The Clean Energy Future Blog

By Coalition for Green Capital

By Adele Green 

The same thing can happen nationally, where the bank would be created as an independent, nonpartisan nonprofit—sitting outside the government, but capitalized with an initial appropriation from Congress—and could invest both in national projects, such as upgrades to the electric grid, and send money to state and local green banks. “Between 35 and 40 states want to have a green bank or something like it, but they don’t have the capital,” says Schub. That’s especially true as COVID-19 hits government budgets, including in the states and cities that do have green banks now. In Connecticut, nearly half of the green bank’s budget was recently cut to help balance a deficit in the state’s general fund.

Read the full story. 

By Coalition for Green Capital

House provides $20B to create millions of jobs building clean energy infrastructure 

At least 20% of funds required to go to low-income, minority communities

WASHINGTON —The Coalition for Green Capital today called on the U.S. Senate to pass the National Climate Bank Act after the House approved a similar measure for the second time in three months. By a bipartisan vote of 220-185, the House provided $20 billion for a nonprofit accelerator based on the National Climate Bank Act to build clean energy and transportation infrastructure and put millions back to work.  

The nonprofit accelerator would use the proven green bank model to fund projects. With this $20 billion, more than 3 million jobs can be created. With $35 billion, 5.4 million jobs could be created. At least 20 percent of the funds must go to low-income and climate-impacted communities, many of which have also been hard hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

“The climate and jobs crises our country faces did not take the summer off. The Senate shouldn’t either. It must act to put people back to work and reduce emissions,” Coalition for Green Capital founder and CEO Reed Hundt said. “We urge Senate leaders to use this tool that a dozen states have shown works to create millions of jobs.”

“Establishing the Clean Energy and Sustainability Accelerator will serve as an important implementation tool to achieve a clean energy economy by publicly financing and stimulating private investments in clean, renewable energy projects, clean transportation, and support communities most effected by climate change,” said Rep. Debbie Dingell, the author of the National Climate Bank Act. “The Accelerator will finance critical infrastructure projects and mobilizes investment directly into the greenhouse gas emissions reduction projects most in need of capital. The expansion of these projects will create good jobs, a strong future workforce, and deliver a clean economy that works for communities in Michigan and across the country.”

The passage of the funding and legislation—based on H.R. 5416 and S. 2057 and introduced by U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell, U.S. Sen. Ed Markey and U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, respectively—comes after momentum for a National Climate Bank picked up this year. 

In July, Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden backed the concept and his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris, also cosponsored the National Climate Bank Act in the Senate. The Senate Democrats’ Special Committee on the Climate Crisis included a National Climate Bank nonprofit in its blueprint following the House’s lead. 

Nearly 100 organizations have sent a letter to U.S. Senate leaders requesting they include $20 billion to start a nonprofit National Climate Bank. 

Authorized projects include renewable power, building efficiency, grid infrastructure like transmission, industrial decarbonization, clean transportation, reforestation and climate-resilient infrastructure. Because the dollars are repaid over time, they can be recycled to make additional investments in the future. 

With 12 million Americans still filing for unemployment due to the COVID-19 pandemic and studies showing that up to 42 percent of those jobs will not return, Congress must urgently make long term investments that create jobs and build a cleaner future. 

National polling shows eight out of 10 Americans want Congress to create clean energy jobs and seven out of 10 support depositing billions to achieve this. 

###

By Coalition for Green Capital

Maine is looking to successful financing models in other states as it seeks ways to fund a statewide energy overhaul and climate adaptation measures.

By Marina Schauffler
September 13, 2020

Green banks can help provide clean energy financing to markets that are not well served now, like low to moderate-income homeowners. Connecticut Green Bank’s Solar for All Program, for example, has helped facilitate installation of more than 2,800 residential solar power systems in the past five years. Photo courtesy of the Connecticut Green Bank.

Maine has New England’s most energy-intensive economy, expending roughly $6 billion annually – primarily on imported oil and gas for heating and transportation. Global warming could worsen the fiscal drain through a combination of rising costs and declining revenues.

The state must overhaul its energy sector to reach its climate targets for 2050, which include cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent over 1990 levels and generating all of the state’s electricity from renewable sources.

Ninety percent of heating systems and vehicles in the state need to be electrified, said Michael Stoddard, executive director of Efficiency Maine Trust, and the grid requires upgrades.

