The main squeeze: Is renewable energy a commodity or a commons?
Is renewable energy a commodity or a commons? Often referred to as a natural resource that is available to all, renewable sources of energy (especially wind, sun, water) are clearly part of our natural commons: no one can claim their ownership. This is particularly important because despite their power generation capabilities these are finite resources, especially water and wind, that require mindful production and conservation efforts in alignment with a cultural awareness and climate destabilization.
In an increasingly modern digitized society, access to energy is an indispensable part of our lives. Equally critical is ensuring renewable energy sources are equally shared throughout the society; and not just consumption, but the means of production as well. This is where social and economic justice are key in implementing a climate resilient decentralized grid.
To highlight this point, here is how the EU Horizon 2020 research project REScoop presents the social relevance of framing Renewable Energy sources in the commons (as a policy recommendation):
“Wind, solar, hydro, biomass and geothermal energy are natural resources. They in fact belong to no one and are in principle available to all. They are common goods. From the perspective of social justice, more attention therefore must be paid to the way in which decentralised renewable energy sources are managed. In a world where energy is scarce, these sources of energy will mean income for the operators. Citizens and users therefore have every interest in keeping this local energy production in their own hands as much as possible. Governments too have every interest in anchoring decentralised renewable energy with the users as much as possible so that the added value of the production also benefits society. This is especially true for wind energy, an energy source that extends over a larger area, but ultimately is exploited on a small site. The benefit of this exploitation should extend to the widest possible group of people. Thus, the exploitation of wind energy should not simply be privatised, but also allocated on the basis of socio-economic criteria.”
A socio-economic justice lens is needed in energy production because it incorporates the influence of the socio-economic forces that colonization and industrialization have had on technology and systems design. That is true for many industries, but is seen most blatantly in the commodification of energy. In other words, there is no denying the centrality of fossil fuel to capitalism and the immense wealth and power it created for energy corporations.
Commodification matters, because it is one of the ways to readily see how capitalism shapes the technology used in and the behaviors of energy consumption. Energy is often referred to through a capitalist perspective as something that is “bought and sold” or “consumed or wasted.” Stepping back, we can see that buying and selling is relatively recent in historical terms. For thousands of years, humans accessed types of energy directly harnessed from nature. Many civilizations used wind to sail, and the Egyptians designed their homes to capture solar. Fuels became commodities only in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Rejecting the commodification of energy today will require a great deal of political and social will. But it may be the only path towards energy as a commons and to truly democratize our energy system for public benefit.
To do this means breaking through the analytical frameworks through which energy is seen as a commodity. According to David McDermott-Hughes, author of Who Owns the Wind?: Climate Crisis and the Hope of Renewable Energy, there are a few radical approaches to anti-capitalist and post-fossil fuel energy justice:
Ladders to Public Ownership: Federal and state policy already encourages rooftop solar. Extending tax incentives to promote public, cooperative, and community solar projects in rural and urban spaces would allow for more participation. McDermott-Hughes comments on the untapped solar potential of big-box stores and parking lots. “What if a city, a community organization, or even high-tech protesters could climb up, install panels, and wire them to a local micro-grid? ” Publicly owned urban panels allow for power to be generated where it is used which decreases the amount of extractive rural solar or wind farms and increases resilient electricity systems.
The Common Wind: Right now wind is being privatized, commodified, and profited on by major corporations and landowners. There is a deeper battle of land rights and “wind rights” that come along with it. Privatizing wind rights tilts wind power towards the benefit of elites and corporations once again. But the construction of large wind turbines leaves neighboring homes, schools, hospitals etc, affected by the impact without compensation or involvement. If a legislature were to “sever” wind and land rights, then wind could be under public ownership and make it more popular. Unlike solar, no one harvests the wind for production on land. “Make the wind a commons and invite every breeze-blown community into the energy transition. In Germany, Denmark, and New Zealand, communities have already erected wind farms on municipal land for the common good.”
A Right to Light: Taking advantage of passive-solar energy- a concept that arose in 1940’s modern architecture- refers to the non-electrical means of harvesting light and heating. The US Green Building Council (author of the LEED standards) and the Passive House Institute have perfected these techniques. They can cut your consumption of electricity, methane, and heating oil by up to 90 percent. However, there has been a low adoption rate because of the startup expense to create buildings. Passing a passive solar building code would enable “would require setbacks from the street—allowing light to enter balconies and balcony doors—and appropriate shading. New developments could include such features as light-maximizing districts.”
As climate destabilization worsens, we all feel the pressure to shutoff fossil fuels. Hawaiʻi made the 100% renewable energy goal, yet is a painstakingly long uphill battle to get there (as progress is often stalled at the feet of capitalist interests). The reality is, power companies have always been incentivized to produce more to make more profits from cheap fossil fuels. However, the transition requires just as much aggressive efforts in energy conservation as it does in switching sources. Imagine if the profit motive were taken out of the transition, how much closer would we be to a 100% renewable energy system that we desperately need today?
When we treat renewable sources as a common good, like we do water, we see the deep rooted issue with having a share-holder beholden utility control it. It is time we institutionally support that reality by administering more mechanisms that encourage localized energy systems that meet the needs of distinct communities while supporting a localized energy economy. Being at the whim of a colossal corporate utility may make this change seem impossible, but along with advocacy and community engagement, there is hope that we can pursue change through Hawaiʻi’s laws and policy.
Hawaiʻi has a public trust doctrine included in the State Constitution, put in place to protect natural resources such as land, water, and energy sources. This opens up options such as:
Pushing the Legislature to Uphold the Public Trust Doctrine as a “Sword”: the legislature has the kuleana to change and/or amend policies that will ensure a more equitable transition to renewable energy (i.e., through imposing fees or altering policy language) to reflect the principles of the public trust doctrine, using it as a “sword” to proactively ensure renewable-based energy is treated as a common good rather than a private commodity .
Community Based Renewable Energy (CBRE) Projects for energy sovereignty: CBRE projects puts the power (literally) back in the hands of the community. Often, CBRE projects offer more favorable energy rates to the community, are more likely to favor community interests, and provide local job opportunities. A great example is Hoʻahu Energy Cooperative on Molokaʻi!
Push for the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to address equity: In 2022, the California PUC adopted an “Environmental and Social Justice Action Plan” to address the disproportionate impacts energy projects have on BIPOC and frontline communities. This plan can inspire Hawaiʻi’s PUC to change policy and include language that reflects the public trust doctrine.
We need solutions at the scale of the problem and the resources available to us in the energy transition. Only by taking a radical approach to renewables can we ensure that all people benefit from natural resources at a lower cost to both people and planet. Right now the majority of energy solutions are coming from industrial scale developers and corporations whose inherent interest in profits contradict our inherent right to clean, affordable, safe energy sources. But the wide sky of abundant winds and solar power lends itself to public rights and ownership.These resources are vast, ubiquitous, and universally accessible. That is how we make energy justice a reality. Distributed renewables as determined by local communities can power utilities and power the grid. They can also empower the communities that have been marginalized by both.
As noted above, there are many ways in which we can move forward towards a Just Transition, and to push our leaders and changemakers to follow the community’s lead. It all starts with perspective: renewables belong to us all.
*Mahalo nui to Sierra Club of Hawaiʻi extern Logan Araki for providing invaluable information and his diligent legal research and expertise connecting Hawaiʻi’s public trust doctrine to energy justice and making recommendations for change!