OUC’s 2050 plan is a viable bridge to a clean-energy future
Nobody wants to find a lump of coal in their stocking. With that in mind, Orlando got an early Christmas present Oct. 14. The city is getting out of the coal business. Actually, the gift is more like a promissory note. The Orlando Utilities Commission unveiled its plan to convert from fossil fuels to solar and other renewable sources.
That’s the good news. The bad news is we won’t be running on clean energy anytime soon.
The plan calls for carbon emissions to be reduced 50% by 2030, 75% by 2040 and completely by 2050. That’s disappointing, but it’s also is a nod to reality.
Renewable fuels are the future, but the future isn’t nextweek or next month. OUC’s plan is basically a 30-year bridge to that future. It was spurred by Mayor Buddy Dyer and the city council, which committed the city to run on 100% “clean, renewable energy” by 2050.
Coal and natural gas produce about 80% of Orlando’s electricity. The $1 million study calls for the two coal-fired Stanton Energy Center plants in east Orange County to be converted to natural gas between 2025 and 2027. They will be completely shut downin 2040.
That’s about 20 years too late for environmental groups. Coal-fired power plants release more greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide per unit, than any other electricity source.
With climate change becoming more of a concern every day, the thought of CO2 spewing into the atmosphere for at least another five years is depressing. But given the industry’s addiction to coal, seven years is a reasonable time for OUC to kick the habit.
“This is a long time in coming,” said Susannah Randolph, senior Florida campaign representative for the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign. “It’s pretty momentous that they are ending coal usage. That’s a big step forward.”
Natural gas produces about half the greenhouse gases that coal does. Kicking that habit depends on how quickly solar technology advances.
Florida may bill itself as the “Sunshine State,” but it’s actually not all that conducive to producing solar energy. Orlando has 277 partly cloudy days a year. What’s worse, the sun never shines at night.
That means solar power must be stored. Battery technology is improving fast but it won’t be cost-effective anytime soon.
As for wind, Florida isn’t breezy enough to depend on wind turbines. And since it’s a peninsula, clean energy can only be imported fromthe north. That limits the state’s import capacity to 6% of its energy needs, according to the OUC study.
California can import 20% of its energy needs. But when it comes to energy plans, we do not want to emulate California too closely.
It passed a lawin 2018 mandating that 50% of the state’s electricity be powered by renewable sources by 2025 and100% by 2045. The goals are admirable, but massive heatwaves this summer stretched the electric grid beyond its capacity.
The state’s utility commission blamed the blackouts on a lack of planning to replace fossil-fuel burning plants with renewables.
As important as clean energy is, people tend to lose their environmental focus when they can’t cook ameal or take a hot shower. And few things matter more to a customer than the size of his or her monthly electricity bill.
Transitioning America’s entire electric system to 100% renewables would cost $4.5 trillion to $5.7 trillion, according to the Institute for Energy Research. That works out to almost $2,000 a year per household through 2040.
The OUC study did not put a price tag on the 30-year conversion. A precise prediction is impossible since nobody knows how quickly solar technology will develop.
OUC general manager Clint Bullock said the costs will be addressed in a public workshop on Nov. 17. That’s a little worrisome, but an OUC spokesperson said the utility would “never do anything that dramatically negatively impacts rates.”
The study included an online survey of 1,377 residents and feedback from306 more people at forums. An advisory committee took that data and ranked customers’ priorities.
The biggest was reliability— people don’t want blackouts. Then came affordability— people don’t want their bills to skyrocket.
The next two priorities were sustainability and resiliency. Sustainability was defined as “an electric system’s ability to produce energy in away that proactively reduces pollution and impacts on the surrounding ecosystem.”
No one should forget that is the ultimate goal here, even if it comes with a price. The environmental costs of staying on fossil fuels can no longer be ignored.
It’s frustrating to think a clean power system is 30 years away. Even then, OUC is hedging its bets. The study said some nuclear power might be added to the long-term mix, and about 7% of its energy beyond 2050 could be from fossil fuels in order to maintain reliability.
Hopefully, solar and other clean-energy technologies will develop faster than anticipated. The OUC study has some disappointments, but at least coal’s days are now officially numbered.
Consider that the first building block in a bridge that will take us where we need to be.
Editorials are the opinion of the Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board and are written by one of its members or a designee. The editorial board consists of Opinion Editor Mike Lafferty, Jennifer A. Marcial Ocasio, Jay Reddick, David Whitley and Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson. Send emails to insight@orlandosentinel.com.