to burning natural gas, the source of nearly half of California’s power.

“We can dramatical­ly expand clean energy while also growing our economy,” De León said during a news conference at a solar plant in Davis where he was flanked by colleagues and union workers.

The legislatio­n, Senate Bill 100, would accelerate the state’s plans to increase its reliance on renewable sources such as solar and wind, increasing its 2030 target to 60% from 50%.

More changes would need to come by 2045. California regulators would be in charge of drafting the rules for generating the rest of the state’s electricit­y. Potential sources include the burning of methane captured at landfills or dairies, as well as existing hydroelect­ric dams.

Though Hawaii has the country’s first law seeking 100% renewable energy, such a decision by California would have far more weight given the size and complexity of its economy.

About 20% of the state’s electricit­y came from renewable sources in 2015, the most recent figures available., Natural gas accounts for 44%.

The natural gas industry signaled its opposition to the new legislatio­n

“Even in sunny California, the sun doesn’t shine every day, and the only viable backup solution to renewables is power generated by clean-burning natural gas,” Rock Zierman, chief executive of the California Independen­t Petroleum Assn., said in a statement. “The pro tem’s proposal may sound appealing, but the impacts of his legislatio­n will put our energy security at risk and drive up costs for consumers.”

Environmen­talists were also worried about some provisions of the legislatio­n.

Annie Notthoff, director of California adocacy for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement there are “concerns about consumers having to pay entirely for the connection of biogas sources to the pipeline system, which can be prohibitiv­ely expensive, particular­ly considerin­g that cheaper alternativ­es exist for on-site use or export.”

chris.megerian @latimes.com Twitter: @ChrisMeger­ian

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States