By John Addison (10/19/10)
California is World’s Third Biggest Oil Consumer
Over 95 percent of California transportation is fueled by petroleum. Electric light-rail, CNG buses and trucks, ethanol blended in gasoline make up the rest. No other state is more addicted to oil. By comparison, only two nations use more oil – China and the United States. California uses more oil than India, Japan, or Germany.
California wants to be more energy secure, have cleaner skies, lower healthcare costs for asthma, and reduce its own contribution to the global warming that threatens water shortage and failed crops. In 2006, a Republican Governor signed the nation’s most comprehensive climate legislation, AB32, shaped by both parties in the State Assembly and Senate. The law would increase refinery costs and encourage a reduced use of petroleum.
California’s efficiency and climate solutions are creating over a million cleantech related jobs as use of fossil fuel declines. According to recent scenario’s from the California Energy Commission, “Between 2007 and 2030, staff estimates total annual gasoline consumption in California to fall 13.3 percent in the low-demand case to 13.57 billion gallons, largely as a result of high fuel prices, efficiency gains, and competing fuel technologies. In the high-demand case, the recovering economy and lower relative prices lead to a gasoline demand peak in 2014 of 16.40 billion gallons before consumption falls to a 2030 level of 14.32 billion gallons, 8.5 percent below 2007 levels. CEC Report
Reducing the use of petroleum, of course, would cost oil companies billions. Texas oil companies are buying TV ads to encourage Californians to vote “yes” for Proposition 23 this November. The proposition would require the State to abandon implementation of a comprehensive greenhouse-gas-reduction program that includes increased renewable energy and cleaner fuel requirements, and mandatory emission reporting and fee requirements for major polluters such as power plants and oil refineries, until suspension is lifted.”
Prop 23’s biggest backers, Valero and Tesoro, are responsible for 16.7% of California’s emissions, according to the California League of Conservation Voters. Prop 23 will allow California oil refineries to avoid paying over one billion dollars for carbon emissions. Prop 23 is promoted as a jobs creation, but it’s a job killer. A recent UC study reported that California’s successful efforts to become cleaner have already created 1.5 million jobs with a total payroll of over $45 billion.
California leads the nation with 25,000 electric cars on the road and thousands of new electric charge stations scheduled for installation. By the end of the decade, California is forecasted by the CEC to have 1.5 million electric cars on the road. California’s Electric Transportation Report
66 leading investors representing $400 billion oppose proposition 23 as harmful to jobs and investment
Proposition 23’s opponents include 66 asset managers, venture capitalists and other investors collectively managing over $410 billion who issued a joint statement today opposing Proposition 23, the statewide ballot initiative to stop implementation of the state’s landmark clean energy law, AB 32.
Tesla electric cars, Better Place, and Bright Source Energy would not have achieved their success without the investment and guidance of VantagePoint Venture Partners, who has invested $1.5 billion in a portfolio of over 25 leading clean technology companies. Vantage CEO, Alan Salzman, sees a trillion dollar future in clean transportation, energy, water, lighting, and materials. On today’s conference call he stated, “We don’t want our cleantech future high-jacked. Is California going to stay in the game, or cede to China, India, and Russia?”
The oil industry attack on California carbon pricing will not stop cleantech, but it may stop the next 500,000 cleantech jobs from being in California. At stake is whether the next Google or Tesla is in the U.S., or in some other country. When asked whether putting a price on carbon would cost consumer’s money, Salzman responded, “This is about using technology to modernize ancient technology, such as the light-bulb. “ He sited that new LED only uses 15 percent of energy of old bulbs. We have cheaper and better technology. Flat screens that cost $15,000, now cost $400 due to learning curve and scale.
Kevin Parker, Deutsche Bank Climate Change Advisers has over $1.5 billion of their $8 billion invested in cleantech. He stated that a billion dollar wind or solar project only happens when investors or lenders have TLC– transparency, longevity, and certainty. A predictable price on carbon could make the next utility scale wind farm a good investment. No TLC, no renewable energy, no thousands of jobs – only consumers stuck with coal and gas generated electricity. If Prop 23 is defeated, major clean energy projects can move forward. He sees the stakes being much bigger than California. With our failure to support clean energy in the U.S. Senate, other states will either follow California’s cleantech lead, or they will give up on climate legislation. The U.S. will fall behind other nations, unless investors have reason to invest in U.S. cleantech.
Chris Davis, a director of Ceres and director of the Investor Network on Climate Risk, a network of 90 investors with assets exceeding $9 trillion focused on the business impacts of climate change agreed that investors could easily move money and jobs globally. He stated, “Cleantech is a major economic engine. Trying to repeal the future will not get us there.”
The U.S. can win or lose in a future that includes energy efficient materials, LED lights, electric cars, high-speed rail, wind power, solar power, smart grids and smart apps. If Californian’s defeat Prop 23 on November 2, Texas may be a few hundred jobs lighter and California a few hundred thousand jobs richer. California Cleantech Jobs
