Testimony of Mark Rodeffer of the Sierra Club
Before the DC Public Service Commission
In the Community Hearing on Formal Case No. 1169, In the matter of the Application of Washington Gas Light Company for Authority to Increase Existing Rates and Charges for Gas Service
February 7, 2023
Thank you, Chairman Thompson, and Commissioners Beverly and Trabue, for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Mark Rodeffer, and I am testifying on behalf of the Sierra Club, America’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization, with millions of members and supporters nationwide and thousands of dues-paying members in DC. Our top priority is combating climate change.
Almost a quarter of DC’s total climate pollution comes from a single source: methane gas supplied by Washington Gas and burned in our homes and other buildings to provide heat. If DC is going to meet its commitment to carbon neutrality, first established by Mayor Bowser in 2017 and codified into law last year by the DC Council, we must end the combustion of dirty fuels in our buildings by 2045.
Unfortunately, in the rate case before you today, Washington Gas is asking the Public Service Commission to disregard DC’s climate commitments and DC law. The gas utility would have the Commission ignore its mandate under the Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act of 2018 to ensure that the Commission’s decisions are consistent with DC’s climate commitments, which call for carbon neutrality and fully phasing out fossil fuel combustion by 2045.
Washington Gas is seeking a rate increase of more than 20 percent – more than three times the rate of inflation, which recently hit 40-year highs – for what Washington Gas falsely calls “climate action.” The gas utility’s “Climate Action” Recovery Tariff (CART) would charge DC residents millions of dollars to mix a small amount of so-called “renewable” gas from sources like animal manure from factory farms into Washington Gas’s fracked gas supply. Methane gas from sources like animal manure is in limited supply and is extremely expensive. It’s not a realistic solution to climate change. It’s a greenwashing attempt to deceive the Commission into approving cost recovery for false solutions on climate change. Even if the Commission bought into the false solution of so-called “renewable gas,” that would do nothing to address the public health threat of burning methane gas in our homes, which medical research has linked to increased hospital admissions, respiratory symptoms, asthma attacks, and a 42% increased likelihood of developing childhood asthma.
We all know that the climate’s worst polluters – companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron – have lied to the public for decades about the health and climate threats of their product. They are not alone among dirty energy interests. The gas industry has been gaslighting us for decades, claiming that burning dirty fuels in our homes is actually “clean.” The question before this Commission is whether you take DC’s climate commitments and public health seriously, or whether you prioritize utility profits over requirements in the law.
It’s bad enough that Washington Gas is asking the Commission to increase costs on DC residents to pay for false solutions to climate change. But it gets worse. Washington Gas actually wants DC residents to pay Washington Gas more money for selling less gas. The gas utility calls this a “climate progress” adjustment (CPA) and asks the three members of this Commission to make DC less affordable for residents, businesses, and families in order to protect profits of the Calgary-based Washington Gas parent company AltaGas. If this Commision is serious about meeting DC’s climate commitments and protecting DC ratepayers from unnecessary and imprudent costs, you will reject the falsely-named “climate progress” adjustment.
The proposed gas rate increase is just a downpayment on the gas utility’s plan to charge DC ratepayers billions of dollars for continued reliances on dirty fuel. Washington Gas has asked the Commission to ignore DC’s climate laws and instead extract nearly $672 million dollars from DC residents for the next phase of Project Pipes. It’s part of the larger Washington Gas plan to hit DC residents with the $4.5 billion cost of maintaining its dirty energy infrastructure.
With these enormous costs looming, DC residents should have a central voice in determining the District’s energy future. We believe the Commission needs to do a better job of educating the public about the costs they may be forced to pay and the Commission needs to do a better job of encouraging public engagement. These hearings were not widely publicized. The notice included a deadline to sign up but did not note that walk-in testimony would be allowed, which we only learned after a DC resident emailed the Commission asking if she could testify despite having missed the deadline and was told she could. We do appreciate the opportunity to comment on this case, and hope to see robust efforts to inform the public about future hearings in other dockets involving Washington Gas, like the upcoming ProjectPipes docket, Formal Case 1175. If this Commission is considering allowing Washington Gas to charge DC residents billions of dollars to maintain its dirty energy infrastructure, you need to ensure the public understands what you’re doing.
In summary, we ask that you reject billions of dollars in wasteful spending on fossil fuel infrastructure, that you reject the false solutions to climate change included in the CART, and that you reject the CPA proposal to charge DC residents more money for using less gas. It is time for proactive climate leadership from DC’s Public Service Commission.