“We need to run a marathon, and we need to get started,” he said.

But the success of this race hinges on finding capital to invest.

To help finance this energy transformation, Maine may create a green bank, a nonprofit or quasi-governmental institution that uses public funds to leverage private capital for renewable energy and climate adaptation. This approach, used in more than a dozen states to date, helps “finance reach underserved parts of the market,” according to Abraham Wapner, program director at the nonprofit Coalition for Green Capital.

A green bank could help Maine meet the significant cost of “decarbonizing” Maine’s economy, which Steve Clemmer, director of energy research at the nonprofit Union of Concerned Scientists, puts in the range of $40 to 50 billion by 2050. Freedom from fossil fuel reliance would offer Maine greater economic resilience, but the upfront investment could reach $60 billion, according to a recent estimate by economist Richard Silkman.

The challenge of finding funds is compounded by an economic downturn the International Monetary Fund describes as a “crisis like no other.” Maine’s projected revenue shortfalls over the coming three years are expected to be upwards of $1.2 billion.

Ideas for stretching limited public funds surfaced this summer from the Maine Climate Council. Half of its work groups recommended that the state pursue some sort of green bank to help finance its plans for energy, buildings and climate resilience.

Hannah Pingree, co-chair of the Maine Climate Council

There’s a clear need for “significant and creative finance mechanisms,” said Hannah Pingree, council co-chair and director of the Governor’s Office of Policy Innovation and the Future. The total cost of reaching Maine’s climate targets is not yet defined as the Council is still weighing priorities and strategy timelines. A consultant recently delivered some draft figures, but those numbers can’t be shared yet because the “data is not fully complete and agreed upon,” she noted.

Pingree expects that the final climate action plan adopted by her council, due to the Legislature by Dec. 1, will recommend that Maine move quickly to identify funding gaps, determine appropriate types of climate financing, and recommend “the right venue” for new financing programs.

“Other states have shown there are opportunities,” Pingree added, describing some models as “hopeful.”

Charlie Colgan, a former Maine state economist who directs research at the Center for the Blue Economy in Monterey, Calif., agreed.

“This (challenge) is hard but it’s not impossible,” he said. “There is money available, just in places that Maine has never thought to look before.”

‘Democratizing’ clean energy

In June, roughly 100 people participated in an online Green Bank Summit to explore whether Maine might benefit from the formation of a green bank.

Green banks – by various names – have become an important tool for what is sometimes called the “democratizing” of clean energy, freeing citizens from polluting, high-cost fuels and fostering greater climate resilience in economically vulnerable communities.

Solar power, in particular, is often viewed as out of reach for lower-income homeowners and renters. While access is improving with community solar farms, where shares are not tied to home ownership, barriers remain for low-income and moderate-income Mainers who seek to rely on renewable power.

RELATED Small wood homes yield big climate benefits

Older housing often requires efficiency upgrades first, and Maine lacks the money to meet increased demand for those residential loans, Stoddard said. Nor does Efficiency Maine have the capital to make low- or no-interest loans for solar installations.

Hoping to gain new financing ideas, Maine is looking to states that have successfully mobilized more capital for energy efficiency, renewable power and climate adaptation.

Models of innovation

Connecticut Green Bank (CGB), the nation’s first such institution, has deployed more than $1.7 billion toward clean energy projects since its formation in 2011, directing much of it toward low and moderate-income households, and small businesses for projects such as solar power generation and energy-efficient retrofits. For every public dollar invested, said its president, Bryan Garcia, eight dollars of private investment on average has been raised.

Bryan Garcia, president and CEO of the Connecticut Green Bank

Recognizing the limitations of public funding and the need for rapid climate progress, CGB is now “asking taxpayers to invest with us,” Garcia said. In July, it launched an inaugural $16 million issuance of low-denomination “Green Liberty Bonds.” The bank sought to “give people something beyond the ballot box” to support climate action, Garcia noted, and they responded; within two weeks, the bonds had sold out.

The bank’s latest bond offering builds on nearly a decade of work and a “track record established across different programs,” Garcia acknowledged. Just moving from legislative approval to operations took the better part of CGB’s first two years, he recalled, given that “a lot of new operating procedures” are involved when a financial entity scales up to serve new markets.

