How voting Yes on I-2066 will prevent higher energy costs

October 24, 2024

Don’t be gaslit: Voting Yes on I-2066 is the best way to prevent higher energy costs now and into the future.

“Opponents of energy choice are desperately spreading misinformation to defeat I-2066 and reduce access to low-cost, reliable natural gas,” said BIAW Executive Vice President Greg Lane. “We encourage voters to look at the facts and vote Yes on I-2066 to preserve natural gas as a less expensive, more reliable energy choice.”

Electricity is 3x as costly as natural gas

Electricity costs more than three times as much as natural gas, according to the US Energy Information Administration as reported in the Federal Register on Oct. 17. Read more.

Forced electrification drives energy costs for everyone

When policymakers force the market to abandon an energy source the majority of the country uses, it will affect the supply chain and artificially increase the cost of all-electric appliances in our market. That will not only hurt people who don’t want to pay $40,000 to trash their gas appliances and convert their homes to electric, but it will also hurt people who would voluntarily like to purchase electric appliances.

HB 1589 also increases energy costs for all consumers. Puget Sound Energy’s 2023 Decarbonization Study shows the comparison between costs for natural gas vs. heat pumps in multiple scenarios in 2030 and 2045. The contrast for heat pumps vs. gas is dramatic. Voting Yes on I-2066 will reverse that.

 

I-2066 not only retains incentives, it restores them

Nothing in 2066 removes the ability to access rebates and incentives for energy-efficient appliances. In fact, the initiative restores incentives for energy-efficient gas appliances, too. Most of the energy efficiency rebates available to consumers in Washington come from the federal government, and our initiative touches none of those (State initiatives CAN’T change federal law).

I-2066 is carefully crafted to remove the requirement in HB 1589 to “achieve all cost-effective electrification of ends uses currently served by natural gas…” (Section 4 (h). Then it keeps the section that require PSE to plan to:

• “Include low-income electrification programs that must include rebates and incentives to low-income customers and customers experiencing high energy burden for the deployment of high-efficiency electric-only heat pumps in homes and buildings currently heating with wood, oil, propane, electric resistance, or gas.” (New Section 4 (h)i on page 10)
• “Include low-income customer protections to mitigate energy burden, if electrification measures will increase a low-income participant’s energy burden;”  (also on page 10)
• “Enroll customers in energy assistance programs or provide bill assistance;”
• “Coordinate with community-based organizations in the large combination utility’s service territory including, but not limited to, grantees of the department of commerce, community action agencies, and community-based nonprofit organizations, to remove barriers and effectively serve low-income customers;” (Page 11)

It also doesn’t force any consumer to use natural gas but it does prevent the UTC from approving integrated system plans that require or incentivize terminating natural gas service or allow utilities to require customers to involuntarily switch off natural gas by restricting access or making it too costly for them to access. (Page 17)