Local First Utah Op-Ed

Local First Utah’s blog often focuses on the human energy that propels our independent business community. But today I’m going to switch entrepreneurship for concrete kilowatts. You see, Utah’s energy system has some problems. Two of the gravest—air pollution and rapidly rising prices— have local solutions.

In January this year, The Salt Lake Tribune alerted consumers to the grim reality of rising energy rates because, quite frankly, we’re using a lot more of it: “Due to what it describes as the rising demand for electricity throughout the state, the utility warns Utah consumers may see annual price increases of 8 percent to 10 percent annually for the next decade.” This year, rates will only increase by 4.7%, a reduction of the power company’s initial request, but a reduction that suggests Rocky Mountain Power will be back before the Public Service Commission next year asking again for another hike.

It seems that as long as our energy needs keep rising we’ll have no choice but to pay the higher rates. But alternative energy proponents disagree, believing that as long as we’re investing more in energy now, it should be in sources that will continue to generate energy for the long haul. That, rather than gradually paying more for “traditional” and ultimately finite sources—sources that are, arguably, much more harmful to our health.

So, what…are we talking about solar panels on our roofs? We just might be. We just might be. But that idea is only part of the equation, which, it turns out, is literally what we are talking about: an equation. In fact, the equation is a series of integrated calculations that maximizes energy inputs from renewable energy sources at the moment of their peak generation that is designed, eventually, to largely or completely offset dependence upon coal and natural gas.

“One of the biggest arguments against renewable energy,” notes HEAL Utah’s Energy Analyst Arthur Morris, “is that it is intermittent and therefore cannot be predicted and therefore cannot be integrated. But Morris says we can look at meteorology as a useful comparison. “Everyone knows you can (to an extent) predict the weather. Is it perfect? No. But it’s a damn fine ballpark.” The equation forecasts both energy needs and energy generation.

Look, we’re paying more for energy—even self-styled “cheap” fossil fuels. That’s a reality. We will continue to pay more as long as alternatives aren’t developed. Investment in alternative energy can ensure that some of those most vulnerable to constantly increasing rates—small businesses—can remain sustainable for the long term.

That’s Local First Utah’s mission to the core.

In Search of Innovation

But please note: the following opinion does not necessarily reflect that of Local First Utah or its sponsors. The ideas are, however, concerned with protecting the public health of Utah’s citizens through responsible, local energy development.

Embedded, traditional energy structures have effectively maintained status quo by delivering what had been for a long time the lowest-cost energy on the market. Improvements in technologies harnessing alternatives sources, including wind, solar, and geothermal are beginning to level the playing field—and they avoid external costs (those not factored into the projected rates) of public health.

In short, think of all those “red alert” air days in Northern Utah during which it is recommended that children, the elderly, people with autoimmune disorders, and anyone who cares about breathing stay inside.

The fact is we have some of the worst air in the nation. As Utah Department of Environmental Quality points out, our winter inversions cannot be prevented, but the pollution that gets trapped in the valley and in our lungs can. While surrounding western states such as Colorado and California have legislated tough renewable energy standards, Utah is lagging behind, in spite of the impacts of our dependence upon fossil fuels on our health.

I have blogged before about local energy. Remember Moab? “The localization movement encompasses more than just food production. Moab (for example) is already harnessing healthier, renewable energy in the form of wind, a commitment that earned the city the distinction of being the Nation's First EPA Green Power Community.”

States generate (and often export) energy from a variety of energy sources, including both traditional fossil fuel-based energy and more modern, renewable sources. While a number of states have legislated renewable portfolio standards (RPSs), Utah has simply established renewable energy goals.

Utah’s code “requires that utilities only need to pursue renewable energy to the extent that it is ‘cost-effective’ to do so” based upon an “assessment of whether acquisition of the resource will result in the delivery of electricity at the lowest reasonable cost, as well as an assessment of long-term and short-term impacts, risks, reliability, financial impacts on the affected utility, and other factors determined by the Utah Public Service Commission (PSC).” The idea is to ensure Utah ratepayers are given the lowest cost, lowest risk energy. While the short-term low cost of fossil fuels is appealing, the elevated rate of environmental illnesses in our children is not.

