Ray from p 13 energy projects such as solar panels. Green bonds, environmentally friendly invest- ments, are being gobbled up on the global bond market. Shareholders, board leaders, and customers of companies have been pushing for corporate goals which align with an environmental, governance, and a more socially responsible future. Over the years, the cost of large-scale solar projects has declined substantially to the point that it is the cheapest way to pro- duce electricity, even cheaper than natural gas power plants, according to interna- tional market analysis business Lazard. But fewer than 200,000 residential dwellings in Arizona are powered by utility-scale solar energy. “There’s all this solar in Arizona and we’re not using it,” said Shelley Gordon, a solar panel owner in Mesa and director of Arizonans for Community Choice, a spe- cial interest group focused on solar energy. The solar market in Arizona has remained turbulent since the imposition of a net metering charge in 2014 and the erosion of incentives since, sparking public debate about the benefits of solar. It’s the utility-controlled political machine that sowed doubt and apprehen- sion in the hearts of prospective solar adopters at an early stage, Gordon said. Arizona residents “lack the confidence to make a decision” on whether or not to go solar, Fanshaw said. During elections in 2014 and 2016, Arizona Public Service’s top executives plotted smear campaigns against pro-solar candidates for the Arizona Corporation Commission, while boosting their anti- solar counterparts. The Commission regulates the utilities. “APS has spent the last eight years es- sentially undermining our democracy,” former Corporation Commissioner Kris Mayes told Phoenix New Times in 2019. APS did not respond to requests for comment for this story. Both of Arizona utility giants are culpa- ble for stifling solar, Gordon said. “The issue is that they see solar as competition,” she said. “They see it as something that’s going to hurt them.” Where the Power Comes From The vast majority of Arizona’s energy comes from non-renewable sources. Natural gas, nuclear power, and coal provide 88 percent of Arizona’s utility- scale electricity net generation. And despite having the third-least water of any state, Arizona’s leading clean energy source is hydroelectric power, thanks to the APS-operated Hoover Dam and Theodore Roosevelt Dam, which is operated by SRP. Miller, the SRP board member, attributes this to the company’s inability to transition to new technology as it becomes available. Small and cloudy Massachusetts has 14 access to more waterways than almost any other state but hardly uses any hydroelec- tric power as it emerges as a national leader in solar energy. James Deak SRP has five hydroelectric power plants, which rely on water dams to gener- ate electricity in its portfolio. It has more hydropower in terms of the number of facilities compared to steam and coal-fired power plants. SRP also remains a major player in the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, about 50 miles west of downtown Phoenix. It’s the largest nuclear power plant and the largest net energy producer in the country. “They want to lock up the monopoly in perpetuity,” Gordon said. Arizona’s Navajo Generating Station, the state’s second-largest power plant, shut its doors in 2019. It was the only customer of the state’s last remaining operating coal mine, which also closed in 2019. The Navajo Nation’s other coal plant in New Mexico which contributes to the Arizona grid through APS, is closing, too. But last month SRP pledged to extend the operation of an existing solar plant in Kayenta through 2038 and to begin construction on a new solar facility in Cameron, which will be functional next year. SRP General Manager Mike Hummel and Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez shook hands in Phoenix in late January. “We need to protect our Mother Earth, the land, air, and water for the next genera- tion,” said Navajo Nation Council Delegate Nathaniel Brown. But that doesn’t mean nonrenewable energy is dwindling in Arizona’s portfolio. Next week, SRP will consider adding sixteen more natural gas plants, dubbed “death plants” by board member Miller. Those gas-fired plants are expected to ex- pand an existing generation station in the community of Randolph in Pinal County. zrfphoto/istockphoto The SRP-operated Roosevelt Dam: Despite having the third-least water of any state, Arizona’s leading clean energy source is hydroelectric power. SRP’s leadership told ratepayers that increased demand for power in metro Phoenix necessitated the expansion. This action is a step in the wrong direc- tion, Miller said. Nationwide, power generation facilities have been built in communities where locals were not always given a chance to participate in the wealth generated such as getting high-paying plant jobs, while bear- ing the brunt of environmental pollution emitted by such a plant. The mostly Black community of Randolph has lost significant population over the years. Critics claim that the com- munity as a whole would not likely benefit Arizonans for Community Choice Director Shelley Gordon at her solar-panel- equipped Mesa home: “There’s all this solar in Arizona and we’re not using it.” much economically by doubling the size of its natural gas plant but would potentially breathe more toxic air created by the fossil fuel. “It’s going to be a stranded asset before it’s even built,” Miller said about the Randolph plant. Natural gas turbines are necessary to bail out the “fluctuations in output” when relying on wind and solar energy systems, said Hummel. >> p 16 FEB 17TH– FEB 23RD, 2022 PHOENIX NEW TIMES | MUSIC | CAFE | FILM | CULTURE | NIGHT+DAY | FEATURE | NEWS | OPINION | FEEDBACK | CONTENTS | phoenixnewtimes.com