Other green banks also develop financing for climate adaptation projects such as road or pump station elevations, green infrastructure like living shorelines, backup power options, stormwater management and urban tree planting.

Maine could establish a bank that funded both clean energy and resilience infrastructure, said Keith Bisson, president of the Maine-based nonprofit Coastal Enterprises, Inc.

The Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank, which grew out of a Clean Water Finance Agency, offers municipalities loans at rates from 20 to 33 percent below market so they can implement measures to build resilience, said Jeffrey Diehl, its executive director, recognizing that “a dollar invested today (in climate adaptation) saves you six dollars down the line.”

The bank also contracts with engineers who are “loaned” to municipalities to help them “prioritize, write requests for proposals, interpret energy audits and oversee (renewable energy) installations,” Diehl said.

Fitting into the financial landscape

While each green bank is structured differently, most work with community banks and credit unions to lower barriers to lending – using loan guarantees or loan loss reservesthat reduce lenders’ risks, and aggregating loans to increase their appeal to investors. These approaches can help convince bankers and investors that “putting their capital to work for clean energy isn’t as risky as they think it is,” Garcia said.

(Lowering barriers to lending helps convince private investors that) putting their capital to work for clean energy isn’t as risky as they think it is.”

— Bryan Garcia, president of Connecticut Green Bank

Garcia recommends that states create a dedicated finance entity whose “sole focus is climate.” But Pingree isn’t prepared to say whether Maine will need to “create a super-organization to do all this,” or whether a more decentralized approach might work – housing new finance programs within entities such as Finance Authority of Maine (FAME), Maine Municipal Bond Bank and Efficiency Maine Trust.

David Gibson, who organized the recent online meeting, and, in a prior job, led efforts to create the Nevada Clean Energy Fund, anticipates that representatives of Maine’s finance agencies will need to discuss at length the benefits and downsides of various structures. Wherever the fund is ultimately housed, he said, it’s critical that it be led by people with a background in finance, investment and banking.

Maine also needs to commit to capitalize the bank from the outset, Gibson said. Nevada created a structure that “sat for two or three years before there was funding” from local and national foundations to get it operational.

Funds from the feds?

Most green banks are launched with public money that can be largely self-sustaining when used as a revolving loan fund. While state resources are in short supply, Maine could dedicate federal dollars to establish a bank if the state receives further pandemic recovery support.

The House of Representatives recently passed a Moving Forward Act that includes an amendment to “establish a national climate bank to finance targeted deployment of clean energy and other decarbonization technologies and climate-resilient infrastructure.” The bank would fund its own projects and help capitalize state and local green banks.

Wapner, at the Coalition for Green Capital, sees momentum building for a national climate bank, which is supported by Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

 “Come January, there’s a very real chance that money could come available,” Wapner said.

State Treasurer Henry Beck would like Maine to have completed the strategic planning necessary to take advantage of that opportunity.

“I feel a sense of urgency if there is going to be federal funding available for clean energy (for Maine) to quantify the need and see where there are gaps,” he said.

Other federal actions could shape state financing, noted Clemmer, citing how an extension of tax credits for electric vehicles, energy efficiency and solar installations could help support loan programs in Maine. A federal infrastructure bill might complement state-level investments in the grid, climate resilience measures and EV charging.

Starting in-state

During the last session, the Maine Legislature’s Joint Standing Committee on Energy, Utilities and Technology considered a bill, LD 1634, to create a Maine Clean Energy Fund capitalized through a $100 million general fund bond issue. The Committee amended the bill into a resolve that the Maine Climate Council should assess financing options – a measure tabled when the Legislature adjourned early.

Rep. Stanley Paige Zeigler (D-Waldo County)

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Stanley Paige Zeigler (D–Waldo County), is concerned that all Mainers get ready access to cleaner, more affordable power, and he sees a green bank as helping. There are “tons of ways we could fund this,” he said, with options that extend well beyond bonds and federal grants.

Maine already uses proceeds from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to fund millions in efficiency upgrades (through loans and incentives administered by Efficiency Maine). While Maine has not formally signed onto the Transportation Climate Initiative, a counterpart to RGGI focused on reducing vehicular emissions, that effort could potentially generate ongoing funds for clean energy and climate adaptation.

Other funding ideas include fees on oil and gas wholesalers for carbon dioxide emissions and – as CGB has demonstrated – investments from individuals. In Maine, Bisson has found an “appetite among people to put their money to work” here.