The Local Solution: Wherever Local Is

There are several entrepreneurs and independent business owners working locally to develop and manufacture energy that can help nurture a transition to cleaner, safer, more local energy. But it will take an investment by people and local government to ensure their viability and competitiveness in a market flooded with cheaper products from abroad. Local energy production should ideally combine domestic manufacturing with renewable, localized, and readily available sources. Even the conversation about building costly twin nuclear power reactors in Green River is troubling in part because the power is likely destined to leave Utah, doing nothing to ensure Utah's energy independence. Meanwhile, the recent conversation about reducing our dependence upon foreign oil has turned our focus to domestic natural gas and, more recently, controversial oil "tar" sands from Canada.

We can do better.

An expert in air pollution and a leader in renewable energy development says he has the answer to powering the future world’s energy needs using only renewable sources. He is Stanford professor Dr. Mark Jacobson, and he will be visiting Utah on November 15th to discuss his plan for a safer, cleaner, and independent energy future. Dr. Jacobson will be visiting in conjunction with a fundraiser for a local nonprofit that has led grassroots efforts to keep foreign and excessive radioactive waste out of Utah—and which is looking to the future of Utah by supporting research that improves the health and integrity of our state through thoughtful, local development.

The same brand of initiative and ingenuity that define America—or better still, the sheer industriousness of Utahns—will power our future. Indeed, these ideas are not so big a shift from this blog’s core after all. It’s energy entrepreneurship driven by human entrepreneurship. They’re ideas that, in the long term, protect and empower independent businesses in our great state.

Typically, I am inclined to provide a full analysis of an article on the local movement from the perspective of Local First Utah but authors Miguel Bustillo and David Kesmodel do an excellent job presenting the full scope of the trend with in this case with regard to Wal-Mart in the August 1st edition of The Wall Street Journal. Please read the pdf part 1 and part 2 for the full story.

Bustillo and Kesmodel actually craft language that obliges the reader to ask some really obvious questions without outright villainizing any of the parties involved. For our purposes, the most interesting aspect of the piece is the fine line that multi-national corporations now dance on between the cost of fuel and transportation and the higher price of local, often smaller farmers—and how ultimately buying local maybe isn’t the most cost effective, but it responds to a demand.

That, alone, is a huge victory: “most of the chains say their main objective is to satisfy changing consumer preferences.” Of course, the article makes several good points about how some companies might resort to simple changes in marketing strategies to meet customer expectations rather than actually changing how they do business, but the idea is still encouraging.

Unfortunately, food is only a tiny fraction of the total picture, big box or no, since the vast majority of major manufacturing is now conducted overseas where labor is cheaper and poorly regulated. That means most days the very best we can do is buy our food from local farmers, and, of course, consume less.

In the meantime, we can take heart in knowing that the big boxes are responding to customer demand, and though such demand forces a shift in business from established relationships to new, local farms, it also encourages diversity in the marketplace. But marketplace diversity is only the beginning.  Next, can we can hope for a return to broader systemic diversity (rather than centralized power and concentration of wealth) and even better business ethics providing for ecological diversity? Probably not. Note that the corporations in question aren’t shifting because it’s right; they’re transitioning because their customers have demanded it. But it’s good to hope for diversity because, well, diversity is resilience in any system: individuals actually contributing to a whole. Keep demanding! Keep choosing local first, and if Wal-Mart is your only option, then ask for local. There’s power in unity.

Words by: Andrew Dash Gillman

The Moab Economy

When last we spoke, a bit of an economic divide in Moab was unfolding. There are many facets breaking down that divide, but in its simplest, gentlest form, the divide is between the seasonal, tourism-driven economy, and the year-round economy.

Some business owners provide year-round services, while others are largely only able to cater to tourism, offering goods of little or no interest to residents. The dialogue is tricky because on both sides of the conversations are legitimate business owners trying to make their living, which with many consumer goods isn’t feasible given the town’s size, hence the drift of business and purchases outside of Moab.

