Energy Transition and Social Movements: The Rise of a Community Choice Movement in California
This chapter examines the rise of a community choice movement in California. Here local governments launch community choice aggregation programs, one after the other, that promise higher renewable energy content than the existing investor-owned utilities. I view the movement as an expression of local climate interests fused with anti-utility resentment, and use the three lenses from social movement theory—political opportunities, mobilizing structures and framing processes—to analyze the emergence and development of the movement. This bottom-up process unfolds in a state that has some of the most ambitious climate policies and renewable energy goals in the US. The effectiveness of the community choice model as a climate policy tool is contested. However, the movement’s aim is not only to decarbonize the electricity system but to build an electricity system that utilizes more local renewable energy resources.
I want to thank the American-Scandinavian Foundation and Centre for International Climate and Energy Policy (CICEP) for financial support to conduct fieldwork in California spring 2017. I am grateful to all of those whom I interviewed for taking the time out of their busy schedules and to Jeremy Waen for commenting on an early draft.
- Asmus, Peter. Introduction to Energy in California. California Natural History Guides, vol. 97. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009.Google Scholar
- Baruch, Seth, and Shawn Marshall. “Community Choice Energy in Silicon Valley 2015 Assessment Report.” Prepared for Silicon Valley Community Choice Energy Partnership (SVCCEP) LEAN Energy US, 2015. https://www.svcleanenergy.org/files/managed/Document/86/SVCCEPAssessmentReport-LEANEnergyMay2015.pdf.
- Borenstein, Severin. “Is ‘Community Choice’ Electric Supply a Solution or a Problem?” Blog. In Energy Institute at Haas, Accessed 8 February 2016. https://www.energyathaas.wordpress.com/2016/02/08/is-community-choice-electric-suppy-a-solution-or-a-problem/.
- Burke, Garance, Chris Finn, and Andrea Murphy. “Community Choice Aggregation: The Viability of AB 117 and Its Role in California’s Energy Market, an Analysis Prepared for the California Public Utilities Commission.” Berkeley: The Goldman School of Public Policy, 2005. http://www.local.org/goldman.pdf.
- CACE. “Good Energy Is a Bad Deal, Why Good Energy Inc. Is a Bad Choice for Your Community Choice Energy Program.” California Alliance for Community Energy, 2016. http://cacommunityenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Good-Energy-is-a-Bad-Deal_10-7-16.pdf.
- ———. “Position Paper: Retract CPUC Resolution E-4907, December 21.” California Alliance for Community Energy, 2017. http://cacommunityenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/CACE-E-4907-Response_final.pdf.
- ———.“Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA), Letter to California Public Utilities Commission, March 2, 2016.” California Alliance for Community Energy, 2016. http://cacommunityenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/CACE-PCIA-position-3-2-16.pdf.
- CPUC. “2017 Annual Report: Renewables Portfolio Standard.” California Public Utilities Commission, 2017.Google Scholar
- ———. “Consumer and Retail Choice, the Role of the Utility, and an Evolving Regulatory Framework, Staff White Paper.” California Public Utilities Commission, 2017.Google Scholar
- ———. “Decisions Resolving Phase 2 Issues on Implementation of Community Choice Aggregation Program and Related Matters.” In Decision 05-12-041 December 15, 2005, edited by CPUC: California Public Utilities Commission, 2005.Google Scholar
- ———. “Letter from Steve Larson Executive Director Cpuc to David Orth, General Manager Kings River Conservation District.” California Public Utilities Commission, 2007. http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/general.aspx?id=2567.
- ———. “Resolution E-4907. Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators, Draft February 8.” California Public Utilities Commission, 2018. http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/publisheddocs/published/g000/m208/k956/208956263.pdf.
- Energy Washington Week. “Retail Electric Utility Competition Likely Will Remain Moribund.” April 12, 2006. Factiva.Google Scholar
- Fosterra Clean Energy Consulting. Community Choice Energy: What Is the Economic Impact of Local Renewable Power Purchasing? San Joaquin Valley Case Study. Center for Climate Protection, 2017. https://climateprotection.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/CCE-Benefits-Report-for-San-Joaquin-Valley-June-1-2017.pdf.
- Gerring, John. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511803123.
