��«����Ƶ

In a deal with Xcel Energy, the City of ��«����Ƶ hopes to minimize its carbon footprint through increased utilization of renewable energy.

    The City of ��«����Ƶ is seen as a leader in sustainability, but as the window for climate change legislation narrows, citizens are looking to hold large companies and institutions accountable for reducing fossil fuel consumption. After a franchise agreement approved this year between the City of ��«����Ƶ and Xcel Energy, the transition to renewable energy is now in the hands of Xcel Energy. Under this franchise agreement, Xcel pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2030.

    These sustainability goals come after a decade of advocacy. In 2010, ��«����Ƶ residents felt that Xcel Energy was not reducing its reliance on fossil fuels fast enough to be consistent with the City of ��«����Ƶ’s goal to transition away from fossil fuels. In response, voters created the ��«����Ƶ Power Municipality (a publicly owned energy utility) intended to be the energy utility for the city. In creating the ��«����Ƶ Power Municipality, voters believed that there would be greater accountability for transitioning to renewables, particularly because a public utility would only serve the local residents.

    The ��«����Ƶ Power Municipality was an appropriate solution, but implementing it proved unrealistic. Taxpayers raised $29 million in funding for the power utility. These funds went towards buying lines, poles, transformers, and other essential infrastructure needed to provide power to ��«����Ƶ residents. Despite the original goal to be operational in 2017, the municipality never became functional. With no end in sight for when the municipality would be able to provide reliable energy, a ballot measure asking residents to raise the tax to continue the project seemed out of the question. This lack of funding, on top of the financial impact of the coronavirus pandemic, exacerbated the pressure to drop the municipality fight in favor of a deal with Xcel. Moreover, the original concerns that the private utility was not on track with ��«����Ƶ’s energy goals are no longer as applicable.

    “The fact of the matter is that Xcel is going to be green long before the City of ��«����Ƶ. ��«����Ƶ just does not have the resources to become 100% renewable like they dreamed... it’s just not going to happen independently, but Xcel can do it,” said Energy Manager with Facilities Management at CU Ellen Edwards.

    While some advocates saw the end of the municipality as a loss, the franchise agreement with Xcel provides a pathway for the City of ��«����Ƶ and the University of Colorado to still reach its “green” energy goals. As of 2020, only 2% of all energy supply on campus came from renewable sources, with Xcel providing the rest. If Xcel could significantly increase its reliance on renewables, the campus reliance on fossil fuels would decrease substantially.

    As a state entity, the University also has a lack of funding and land, which prevent campus from becoming completely renewable. Many other large institutions, particularly Universities, get around these restraints by purchasing renewable energy from third party sources in the form of Renewable Energy Certificates (REC), a similar process to buying carbon offsets. CU Facilities Management, however, has opted for a different strategy.

   “We don’t want to buy energy from third parties to claim that we’re green. We would rather work harder at conserving energy, lowering our load on campus, and supplementing with as much renewable energy as possible.”

    Institutions that purchase RECs pay for electricity generated from a renewable energy source across the country. The kilowatt hours of renewable energy are sold on the market for the renewable credits. While purchasing RECs means that renewable energy is being used somewhere, the process does not support local energy supply and also introduces questions of efficiency and accountability. For example, a main criticism of RECs is that they allow institutions to claim to be renewable, a claim institutions often hide behind instead of tackling other areas where sustainability can be improved.

    “We don’t want to buy energy from third parties to claim that we’re green. We would rather work harder at conserving energy, lowering our load on campus, and supplementing with as much renewable energy as we can,” said Edwards.

    With campus resources focused on reducing consumption and efficiency, the University is counting on Xcel to transition to renewable energy. In addition to largescale initiatives to transition to clean energy, Xcel is once again in collaboration with the University now that the municipality fight is over.

    Campus facilities mangement “is more focused on partnerships and programs, working with Xcel on a larger scale; such as electrification of the grid, additional electric vehicle charging, different studies or analytics that we can provide for them on how we run our campus,” said Edwards.

    The complexity of energy supply on campus and in the City of ��«����Ƶ reflects the larger national issue of how we will address climate change. The infrastructure bill just passed marks a step in the right direction, with significant investments in power and transportation infrastructure. Not only did the bill make the headlines for its trillion-dollar price tag, it also made headlines for the significant compromise from the senate.

    Advocates for the original infrastructure bill, before it was scaled down, will point to how much is left out of the bill, most notably funding for affordable housing and clean energy tax cuts. However, if the municipality fight in ��«����Ƶ, the “best place to live” (US News), has demonstrated anything, it is that even with the most noble intentions, real change comes with compromise. Only by working with Xcel, for all its fossil fuels and money-making interests, will ��«����Ƶ be able to achieve its sustainability goals.

Photo by Elliot Whitehead