This opinion piece is the first of a series from Energy Innovation’s experts on policy to promote a sustainable, affordable, and clean energy system.
As the United States transitions to a clean electric system, policymakers as well as utilities are prioritizing equity to address our long history environmental injustice (EJ) in utility regulation. The federal government and many states have developed approaches to an equitable transition. These include investment targets and community engagement goals. Tracking progress is impossible without a way to target funding to the most vulnerable.
Many of these states are listed belowCalifornia, Colorado and Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, and Massachusetts have all passed legislation that requires environmental justice to be included in electric utility regulation decisions. Continued discussions surrounding the Build Back Better Act are now underway, following the passage the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.,These include state-level net-zero targets, trillions and a just transition.
Numerous states currently use mapping tools for identifying communities most at risk of environmental injustice. This provides regulators with clear metrics to improve equity. The best tools include community input, localized data, as well as analysis of cumulative impacts.
State agencies and utility commissions can support map creation in regions that don’t have a process for prioritizing residents. This process can be slow and tedious so it should be started as soon possible. These tools are only as good and reliable as the underlying data. Therefore, policymakers should support data collection and allow self-reporting. These tools are essential to ensure that policymakers, the public, and utilities can determine if investments are reaching their stated goals. This is both inefficiency as well as injustice.
State efforts to identify and prioritise environmental justice communities
State agencies must clearly identify which communities are less protected from environmental hazards in order to advance environmental justice and attain equity goals. A map tool that combines place-based data sets with mapping tools is a great way to identify communities.
These tools can be used to identify communities that are facing disproportionate burdens. To do this, you must first determine what factors cause environmental injustice. This includes pollution sources, demographics and health. However, each contributing factor to environmental injustice must be considered in conjunction with the others.
People living in high-pollution areas often have multiple external factors that increase their risk, such substandard housing or a lack of access to healthcare. The first step towards prioritizing communities that are most likely to experience negative environmental impacts is to identify these types of cumulative effects.
Numerous states have made significant progress in quantifying cumulative effects and creating maps to identify communities most affected by historical and current environmental injustices (EJ) or “disadvantaged communities”. California is one of these leaders and has established the mapping tool. CalEnviroScreen2013: To rank all census tracts within the state using a relative score.
CalEnviroScreen uses a combination population and pollution data to rank census tracts according to their cumulative impact.
California created CalEnviroScreen. Since then, many states, including Maryland, Michigan and New York, have followed California’s lead and created maps that identify indicators and highlight communities with the highest cumulative impact.
These efforts have been the basis for allocating state funds to these communities. California regulators and policymakers use the tool extensively to evaluate progress and target investments. CalEnviroScreen was used to structure the California Public Utilities Commission’s “Solar on Multifamily Affordable Housing Program,” which provides up to $100,000,000 per year for projects in disadvantaged communities. The tool can also be used for program evaluations, such as assessments of impact on Utility transportation electrification programsEmissions reductions in disadvantaged areas
Washington States King CountyThe Washington Environmental Health Disparities map was used to create a six year Equity and Social Justice Strategic Plan. The mapping tool will be used to measure progress over time.
Public outreach was key to unlocking the data-driven decision making they offer. Washington, for example, held 12 listening sessionsIt is a state-wide initiative that ensures that all communities are involved in the creation and maintenance of tools.
Because of environmental concerns and availability of data, data in each state tool is different. California uses a pesticide indicator owing to its large agricultural industry, while Michigan’s environmental justice communities are more dependent on lead and paint. EJ communities are not a single entity. Therefore, policymakers must take into account the unique concerns of each region.
Although federal efforts have lagged behind the leading states in this regard, they are moving forward
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has many EJ data sets available at the federal level that can be used to support regulator and utility assessments. These include air toxics cancer risk, particulate material, lead paint and proximity to hazardous materials. These data were used, together with demographic information, by the EPA to create the EPA’s EJ Data Set. EJSCREENMap tool. EJSCREEN can’t analyze cumulative impacts nor identify EJ communities. However, the publicly available data can be used to support the creation of subnational tools to identify communities or direct funds.
EJSCREEN is not the only option. President Bidens is also available. Jan. 27 executive ordersDirected the creation of a “Climate and Economic Justice Mapping Tool” in order to identify cumulative effects across the country and improve consistency with program implementation. This is an important step towards the administrations. Justice40Goal to direct 40% of the clean energy transition benefits to EJ communities. The administration plansReleaseThis tool will be available in beta form starting in 2022.
It is difficult to find high-quality data
It is important to understand that quantifications of EJ are only as good and accurate as the data. Unfortunately, EJ-related numerical data quality and quantity vary widely across the country. The United States is far from having a consistent set of data sets that covers all EJ issues.
A comprehensive mapping tool that addresses data gaps must include options to self-identify as an EJ community, or incorporate qualitative data. The Illinois Solar for AllProgram, which aims for 25% funding for EJ communities, provides a community application with clear and precise instructions for self-designation.
Data improvement is also important, especially in terms granularity. Air pollution is one example of environmental hazards. Block-by-block variationsNational air quality monitoring systems measure the air quality of the air more broadly. 2020 will see the U.S. Government Accountability Office Identified the statusThe national air quality monitoring system is severely lacking. Electric utility regulators, along with others, will have difficulty prioritizing retirement of power plants and community reinvestment in order to reach equity goals.
This problem can also be extended to water pollution and other hazards. To achieve success, significant investment in pollution monitoring hardware across the country is required. Data granularity and data quality improvements through mobile sensors as well as high-resolution remote sensing data are also necessary. This is likely to be outside the scope of utility investment, which highlights the need for utility stakeholders engage with other state agencies.
Data collection can also be used to engage communities, as Aclima, an air quality monitoring company, has demonstrated. Community members are employedMobile monitoring is an important part of their work. These systems can often take years to implement, so policymakers need to get started now to improve the effectiveness of future EJ investments.
How can policymakers ensure that environmental justice issues are measured and progress is made in a consistent manner?
Both regulatory and legislative approaches will be needed by states as they consider the best ways of improving equity through utility policy. Legislation is a great way to secure funding for tool creation and update. Therefore, utility stakeholders should support legislative efforts. However, public health agencies and environmental agencies must not wait for a mandate from the legislature to start work on determining and mapping cumulative effects. They should do this immediately.
While data quality needs to be improved, policymakers shouldn’t allow this barrier in the way of creating useful tools. There are many data sources, including those used in EJSCREEN. They can be combined using a cumulative effects methodology with any other data available at the state or regional level to create EJ score. This process has been used. create several state-level toolsIncluding those in Michigan, Washington
With trillions of dollars worth of new investments in clean energies expected over the next ten years, now is the right time to implement mapping and data collection tools that will ensure these investments reach communities that previously missed out on economic opportunities or have had the worst environmental health effects.