Eli Hopson
Chief Executive Officer
DC Green Finance Authority
Dear Mr. Hopson,
The Sierra Club was proud to support the Green Finance Authority Establishment Act of 2018 and we are pleased that the Green Finance Authority (“Green Bank”) is beginning operations under your leadership. We believe the Green Bank must play an important role in meeting Mayor Muriel Bowser’s commitment that DC will achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, which the Clean Energy DC plan states “will require the District to eliminate fossil fuel use.”
The Green Bank could potentially receive applications for funding for fossil fuel projects, such as combined heat and power plants that burn methane gas, as well as upgrades to higher efficiency gas-fired boilers or gas-fired water heaters in building energy efficiency projects. We urge the Green Bank to institute a policy to reject all applications to fund fossil fuels.
Continued use of methane gas of any kind – both fracked gas as well as fossil gas alternatives such as the so-called biogas advocated by fossil fuel interests – is incompatible with the District’s commitment to climate neutrality. Methane from fracked gas and fossil gas alternatives is a greenhouse gas that is 84 to 87 times more potent than CO2. When even small proportions of methane leak through transmission and distribution pipelines, and at source during extraction, the leaks have a significant negative impact on both the climate and public health. Additionally, gas appliances in buildings are a major source of indoor air pollution, triggering asthma and other adverse health consequences.
The Green Finance Authority’s authorizing statute states that the Green Bank may support “sustainable projects and programs” and that “the term ‘sustainable projects and programs’ shall not include biomass, biofuel, nuclear, or waste-to-energy projects and programs.” But the Green Bank guidelines are not explicit about eligibility of fossil gas, fossil gas alternatives, and other fossil fuels for funding from the Green Bank.
DC has taken a leadership role in addressing climate change, including Mayor Bowser’s commitment that DC will reduce greenhouse gas emissions 50 percent by 2032 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, the passage of the Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act of 2018, and the creation of the Green Bank. Allowing the Green Bank to use capital raised from District residents to finance the burning of fossil fuels as “sustainable projects” would subvert the very reason the Green Bank was established and make a mockery of Mayor Bowser's commitment of carbon neutrality by 2050. To fulfill the Green Bank’s mission and to protect Mayor Bowser’s legacy on climate action, the bank must exclude all fossil fuel projects from its financing.
The technology for space and water heating using air-source heat pumps has sufficiently matured and can be cost-effectively deployed in new construction and retrofits. Many examples across the District demonstrate that new and renovated buildings can be heated without fossil fuels.[1] But support from lenders at times is lacking for development projects that are pushing the frontier and are completely free of fossil fuels. The Green Bank should fill that void rather than provide additional financing for fossil fuels, even as part of a development package that is otherwise green.
The Sierra Club requests a timely response to our question of whether the Green Bank will use its capital to fund fossil fuel projects.
Sincerely,
Mark Rodeffer
Co-Chair, Beyond Gas Subcommittee
Matthias Paustian
Co-Chair, Beyond Gas Subcommittee
CC:
Director Tommy Wells, DC Department of Energy and Environment
Councilmember Mary Cheh, Transportation and Environment Committee Chair
[1] For example, Weinberg Commons is the first multifamily passive house building in DC. This 2016 retrofit project is all electric. Water heating is provided by solar thermal and electric resistance backup heating. A highly efficient heat pump serves for space heating and cooling.