One hope is that some intrepid soul or brilliant entrepreneur is able to carve out a living selling necessities while also supporting themselves. That may not mean a competitively prices electronics store in which to purchase a 72” 1080p HDTV, but it could mean expanding lines of basic apparel and household needs outside of the outdoor gear that most outfitters provide. Village Market’s Mr. Washburn has seen the constraints of the economy and gas prices combine to lure in more local business, but he has also committed to sourcing local products, distinguishing his store both to residents and to tourists through dedicating a portion of its stock to the local economy.

It’s a great start. Yet the localization movement encompasses more than just food production. Moab is already harnessing healthier, renewable energy in the form of wind, a commitment that earned the city the distinction of being the Nation's First EPA Green Power Community. Maybe the next step is learning to use completely regionally available building materials in conjunction with modern building knowledge to maximize energy efficiency within households and businesses. Well, maybe if Moab were a transition town like the one depicted in The Economics of Happiness.

The Voices of Business Owners

Ultimately, Local First Utah can’t answer all the questions. But as we continued our listening- and fact-finding tour we did hear a lot of optimism. Desert Thread’s Cathy O’Connor notes, “A lot of locals really try to support us and also pay cash.” O’Connor’s colorful shop sits next to the 100% wind-powered Moab Times-Independent, though it was a somewhat recent move, part of the town’s “rent-motivated musical chairs.” The difference in rent between O’Connor’s shop just off Main Street and those whose storefronts face the main drag is astonishing. But the fact remains, most tourists simply don’t wander all that frequently off the main strip.

For O’Connor, it’s okay: “You don’t start a yarn business to get rich. But then our overhead is different too. You can sit on yarn for a long time.” That’s not to say she isn’t kept extremely busy with her business. “As a shop owner you don’t have the time to do the things Local First is doing.” And Desert Thread is one of those businesses that offers something not seasonally specific.

Around the corner, the BARKery’s Jessica Turquette has been fortunate to see her business grow though her property commands ahigher rent. But her specialty dog and cat boutique is definitely a year-round service, though obviously adventurous pets accompanying their owners into Canyon Country during the tourist season spurs a spike in business. Either way, the Farmers Market/Sam’s Club divide is apparent to Ms. Turquette too, but she acknowledges if you want, say, lady’s clothing that doesn’t say “Moab,” you’d have no choice but to pick it up on a trip out of town—even keeping a list for a special trip to Salt Lake (where people where clothes that say, “Moab.”) For many goods and some services, that may well be the only option. But who is going to drive their dog to Sam’s Club in Grand Junction when they can get everything they need in town, including a self-serve dog wash?

Making the Local Shift, where Possible

To be sure, Local First Utah’s philosophy maintains that neighborhoods thrive on diversity, and not everything can be local, let alone produced locally. All things considered, many business owners in Moab seem encouraged by the support of residents. Indeed, if more make the local shift by handling everything they can in Moab, they’ve done the most any of us can do anyway. In larger cities, where there are more options facing every consumer decision, the local shift is complicated even further by matters of price and choice. But if the next closest choice is two hours away, it may well be that the best choice is the local choice, even if it costs slightly more in Moab (which it also may not), offset by time and fuel and money diverted to unintended expenditures. As more options do become available locally, perhaps it will raise the standard of living and allow residents more time to enjoy the place most people come only to visit.

Team Outreach Spring 2011 split at the junction of Center and Main to better canvas the town in the short remaining time. While there won’t be time to mention all of our stops from this (or the morning’s work), it is worth mentioning that my afternoon’s refreshment was provided by the previously mentioned Castle Valley Creamery, whose delightful honey goat’s milk yogurt I purchased at the Moonflower Market, another partner business that is a “non-profit natural foods store featuring organic and locally grown produce, natural and organic foods, organic to go prepared deli items, and high quality supplements and personal care products.”

The staff at Moonflower was quite busy during my visit, providing ample time to photograph their commitment to the burgeoning local and regional food economy (see gallery below).

