Energy and the low-income community

California Energy Policy

It seems like I’ve been creating themes around my blog postings. This one is going to be about energy policy in California. I have been consistently impressed with the incredible amount of energy (haha) that goes into shaping environmental policy in this state. There are several state agencies (EPA, CA public utilities commission, CA energy commission, etc..), many US Congressional representatives from California belong to energy committees, the govenator Arnold has written several executive orders demanding changes to energy policy, and they are creating a statewide Cap and Trade program. The Attorney General of California has sued several local municipalities for not adequately planning for climate change (and won). The city of Stockton, CA will only be building Silver LEED certified buildings in all new construction. It is absolutely amazing that a state can be so far ahead in energy policy. At the same time, California is only doing what the International Panel on Climate Change says is necessary to avoid catastrophic climate change.

So it is both exciting and slightly terrifying to be challenging energy issues every day. It is exciting to be on the forefront of policy change and renewable energy innovation but it is terrifying to be in a coastal state that will probably be significantly impact as sea levels rise. The state parks department is already planning on moving trails inland, the transportation agency is planning for sections of hwy 1 to fall into the ocean. But a huge issue in climate change policy has not been adequately addressed: the impact climate change and climate change policy will have on low to moderate income people. All these energy regulations will increase the price of goods, energy and transportation. It makes sense that we have not accurately been paying for the actual cost of Green House Gasses and this should be remedied. But as we begin to regulate green house gases through a cap and trade program or a carbon tax, it is important to realize these costs will be directly passed on to consumers and those who are really struggling, facing shut-off notices from their utility companies and cannot afford energy prices as they are. An increase to any of these things could be catastrophic to the health and safety of our low-income population. Currently, only a few people are even considering this impact. The most recent person has been President Obama. The 5 billion dollars that he allotted in his stimulus bill to low-income weatherization programs was a crucial part of his energy plan. Unfortunately, there was not an increase to the energy assistance program that helps low-income people directly off-set their energy costs. There has been a discussion around the revenues that could be generated by a cap and trade program and giving this money directly back to off-set the increased energy cost. But talk is not action and some are skeptical that a cap and trade program is politically feasible during a global economic recession.

I have been thinking more about this recently. This weekend I attended a local energy conference that is designed to help promote sustainability and “encourage the adoption of economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable practices in Humboldt County and to facilitate their implementation through education, collaborative partnerships, and technical assistance.” It was an awesome conference that was complete with a fleet of electric vehicles; rows of booths featuring the energy community of Humboldt County; and a plethora of speakers address various topics. The thing that was missing from this conference was the low-income community discussion. It was apparent that the organizers hadn’t really made this a priority. My organization was the only non-profit that helped low-income people, none of the speakers focused on low-income energy issues, and it wasn’t even mentioned by the event organizers. It wasn’t that they were intentionally neglectful but as I talked to people coming to my booth, few even cared to ask about my organization’s programs and most simply wanted to complain that CFL light bulbs burned out too fast and contained mercury. It also took place in Arcata, the wealthiest town in Humboldt. No one from the low-income community was asked to speak and there was no track that focused on low-income issues. Some may argue that this conference was not focused on low-income issues or poverty so it wasn’t relevant. This is the problem though. Activist and author Van Jones often criticizes the environmental movement for neglecting the social justice movement. One example of this he uses is how white environmentalists talk about saving the polar bears.

Try this experiment. Go knock on someone’s door in West Oakland, Watts or Newark and say: ‘We gotta really big problem!’ They say: ‘We do? We do?’ ‘Yeah, we gotta really big problem!’ ‘We do? We do?’ ‘Yeah, we gotta save the polar bears! You may not make it out of this neighborhood alive, but we gotta save the polar bears!’

We need a different on-ramp for people from disadvantaged communities. The leaders of the climate establishment came in through one door and now they want to squeeze everyone through that same door. It’s not going to work. If we want to have a broad-based environmental movement, we need more entry points. ...
You can’t take a building you want to weatherize, put it on a ship to China and then have them do it and send it back. So we are going to have to put people to work in this country—weatherizing millions of buildings, putting up solar panels, constructing wind farms. Those green-collar jobs can provide a pathway out of poverty for someone who has not gone to college.

Remember, a big chunk of the African-American community is economically stranded. The blue-collar, stepping-stone, manufacturing jobs are leaving. And they’re not being replaced by anything. So you have this whole generation of young blacks who are basically in economic free fall.

If we can get these youth in on the ground floor of the solar industry now, where they can be installers today, they’ll become managers in five years and owners in 10. And then they become inventors. The green economy has the power to deliver new sources of work, wealth and health to low-income people—while honoring the Earth. If you can do that, you just wiped out a whole bunch of problems. We can make what is good for poor black kids good for the polar bears and good for the country.

Recently, people have finally begun to listen to him and a huge ‘green-collar’ movement has sprung up. But there still has not been penetration into the environmental movement. Many barriers exist and often those who are included in the conversation are those groups that do advocacy work instead of direct service. Green for All, a non-profit in the Bay Area, has gotten a lot of press recently for their work in this area. But it is important for us to also include those that provide direct services to low-income people. So, what I’m saying is I am disappointed that more discussion in the environmental movement is not focused on environmental justice. Too many upper class folks are not thinking or understanding the struggle that low-income people are having with energy right now.