Electricity Actions

Meeting these current and growing needs for electricity requires a pace and scale of construction of new electricity infrastructure that is not being met today. This problem is not unique to Oregon. According to the Western Electricity Coordinating Council, resource plans for utilities across the West call for an unprecedented amount of development in the next ten years.51 Failure to construct the necessary resources increases the risks of power supply disruptions, including power outages. Even those areas without load growth face heightened risks of disruptions due to extreme weather events, and those utilities need to be empowered to invest in resilience measures to mitigate outage risks.

This is a challenge that utilities should not face on their own. Electricity prices have already increased across the state, and many utility customers cannot afford the rate increases needed to support new investments. Yet the existing policy landscape asks utilities to manage these costs on their own. Although solar and wind technology is cost-competitive even without federal tax credits, the loss of clear federal support makes this transition much harder. Absent intentional public sector investment at the state level, there will be pressure for utility customers to bear a disproportionately high share of the costs for Oregon’s economy-wide clean energy transition and for many significant adaptations to the changing climate.

There are several reasons underpinning the need for state support. Investment is needed on a rapid timeline and scale to meet rising demand and clean electricity goals. This means concentrating capital investments in a much shorter timeframe than has been seen in many decades. Inflation has significantly increased the cost of new infrastructure, and these cost increases are already affecting customer bills. Climate change is increasing risk and cost. For example, extreme weather is sharply increasing winter and summer peak demand. Changing precipitation patterns are affecting hydroelectric system operations. And more intense wildfire seasons are leading to increased costs for resilience measures like grid hardening and public power safety shutoffs. Without state support, these factors threaten to overwhelm ratepayers at a critical time for electricity sector investment.

The state must consider opportunities to reduce these costs and ways to leverage other funding sources to support this transition. State support is particularly critical to help historically and currently underserved communities that could be unduly burdened in the transition or otherwise left behind. Facilitating new development should not undermine past and current efforts to minimize the effects of development on our natural and working lands and waters, to engage environmental justice communities, and to mitigate energy burden. At the same time, the state should carefully consider opportunities to promote more in-state development of clean electricity resources, in order to generate local jobs and economic development. If Oregon does not accelerate new resource development within the state, utilities will increasingly rely on out-of-state resources to serve growing loads. While importing electricity is critical and part of a least-cost portfolio, an over-reliance on out-of-state generation would mean Oregon misses out on potential jobs and other economic benefits from in-state development, and the costs of these necessary investments will primarily flow out of state rather than directly or indirectly supporting Oregon households and businesses.

The following actions aim to deliver progress on this vision in the near-term. In this time frame, the top priority is facilitating enhancement and expansion of clean electricity  infrastructure to maintain reliability. Local resilience should be advanced through expanding energy infrastructure resilience programs. Grid resilience is also critical to consider. This includes increased wildfire risk for communities and utilities, and the need for balanced wildfire utility liability solutions.

Larger developments such as transmission enhancements and expansions require state support to prioritize shared needs and facilitate co-investment opportunities. Generation development, whether by incumbent utilities or by independent developers, is needed both regionally and in the state. Updating the Oregon Renewable Energy Siting Assessment Tool will help guide in-state development assessments. Oregon should also continue its engagement and support for regional activities, particularly as federal policies threaten to diverge from shared Northwest clean energy goals.

The state should monitor the evolution of emerging technologies through a study, evaluate barriers preventing construction and interconnection of permitted projects, and undertake a review of government incentives for local generation investments. These studies should provide recommendations that facilitate the expedited development of clean energy infrastructure while still mitigating the negative effects of infrastructure investments on Oregon’s natural and working lands as well as on electricity rates and energy affordability. Finally, addressing the scale of investment needed requires steps to ensure that utility incentives are aligned with supporting independent resource development and flexible demand-side resources, both of which can reduce pressure on costs as well as on natural resources.