“We’re increasingly seeing banks getting more involved in clean energy financing,” he said.

While few green banks are attracting institutional investors, according to Wapner, that partnership could over time bring major capital. Gibson said that as of December 2019, the Maine Public Employee Retirement System had $1 billion invested in fossil fuels, which it has been under pressure for years to divest.

Some states have forged partnerships with utilities that front money for efficiency or solar projects, then recoup those expenses from customers through on-bill financing. Zeigler doesn’t see that option working in Maine because public trust in the state’s largest utility, Central Maine Power Co., is so low.

Some Maine municipalities offer PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy) loans to homeowners, which allows them to finance energy upgrades through loans secured against the property and collected through property taxes. But banks can resist having mortgages subordinated to the loan. A bill to create a commercial PACE loan program in Maine advanced in the Legislature last session but was tabled in the March adjournment.

Depending on what happens with carbon markets in coming years, Garcia sees great potential for Maine’s abundant forests and regenerative agricultural lands to be valued – in global markets – for their capacity to hold and store carbon. That could open new opportunities for investing in land conservation. At least one land trust in Maine has sold forest carbon offsets to expand its land stewardship work.

‘How our lives could be better’

Maine is enduring a summer of record-breaking heat and persistent drought, making the prospect of a warming world less abstract. A recent poll of 500 residents found that 77 percent are concerned about climate change.

That concern may be magnified by the coronavirus epidemic that has already claimed the lives of nearly 200,000 Americans. Maine voters are sensitive to climate, Beck said, and now “people have seen governmental failure to respond to a natural disaster.”

Yet even as more people confront climate impacts, talk of “decarbonizing the economy” and “meeting climate targets” can seem abstract. A stronger selling point for this change, said Bisson, is ‘how our lives could be better.”

The prospect of clean, reliable and local energy could mean fewer and shorter outages, and more accessible backup power. Add in cleaner air, better buildings, quieter vehicles, more resilient farms and businesses, strong job growth and a planet more likely to remain livable, and the full payback becomes more apparent.

The upfront investment needed to get there is unprecedented, Stoddard said, noting that the dire ecological and economic situation requires an overwhelming response.

How fast could Maine propel an energy transition with creative financing?

As Bisson said, “What COVID has shown us is how quickly we can adapt when we need to.”

By Coalition for Green Capital

By Peter Behr

Aug. 31, 2020 

A very unusual bond offering hit the market last month: $16.8 million in $1,000 chunks offered first to ordinary investors, a strategy that reached back to the public war bonds that helped the U.S. bankroll World War II.

They are called Green Liberty Bonds, issued by a state-backed nonprofit called the Connecticut Green Bank to add capital to the bank’s campaign to fund rooftop solar panels on the state’s homes and business.

The bonds were snapped up, even with the state shut down by the COVID-19 pandemic that forced the bank to market them with online webinars. Nearly $10 million worth were purchased by individual investors, with the proceeds going to help fund the bank’s programs.

The bond sale is an innovation from the Connecticut Green Bank, which is pioneering an unconventional strategy for using state policy to accelerate investments in clean energy at the community level, said bank President Bryan Garcia. The bank’s complex program structure includes solar installations, home energy investments and renewing hydroelectric dams on state rivers.

With state budgets hit hard by the pandemic, the transition is essential, Garcia said in an interview. “Government isn’t going to solve this problem, so we have to enable more private investment to come in to finance clean energy so we can scale it up and get it deployed,” he added.

Instead of tapping the federal budget for support, as the Obama administration did a decade ago with its clean energy stimulus grants and loan guarantees, the Connecticut strategy is to entice commercial bank lending to accelerate clean energy investments. The private loans are coupled with federal solar tax credits where they can be used, an assessment on Connecticut ratepayers that comes to under $10 a year, and state greenhouse gas reduction credits.

“The prior model was just giving the money away,” Garcia said. A dozen other states and the District of Columbia have followed Connecticut’s lead with a green bank or similar strategy. Green lending is part of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s energy platform and the climate platforms of House and Senate Democratic leadership (Climatewire, Aug. 26).

Last month, the House authorized creation of a federal green bank to be funded with an initial $20 billion stake. Two dozen state governors acting through the U.S. Climate Alliance wrote congressional leaders calling for enactment of a similar measure in the Senate.

