Their Democracy
Recent events in the State of Washington pit environmentalists against the voting public.
“Don't pay any attention to the critics—don't even ignore them.” – Samuel Goldwyn
By nearly all the measures that matter, the State of Washington’s energy mix is about as green as it gets. Leveraging the powerful flows of the Columbia River, Washington generates approximately 60% of its electricity from hydroelectric dams. The Grand Coulee Dam is by far the largest hydroelectricity producer in the US and ranks among the top ten globally, generating more than 20 billion kilowatt hours (kWh) per year. The state is also home to the Northwest’s only commercial nuclear energy facility—the Columbia Generating Station—which provides a further 8% of annual supply to the grid, about as much as is currently delivered by wind turbines. The balance of Washington’s generation comes from clean-burning natural gas, and the last of its large coal furnaces is set to close in 2025.
A similar story emerges when analyzing how residents in Washington heat their homes. More than 58% use electricity, and state leaders are actively pushing heat pumps as a replacement for traditional resistive heating options. Only a third of households rely on natural gas, while the remaining 9% rely on a mix of propane, wood, and other sources.
Although Washington produces almost no oil or natural gas within its borders, it has positioned itself shrewdly in both markets. The state is home to five refineries, ranks fifth in the US by total refining capacity, and is a net exporter of petroleum products. Washington is also a major conduit of natural gas produced in British Columbia and Alberta, home to some of the lowest-cost supply in the world. The Gas Transmission Northwest pipeline is capable of flowing 2.7 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) as it passes into the state from Idaho on its way to Oregon. The Northwest Pipeline has a peak capacity of 3.8 bcf/d and enters Washington in Sumas, southeast of Vancouver, facilitating gas supply for Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado.
With a near-perfect energy setup in place, you could be forgiven for assuming Washingtonians had better things to do than fight a protracted war on natural gas. Alas, the state is home to Seattle, which is basically Berkeley with bad weather. After the latter became the first US city to ban natural gas hookups in most new buildings in 2019, Seattle followed suit a year later, changing its new construction code in a similar fashion. When the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit struck down Berkeley’s ban in April of 2023, Seattle was forced to recraft its approach. By the end of the year, city leaders had conceived of a plan assumed to pass legal muster. Instead of outright bans, the city merely set impossible-to-meet emissions targets:
“A new law in Seattle marks the latest in a wave of local efforts to electrify homes and other buildings. Under the city’s Building Emissions Performance Standard, signed into law last week, all existing commercial and multifamily residential buildings over 20,000 square feet will need to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Meeting that target will effectively require building owners to replace oil and gas-powered furnaces, water heaters, gas stoves, and other appliances with electric alternatives like heat pumps and induction stoves. Buildings in Seattle generate 37 percent of the city’s total emissions, and the new law is expected to slash that number by more than a quarter.”
Fed up with the uncertainty of judicial ping-ponging, Republicans and several industry allies decided to take the question directly to the people. In last week’s election, residents across the state voted on Ballot Initiative No. 2066, which would “restrict local governments, and the state's energy code, from prohibiting, penalizing, or discouraging the use of gas.” The measure also denies utilities the ability “to require a customer to involuntarily switch fuel use either by restricting access to natural gas service or by implementing planning requirements that would make access to natural gas service cost-prohibitive.”
Surely, a state that has voted for every Democratic candidate for president in the past 40 years would reject such a conservative gambit, no? With nearly all the votes counted, the results might come as a surprise to many. The impact of both the vote itself and the response to it is likely to inspire reverberations across the US and further highlight the widening urban-rural divide in the country. Let’s dig into the data and ponder what it might mean for the years ahead.