solar array

Xcel Energy offered the most ambitious slate: $3 billion worth of projects that could generate as many as 5,000 jobs.
[image_credit]Xcel Energy[/image_credit]
Gov. Tim Walz’s plan targeting 100 percent clean electricity by 2040 would help tackle climate change’s growing threat and accelerate our COVID-19 economic recovery. This policy requiring utilities to prioritize clean electricity and energy efficiency, focused on under-resourced customers, is exactly the kind of leadership we need. But new research and the state’s latest greenhouse gas inventory shows that our emissions are rising, which means we must be even bolder on climate action. A carbon-free electric grid is a critical but insufficient step.

As long-time advocates for climate justice, we see Minnesota’s incredible opportunity to be America’s climate policy North Star by demonstrating smart climate policy that delivers lasting payoffs — a strong economy, good-paying jobs, and healthier communities. And new polling shows a majority of Minnesotans support ambitious climate action, specifically a national 100 percent clean electricity standard by 2035.

Build on progress we’ve made

We can start by building upon progress we’re already making. Minnesota ranks eighth nationally for wind energy, and major investments by companies like Target prove solar is reliable even in states with long winters. Clean energy investments have created more than 60,000 jobs, and jobs in this sector are growing 2.5 times faster than the overall economy.

But while we’ve reduced electricity emissions, building and industrial emissions grew 15 percent since 2005. New research from think tanks Energy Innovation and RMI shows that unless we accelerate cleaner electricity while also tackling other sectors, Minnesota’s emissions will stay relatively constant through 2050. This is a wake-up call, since science tells us global emissions must drop to net zero by 2050 for a decent shot at a livable climate.

Fortunately, climate solutions generate massive benefits. The Energy Innovation and RMI analysis shows strategic climate and clean energy policies aligned with global efforts to limit climate change to 1.5° Celsius would create approximately 30,000 job-years for Minnesotans annually by 2035 (a job-year is simply one year of full-time work), add $11 billion to the state’s annual economy by 2050, and dramatically reduce air pollution, avoiding 20,000 asthma incidents every year.

Priorities: wind, solar, energy storage, transmission lines

Let’s start by not investing billions in new fossil fuel infrastructure and canceling Line 3. Our utilities can also show their climate ambition by canceling proposed new gas plants in Becker and Superior – bad bets for our climate and utility customers. Instead, let’s prioritize investments in wind, solar, energy storage, and transmission lines to reliably meet power needs and save $600 million by 2050.

Michael Noble
[image_caption]Michael Noble[/image_caption]
We compound power sector decarbonization benefits by electrifying our homes and buildings. Analysis shows all-electric homes in Minneapolis have 51 percent lower emissions and 9 percent lower annual utility costs than homes with gas, as highly efficient electric heat pumps deliver year-round heat and cooling. Walz recently proposed cutting carbon emissions from buildings in half by 2035, and electrification with heat pumps will need to be a primary strategy.

Aimee Witteman
[image_caption]Aimee Witteman[/image_caption]
Transportation is now our state’s largest source of emissions and shifting to clean vehicles is as much a climate imperative as an environmental justice imperative. Black Minnesotans are exposed to 65 percent more pollution than white Minnesotans. Adopting the Clean Cars rule is a critical first step to addressing historic inequities, and will provide many more electric car choices while cutting costs – electric vehicles save an average of $6,000-$10,000. We must do more to transition to cleaner electric vehicles as well as ensure equitable access to transit, biking, and walking options for families who choose to live with fewer cars, or without cars altogether.

Ag and industry: high emitters

Agriculture and industry are essential to our state, but they’re high emitters. Accelerating adoption of farming practices like cover cropping, improved nutrient management, and perennial row crops could help ensure farms continue supporting Minnesota’s rural economies while transforming our working lands into a carbon sponge. Minnesota’s heaviest industries can increase global competitiveness by adopting next-generation industrial strategies, whether using hydrogen, renewable natural gas, carbon capture, or state-of-the-art all-electric technology.

From grain elevators to railroads to health care, Minnesota has always prioritized innovation. COVID-19 has strained our economy and communities, and we’re reckoning with our state and country’s legacy of racial injustice. But these challenges are also opportunities to build a sustainable, equitable economy.

Our state leaders and legislators must seize this moment to create thousands of high-wage clean energy jobs and protect the clean air and healthy soil we all depend on. What are we waiting for?

Michael Noble is executive director of Fresh Energy. Aimee Witteman is director of U.S. states policy initiative for Energy Innovation.

WANT TO ADD YOUR VOICE?

If you’re interested in joining the discussion, add your voice to the Comment section below — or consider writing a letter or a longer-form Community Voices commentary. (For more information about Community Voices, see our Submission Guidelines.)

Join the Conversation

6 Comments

  1. Thanks to MinnPost for publishing this thoughtful and well-researched commentary about the biggest existential crisis that humans have faced.

  2. What happened in Texas this week is one really big reason to worry about decarbonizing electricity generation too quickly. If Texas can’t easily handle extreme weather with mostly fossil fuels, I worry how our system would handle extreme weather even connected to a better grid. Battery storage would be used to supplement when wind and solar don’t provide enough power and as the Texas situation shows, batteries really won’t cut it, at least not with the current technology. Wind and solar are still completely unreliable and until the reliability problem can be proven solved then we must tread forward cautiously. Many people unnecessarily died in Texas and that could easily happen here under a 100% renewable mandate.

    1. Actually, no it isn’t. The idea that what happened in Texas is the fault of decarbonized electricity is completely false. Every word you have said here is pure nonsense.

      No, what happened in Texas is that the privatized energy grid failed. This was a failure of Republican policy making. The people who died in Texas died because of Republican-backed energy policy.

      Sadly, conservative media has been lying about this, blaming renewables instead of the actual cause.

    2. Texas is a bad example. Only about 13% of their power comes from renewable sources. According to the accounts I’ve read, the solar panels were/are functioning at or near capacity. Wind power failed because there was no preparation for cold temperatures.

      The failures in Texas are due largely to their go-it-alone, deregulated power grid. The utilities were not forced to incorporate renreables into their systems, and were not required by regulation to prepare for cold weather.

    3. What mostly caused the problems in Texas was their coal, natural gas and nuclear plants shut down because instruments froze. Yes, they had some wind turbines stop working due to cold because they weren’t adequately constructed. Minnesota’s wind turbines have winterization packages that allow them to keep operating in the type of weather Texas is seeing. The cause of the Texas blackout is shortsightedness by the utility operators and regulators there. Not an overreliance on renewable energy.

  3. Regarding agriculture’s impact on the climate: cover cropping, improved nutrient management, and perennial row crops are just a few of the practices that comprise regenerative farming. It’s sometimes referred to as soil building or carbon farming, because it offers the promise of significant increases in atmospheric carbon sequestration in the soil. There are a number of other benefits, including better nutrition in produce and better retention of rainwater in the soil. Please support the operators of small farms and CSA’s, who are the ones most likely to be regenerative growers, and ask for regeneratively produced foods at your restaurant or market.

Leave a comment