“The momentum for a national climate bank is stronger than it’s ever been in more than a half-dozen years” of pressing the strategy with Congress, said Jeffrey Schub, executive director of the Coalition for Green Capital.

The program poses a contrarian question for Biden and progressives on his side: Does green energy need an infusion of green capitalism to hit its far-reaching climate and job growth targets?

And it may offer a counterpoint to accusations that Biden and his party would turn clean energy programs into socialism, said Reed Hundt, a director of the bank and former Clinton administration official who is considered a father of the green bank strategy. “The green bank is designed to accelerate market trends, not fight them,” Hundt said.

More support for solar

Between the Connecticut bank’s formation in 2014 and mid-2019, it has spent $260 million on its agenda while raising $1.42 billion from banks and other private investors, according to its most recent audited financial statement. It has funded solar panels and other projects for more than 40,000 homes and 375 businesses in the state, generating $87 million in state taxes. The clean energy projects will reduce carbon emissions equal to the reductions from removing 1.1 million vehicles from the road, the bank said.

The added solar power is still a fraction of the state’s power generation, which totals 10,464 megawatts, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. But according to solar developer James Moore, it has opened an important door for residential solar development.

“What the Green Bank has done has shown leadership in ways to make more projects work financially for Connecticut business and homeowners, that leverages private financing as well,” said Moore, co-president of SunCommon in Waterbury, Vt. His company’s solar unit installations in Vermont and New York’s Hudson Valley approach 100 MW.

Soon after Connecticut’s green bank opened, Garcia met with members of the state’s banking association, who were not happy with the new competition.

“They said, ‘The last thing we want is another state bank standing in front of our business,’ and I was like, ‘Whoa. Well, my goal is to enable more of your private capital investment to solve the problems that the state is trying to address, which is climate and clean energy,'” Garcia said.

Over the past decade, banks and credit unions have become a lot more comfortable with solar lending, which is winning a place alongside car, mortgage and home improvement loans, Moore said.

The steep decline in the costs of solar power to customers, compared with utility electricity rates, created a built-in dividend that property owners can tap either by buying or leasing solar units, Garcia said.

The bank’s C-PACE solar program looks to private banks to fund an approved solar installation. The costs are spread over a 15-20-year term, like a mortgage, but are added to the owner’s property tax bill. The payments go to the bank, which reimburses the private lender.

Garcia said that for a typical customer, solar installation in the state now delivers power at 12 to 13 cents per kilowatt-hour, 6 cents better than the utility’s bill.

“The solar contracts deliver a predictable value over a long period of time,” Moore said, with the rooftop electricity offsetting a large part of the monthly electricity bill. Customers “know they will be able to offset a large portion of their electric bill for decades to come.”

“The banks see they can get positive cash flow from day one,” he added.

Shouldering risk

In moving to a climate bank strategy, Connecticut officials are accepting the opposite sides of the lending equation. They have gained the leverage of a fivefold increase in clean energy investments thanks to the impact of borrowed capital, but have exposed the state and its citizens to the risks of customer delinquency and default. A collision between leverage and risk played out disastrously in the 2008 mortgage banking collapse.

“To engage private investors into this market, somebody had to take the risk,” Garcia said. If a solar customer can’t keep up loan repayment, the private investors are paid first, the Green Bank last. “If the household stops paying the bill, who is left holding the bag? The Connecticut Green Bank,” he said. “We are first at risk for non-repayment.”

He cited the bank’s capital, $211 million for the fiscal year ending June 2019, as the foundation of its strength. “We fully believe people will pay us back,” he said.

But it was clear the pandemic’s huge impact on the economy created a new, unimagined test. The business shutdown in Connecticut reduced electricity rates. The state’s unemployment rate soared from 3.8% in February to 10.2% in July.

Before this year, the default rate on the bank’s projects averaged 1% or less, its audit reported.

“When COVID hit, every financial institution took a look at, what are the risks of non-repayment?” Garcia said. Bank policymakers came up with a plan that gave solar customers an option to defer payments due this year, adding a year to the end of the lease period, he said. “We want to help customers manage through this challenging time,” the bank president said.

Connecticut Green Bank reported that 10 property owners in the main solar unit program, representing $11.8 million in installations or 16% of the total loan program, inquired about the deferral program. Seven ultimately received six-month extensions in payments.