But what of that pending visit with Mr. Bob Owen at Fresh Moab Coffee? Well, we had no idea the treat that was in store for us as we stood by the Overlook Gallery peering down the dirt road, or even whether or not Mr. Owen was on hand. The ensuing discussion occupied nearly an hour, with Mr. Owen embodying several tenets of our philosophy. He was like a mouthpiece for our mission, and living proof of the benefits that come from dealing with a passionate and compassionate small business owner.

Alas, as I have already unburdened myself of a great many words on the first day in Moab alone, I shall reserve this discussion for a special edition blog post.

The sun is already lowering toward the high sandstone mesas and since Matt Monson and I had traveled several hours and talked to several business owners as well as city officials (and now the town’s restaurants were filling with patrons while many of the shops were closing down for the day), we decided we had earned ourselves a short hike. Directly surrounded by the expressive beauty of the Colorado Plateau of southeastern Utah, it’s hard not to answer the call of canyon country’s many random and wild places. It’s a place that has inspired innumerable poetic reflections but, alas, my own are not for this blog.

It would turn out that thanks to the organizational prowess of the Wayne County Business Association’s president Ted Winder, tomorrow’s schedule would be packed. For now, let’s just see if we can’t reach Hunter’s Arch…

Photos and Words: Andrew Dash Gillman

Commentary:

There is a skeptic living inside most of us that regards new or challenging information suspiciously. That skeptic regards a film like The Economics of Happiness rather strictly as a polemic, and proceeds about its business as usual, just doin’ what a skeptic does. But then, maybe our inner skeptic has bought into the prevailing, singular worldview sold to us by the dominating corporations. Snap out of it inner skeptic! (As Slow Food Utah’s Christi Paulson puts it, you don’t need a bigger closet, just fewer clothes!) Alternatively, maybe our skepticism is just a rational side of us attempting to deal with (rather than ignore) the condition of our planet in a meaningful way, and acting upon the knowledge. (The alternative being dismissing the science because it is more convenient to do so.) Ideally, because we are rational, we understand that we are not being pitched a fabrication because the storyteller, well, simply has nothing to gain by telling the story—other than hope for a better a future.

The story in this case is globalization. It’s a rather far-flung term bandied about topically by everyone from serious economists to blowhard cable news hosts. Like climate change, globalization is wrapped in controversy and challenged by divisive, partisan politics. But much of the politics that benefit global corporate interests are directly tied to powerful lobbyists representing the monied interests of those global businesses. Breaking the chain of interest between elected officials and powerful multi-national corporations (and closing the revolving door of personnel between the two) is, perhaps, the end goal, but achieving that goal begins with changing the way we think, as consumers and government at the local level, about how we consume.

The Film

The Economics of Happiness is a documentary film by Helena Norberg-Hodge, Steven Gorelick, and John Page. While globalization is the overarching theme of the film, the plot is framed with the before globalization/after globalization cultural collapse witnessed by Norberg-Hodge’s during her work in the Himalayan region of Ladakh. In brief, as the title suggests, the film urges a new kind of measurement of
“success”: a Gross National Happiness (as first employed in Bhutan) rather than a Gross National Product. The reason? Polls have shown American who identify themselves as happy with their lives have dropped every year since 1956—concurrent, it is worth noting, with a sharp increase in availability of and possession of goods.

In a very real sense, The Economics of Happiness takes hold of the baton dropped by former Vice President Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth and runs it all the way to the finish. Where Mr. Gore’s film makes a case about the reality of global warming and the need to act, The Economics of Happiness punches the viewer in the face with a disconcerting reality that, environmental concerns notwithstanding, the human species has tragically disconnected itself from place, tradition, and wellbeing and allowed itself to be governed by powerful, multi-national corporations wherein possession, rather than community and belonging, is the path to happiness.

Tradition and community exchanged for image and materialism.