- Hales, Roy L. “California’s ‘Monopoly Protection Act,’ AB 2145, Is Dead.” The ECOReport, September 3, 2014. https://theecoreport.com/california-assembly-bill-2145-is-dead/.
- Hay, Jeremy. “An Energy Community: Defeat of State Prop. 16 Boosts Opes for Those Advocating a Locally Based Electricity Supply, More Utilization of Renewable Sources.” The Press Democrat, June 11, 2010. Factiva.Google Scholar
- Kahn, Debra. “Electricity; Calif. Rebukes Pg&E for Anti-competitive Tactics.” Greenwire, May 4, 2010. Factiva.Google Scholar
- Karapin, Roger. Political Opportunities for Climate Policy: California, New York, and the Federal Government. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
- Kelly, Elizabeth, Shalini Swaroop, Nathaniel Malcolm, and Camille Stough. White Paper on the Evolution of Non-Bypassable Charges on Community Choice Aggregation. MCE Clean Energy, 2017.Google Scholar
- Kovach, Lisa. “Power Struggle.” San Diego Business Journal. 2004. Factiva.Google Scholar
- Lifsher, Marc, and Dianna Klein. “PG&E’s Customers Vote Down Prop. 16.” Los Angeles Times, June 10, 2010. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun/10/local/la-me-california-prop16-20100610.
- Local Clean Energy Alliance. The Coalition Opposing Proposition 16. Local Clean Energy Alliance, 2010. http://www.localcleanenergy.org/files/NoProp16-Coalition.pdf.
- Macado, Michelle. “Electricity Providers Fight Over Customers in Stockton, Calif., Area.” The Record (KRTBN), 2004. Factiva.Google Scholar
- McAdam, Doug. “Conceptual Origins, Current Problems, Future Directions.” In Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements, edited by D. McAdam, John D. McCarthy, and Mayer N. Zald. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
- McAdam, Dough, John D. McCarthy, and Mayer N. Zald, eds., Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
- McCarthy, John D. “Constraints and Opportunities in Adopting, Adapting, and Inventing.” In Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements, edited by D. McAdam, John D. McCarthy, and Mayer N. Zald. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
- MCE. Financial Statement. 2010. https://www.mcecleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/financial-statements-2010.pdf.
- ———. Financial Statement. 2011. https://www.mcecleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/financial-statements-2011.pdf.
- Phelps, Jim. “MCE’s and Kate Sears’ $500 Million Deal with Shell Oil—Part 3 of 3 Parts.” The Marin Post, Blog. April 30, 2016. https://marinpost.org/blog/2016/4/30/kate-sears-and-shell-oil.
- Power Market Today. “California Community Power Project Set Aside (Again).” July 9, 2009. Factiva.Google Scholar
- Scoones, Ian, Melissa Leach, and Peter Newell. “The Politics of Green Transformations.” In The Politics of Green Transformations, edited by Ian Scoones, Melissa Leach and Peter Newell. Pathways to sustainability series. London: Routledge, 2015.Google Scholar
- Steinberg, Darrell. “Letter from Senator Darrell Steinberg to PG&E CEO Peter Darbee.” December 2, 2009. http://www.localcleanenergy.org/files/Steinberg_a_Darbee-16.pdf.
- Stigler, George J. “The Theory of Economic Regulation.” The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 2, no. 1 (1971): 3–21.Google Scholar
- Stoner, G. Patrick, John Dalessi, and Gerald Braun. “Community Choice Aggregation Pilot Project.” California Energy Commission CEC, 2009. https://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC-500-2008-091/CEC-500-2008-091.PDF.
- Tarrow, Sidney G. Power in Movement, Social Movements and Contentious Politics. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.Google Scholar
- Ventura County Star. “A corporate bet that will keep losing.” June 16, 2010. Factiva.Google Scholar
- Weinzimer, Lisa. “San Fransisco Bay Area Cities Are Taking Close Look at Community Choice Aggregation.” Electric Utility Week, January 14, 2008. Factiva.Google Scholar
- Weissman, Steven, and Harry Moren. “California’s Proposition 16 June 2010 Primary: An Analysis.” Berkeley: University of California Berkeley Law, 2010.Google Scholar