“So far very few [customers] have come to us and said they needed to restructure their payment this year because they were struggling,” Garcia said. “Knock on wood.”

“Worrying about [defaults] is like worrying about fraud in mailed-in ballots,” said Hundt. “It’s fantasy.”

By Jeffrey Schub

One of the distinguishing features of the National Climate Bank Act is that it funds an independent, nonpartisan non-profit to operate as the country’s national green bank. It does not create a new agency or government owned-corporation. This is a very intentional and critical design element, and last week the Australian government shows us why.

In a new “Orwellian” proposal, the Australian Energy Minister introduced legislation that will provide its national green bank with AUD 1 billion in new capital to finance an expanded list of eligible technologies that now includes natural gas and coal-fired generation.

The green bank, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), has driven nearly $20B into renewable, efficiency, transmission, and sustainable agriculture projects, among many other innovative solutions. It is the world’s largest and most successful national green bank, proving out the model, expanding clean energy markets, lowering GHG emissions, and mobilizing private investment.

Unfortunately, the CEFC was established as a government-owned corporation, with the national government in control of its charter and investment mandate. The result has meant that since the day it was created, it has been fighting for its continued existence and climate-focused mission.

As politics and control of government has changed in Australia, so too have attitudes towards the CEFC. Opponents have tried to shut it down, change its mission, sell it and increase its required rate of return so as to shrink the market for viable investments. The fact that the organization has persisted and continued to invest effectively is a testament to the CEFC’s leadership and professional staff.

But it’s also a huge warning sign to those in the U.S. hoping to implement lasting climate finance policies. A government-owned corporation or agency within government can easily be dismantled, shut down or countermanded as politics change. Look at the DOE Loan Programs Office, for example. This kind of political interference is particularly harmful to any finance-based policy solution like a green bank, where long-term stability and reliability is essential for partnership from market actors.

This is precisely why the National Climate Bank must be an independent nonpartisan non-profit. If we want it to survive the inevitable political change that comes and goes over the next decade, any financing solution placed within the federal government itself just won’t cut it.

By Coalition for Green Capital

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Aug. 25, 2020  
press@cgcstagingsite.wpengine.com

Senate Climate Committee Backs New National Climate Bank Nonprofit
Mirrors House Climate Crisis Committee Action Plan Rec 

New initiative would create 5M jobs, with requirement to prioritize investment in frontline and communities of color

WASHINGTON —The Senate Democrats’ Special Committee on the Climate Crisis has included a National Climate Bank nonprofit in its blueprint on how to solve the climate crisis while putting millions back to work. In its report, the committee wrote, “Green banks and climate banks have proven to be effective tools for leveraging clean energy investment, and Congress should act to further expand such tools.”

Earlier this summer, the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis included the National Climate Bank nonprofit in its action plan. A day later, the chamber passed its infrastructure bill that provided $20 billion to start the nonprofit. 

“Momentum has never been stronger to start a National Climate Bank—nor has the urgency. America needs jobs that build a cleaner and better future now, and this is a proven way to do it,” Coalition for Green Capital Executive Director Jeffrey Schub said. “Now is the time for the Senate to finish the job and take up the House-passed bill that provided $20 billion for the National Climate Bank.”

In July, Democratic Presidential Candidate Joe Biden backed the concept and his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris, has cosponsored the National Climate Bank Act in the Senate. 

Nearly 100 organizations have sent a letter to U.S. Senate leaders requesting future economic recovery legislation include such funding. With tens of millions of Americans filing for unemployment due to the COVID-19 pandemic so far and studies showing that up to 42 percent of those jobs will not return, the groups argue that Congress must urgently make long term investments that create jobs and build a cleaner future.

As envisioned in H.R. 5416 and S. 2057, the green bank nonprofit model would pair each public dollar with multiple private ones to build a range of clean energy projects throughout the U.S. This includes renewable power, building efficiency, grid infrastructure like transmission, industrial decarbonization, clean transportation, reforestation and climate-resilient infrastructure. Because the dollars are repaid over time, they can be recycled to make additional investments in the future. 

A significant portion of investment must go to low-income, frontline and communities of color. This means benefits and job creation will be prioritized in climate-impacted communities, many of which have also been hard hit by the COVID-19 pandemic.

###