To make its argument, the film presents eight inconvenient truths about globalization. It is unlikely that any viewer won’t relate to at least one of them. Those truths, in no particular order save for the order they are presented in the film:

1. Globalization Makes Us Unhappy

2. Globalization Breeds Insecurity

3. Globalization Wastes Natural Resources

4. Globalization Accelerates Climate Change

5. Globalization Destroys Livelihood

6. Globalization Creates Conflict

7. Globalization is Built on Handouts to Big Businesses

8. Globalization is Based on False Accounting

The Solution

Of course the rejection of materialism and consumerism is not a new trend. Rather, the film parades the consequences of global consumerism and greed to advocate constructively using our consumer tendencies and energy to build a better local infrastructure as a response to the single world market model of globalization builds community, increases choice, and reduces waste. To better understand the implications of the benefits of localization espoused by the film, visit www.theeconomicsofhappiness.org as well as the website of the International Society for Ecology and Culture at www.localfutures.org.

For now, consider the film’s definition of “localization”:

1. The removal of fiscal and other supports that currently favor giant transnational corporations and banks.

2. Reducing dependence on export markets in favor of production for local needs.

Tens of billions of dollars in the United States alone annually subsidize big business and multi-national corporations at the expense of small business. There’s a competitive disadvantage for small business built into the American fiscal landscape, which one of the film’s commentators notes is the exact opposite of a free market.

Overall, the film portrays the bleak outlook of the unstoppable cogs of globalization in motion, but not without optimism. In fact, the momentum of the plot carries the viewer with full force into the localization response. The slap in the face of the inconvenient truth of globalization is nothing compared to the impact of that answer. Localization.

The Local Response

In the panel discussion that followed, David Everitt, Chief of Staff of the Salt Lake City Mayor’s Office, noted that government, in particular at the state and federal level, can be frustratingly slow to change its course. But, Mr. Everitt eloquently added, it’s municipal government that has the most maneuverability, being the closest to its constituents. Salt Lake City is particularly lucky, he says, to have a mayor who is especially receptive to great new ideas.

City-wide recycling, Mr. Everitt pointed out, didn’t result from a sudden collective epiphany on the part of the city council, but from demand of its constituents.

The city also has a “local preference” policy in place, as another example, for sourcing goods and services for city institutions.

Rounding out the panel was Slow Food Utah’s Christi Paulson, Wasatch Cooperative Market board member Allison Einerson, and Local First’s own.

Ms. Kanshepolsky explained how Local First Utah has been endeavoring for over five years to educate consumers and government alike on the importance of small, independent business to the local economy.

While Utah has been praised for its fiscal conservatism, the state is still caught up in the global economy and all that implies.

Major corporate interests are lured in with incentives, and it is all-too-often at the expense of small business owners and small farmers. This is tricky territory, because government officials are drawn to the prospect of the perceived economic growth and job creation that comes with bringing certain big businesses into the state, whether through tax incentives, or perhaps most disturbingly through our laxer environmental law.

But sometimes, positively, it’s simply Utah’s quality of life that lures businesses to Utah, and keeps our local business community strong. If all businesses and government in Utah operated with our quality of life in mind first and foremost, many of the consequences associated with globalization could be reduced. The definition of quality of life, however, must not be limited, say, to access to ski resorts.

Alas, the state is tasked with striking a balance between creating a positive environment for new- and existing-small business to thrive while also luring in bigger businesses that don’t damage the foundation of our communities or degrade Utah’s environment.

If the film has taught us anything, that inner skeptic should be concerned about policy that strictly favors economic growth and the GNP.

We as consumers can make choices that are local, support community, and favor our own personal health, the health of our families and neighbors, and the health of the planet. If enough of us insist on those choices, our municipal governments will follow our lead.

The new economic model is localization.

Buying Local First is no longer a fringe movement. It is the movement upon which our future—our local future—depends.

One more round of applause for the sponsors who brought the film to Utah: Wasatch Cooperative Market (with added thanks to Brian Emerson) KRCL, Local First Utah, Edible Wasatch, Slow Food Utah, and Wasatch Community Gardens.

Author: Andrew Dash Gillman

Images Credit: The International Society for Ecology and Culture