Photo Courtesy of Flicker user Matt Brown
By Meenal Raval
In April nearly 100 people showed up for a hearing titled The Sustainability of PGW. Renewable energy and climate advocates in Philadelphia had waited months for this hearing, after it was introduced by City Council’s Committee on Transportation and Public Utilities last December as resolution 181081.
What’s so intriguing about discussing the Sustainability of PGW?
Well, Philadelphia Gas Works, or PGW, is a municipal gas utility. The largest municipal utility in the US. And its primary business model for over 100 years has been to sell “natural gas”. And now, in light of the 2016 Paris Climate Accord, the 2018 IPCC report, and per estimates by the Office of Sustainability that PGW’s principal product accounts for 22% of our City’s greenhouse gas emissions, it may be time for a new business model. One that continues to keep all Philadelphians warm and retains the current workforce.
Who spoke at the hearing about the Sustainability of PGW?
The first panel consisted of Mark Clincy of Philly Thrive, Nicole Karsch of Sunrise Movement Philadelphia and Reverend Gregory Holston of POWER Interfaith. The second panel consisted of Professor Nathan Phillips of Boston University and Mark Kresowik of Sierra Club. The third panel consisted of Rob Ballenger of Community Legal Services of Philadelphia and Kelly Flanigan of Penn Environment. Panel four were experts from near and far: Mark Allan Hughes of Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, based out of UPenn’s campus and Mark Silburg of Rocky Mountain Institute based in Colorado. The City was represented in the fifth panel, by Christine Knapp of the Office of Sustainability and Barry O’Sullivan of PGW. Others that added to the discussion were Mitch Chanin of 350 Philly, Mike Ewall of Energy Justice Network, and Matt Walker of Clean Air Council.
If curious, you could watch the entire hearing, almost 3 hours long, or read the 162 page transcript.
What could the transformation of PGW look like?
Several people spoke of the need for PGW to transition away from all fossil fuels, particularly gas. Reverend Holston suggested the City issue a moratorium on all new fossil fuel projects, including for new gas service lines to residential and commercial customers.
There was also a call to reduce our energy demands with energy efficiency first, meeting our remaining demands with low carbon energy sources. As Mike Ewall said, our energy priorities must be conservation first, then an investment in energy efficiency, and lastly, a focus on clean renewables like wind and solar and storage.
Mark Allan Hughes emphasized that the city should examine options for electrification as well as technologies such as biogas, hydrogen, and synthetic methane. Others urged that we pursue electrification in lockstep with decarbonizing electric supply. Suggestions were made to reallocate funds from distribution line repair and replacement to electrification -- bringing houses up to code in electricity, followed by appliance swapping. We need to help customers transition to electric heat pumps, electric boilers, electric cookstoves and tankless electric water heaters. One way would be to offer rebates for electrification, like Sacramento CA and Massachusetts.
From Nathan Phillips’ experience in Boston, there was a good discussion about the need to triage distribution line repair & replacement based on largest leaks; a Penn Professor is willing to lead the study for Philadelphia.
Others also chimed in calling for a phased approach to reduce and discontinue gas service - neighborhood by neighborhood, or branch by branch. And to ensure that gas customers still on the system do not bear the cost. That as we disconnect gas service, we simultaneously electrify communities by blocks and neighborhoods to shut down entire segments of pipes. There are several benefits of doing this including — less tearing-up of streets, less traffic diversion, reduced need for asphalt, cleaner energy use and of course, reduced methane leaks.
One new idea was to reconsider district heat with zero-carbon geothermal installations.
As we focus on electrifying everything, we should also plan for seasonal energy storage. A technology called pumped hydro storage comes to mind for this.
Some new revenue opportunities for PGW could be 1) to become a heating service provider instead of selling gas as a commodity; 2) to offer energy audits and recommend / install efficient appliances; 3) to develop local heating and cooling district infrastructure especially since their workforce is well suited to geothermal installations; 4) to be a distributed resource financing utility, offering on-bill financing, incentives and time of use discounts to minimize peaking concerns; 5) to assign qualified contractors for the electrification; 6) to retool the current workforce about the emerging business of heat pump installation and maintenance; 7) to become an ESCO, an energy saving company, where the savings can help finance the transition; 8) to aggregate the electricity buying power of all Philadelphia residents, via Community Choice Aggregation, in order to lower costs for consumers, and also offer us greater control of our energy mix, such as more renewable energy.
There were concerns about energy affordability; that utility bills for heating, cooling, hot water and electricity be no more than 6% of a household’s income. We learned that Philadelphia has the highest gas rates in the state, in a city where 35% of residents are low income. The City could require PGW to propose lower energy burdens in their next base rate case. We also learned that people are losing homes because of unpaid gas bills. So one suggestion was that instead, the City could subordinate PGW liens for homeowners facing foreclosure.
When building or maintaining affordable housing, plans must include removing lead and mold hazards, and also include rewiring electrical system to support future solar and electric vehicle charging.
It was suggested that labor should participate in shaping the transition, and that retiree pensions be guaranteed.
We also need to hone in on large commercial buildings; especially that proactive planning to reduce energy needs of large buildings needs to begin today, as Los Angeles and New York City have demonstrated.
In closing…
Along with suggestions, many included in their testimony some over-arching demands such as a faster trajectory to reduce our emissions, to exceed our City’s stated goal of 80% emissions reduction by 2050. This was just the beginning of a long conversation, a long conversation where each of us need to regularly and consistently engage with our Council members, reminding them that there can be no new fossil fuel infrastructure built in Philadelphia while we work to transition our City off fossil fuels.
This blog was included as part of the 2019 Spring Sylvanian newsletter. Please click here to check out more articles from this edition!