Why Electrification Could Cost the Pacific Northwest More Than It Bargained For

The push toward a fully electrified, zero-emissions future is firmly established in Oregon, Washington and British Columbia. The region has committed to ambitious climate goals, including phasing out fossil-fuel-generated electricity and requiring all new vehicle sales to be electric by 2035. While these goals may appear visionary, the costs of achieving them—as detailed in a recent report by the Discovery Institute’s Center on Wealth & Poverty—may cripple the regional economy and deliver negligible climate benefits.

Skyrocketing Electricity Demand

One of the central insights from the report is that full electrification will more than double the region's electricity demand by 2050. This surge will be driven by widespread adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) and the electrification of residential and commercial heating systems using heat pumps.

The Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee's latest forecast projects a 30% increase in electricity demand over the next decade, rising from approximately 23,700 average megawatts (aMW) in 2024 to about 31,100 aMW by 2033. This surge is primarily driven by the rapid expansion of data centers, growth in high-tech manufacturing, and increased electrification in buildings and transportation.  The forecast underscores the need for significant enhancements in power generation and transmission infrastructure to meet the escalating demand.

According to the Discovery report, even under conservative assumptions, electricity consumption from EV charging alone would add over 38,000 GWh annually—about 27% more than current consumption. When space and water heating are included, total additional consumption exceeds 54,000 GWh, marking a 40% increase over 2023 levels. Peak demand could double, requiring vast new generation and storage infrastructure to maintain system reliability.

Renewable Realities and Infrastructure Challenges

Meeting this demand with renewables poses substantial challenges. Oregon, Washington and British Columbia plan to replace fossil-fuel generation primarily with wind and solar power. However, the report highlights the fundamental flaw of relying on these intermittent sources: their production often doesn’t align with peak demand, particularly in the early evening when solar power is unavailable, and wind conditions are unreliable.

To ensure reliability, massive overbuilding of generation and storage is necessary. The study estimates that achieving electrification solely through renewables would require 66,000 MW of wind, 147,000 MW of solar, and 153,000 MW of battery storage—representing a more than 700% increase over current capacity. Land use implications are significant as well, with up to one-third of the area east of the Cascades needed for energy infrastructure.

Transmission is another major hurdle. Renewable generation sites in eastern Oregon and Washington would require extensive and expensive transmission upgrades to deliver power to urban centers west of the Cascades. The Bonneville Power Administration estimates $145,000 per MW in transmission costs alone.

Comparing Cost Scenarios

The report evaluates three scenarios for achieving the 2050 goals: a renewables-only path, a low-cost renewables scenario (assuming a 50% decline in technology costs), and a more pragmatic path incorporating nuclear and natural gas. The cost differences are staggering.

• Renewables Only: $550 billion in additional costs

• Lower-Cost Renewables: $418 billion

• Nuclear and Natural Gas Mix: $86 billion
  

These figures do not include the cost of upgrading local distribution systems, which will be required to support new peak loads from EVs and heat pumps. Moreover, utility rate structures mean that investor-owned utilities will earn profits based on capital investment. This creates incentives to overbuild, ultimately passing the cost onto consumers.

The Burden on Households and Businesses

For ratepayers, the impact will be tangible. The report projects a typical residential electricity bill will rise from $110 per month to over $700 by 2050—a 450% increase. Commercial customers can expect their monthly bills to jump from $600 to around $3,800. These increases will not be offset by savings from eliminated gas bills, especially since electric systems will need to be overbuilt for reliability.

This cost burden will ripple across the economy. Energy-intensive industries could relocate, following the path of manufacturers fleeing California and parts of Europe due to soaring energy costs. Job losses, increased consumer prices, and rising energy poverty could become the new norm in the Pacific Northwest.

For example, in 2021, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors requested an analysis to inform potential policies for reducing or eliminating the use of natural gas appliances and to provide financial or other incentives to homeowners for the purchase and use of electric appliances.  Applying these cost estimates to an estimated 240,231 housing units that use natural gas for some or all of their appliances in San Francisco (76,470 single family homes and 163,761 multi-family), the citywide cost to retrofit all residential units currently using natural gas-fueled appliances with those fueled by electricity ranges from $3.5 to $5.9 billion. The city has yet to move forward with their plans.

Climate Gains: Symbolic at Best

Perhaps the most sobering conclusion of the study is the limited environmental return on this enormous investment. Even if Oregon, Washington and British Columbia were to completely eliminate their combined energy-related greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the effect on global emissions would be negligible—equivalent to just three weeks of current worldwide emissions.

The projected temperature reduction? A mere 0.003°C — well below the margin of error of most thermometers.  This is also true of specific policy proposals according to studies done in specific communities.  In July 2022, the City of Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability published a technical memo showing a 1% emission reduction benefit by 2050 of banning natural gas in all new construction. This assumes 100% electric grid goals met.  At the same time, the City of Eugene disclosed analysis showing the potential benefit of banning natural gas in new construction to be a 0.1% of emission reduction for residential and 1.7% emission reduction for commercial in 2037.  Again, this assumes 100% clean electric goals met.

A Better Path Forward?

Given these findings, the authors recommend a more balanced approach focused on reliable, lower-cost generation from nuclear and natural gas. While not emissions-free in the case of gas, these sources offer dependable capacity, avoid the massive land-use impacts of renewables, and come at a fraction of the cost.

Policymakers in Oregon and Washington face a stark choice: continue down a path that promises high costs, economic disruption, and little environmental benefit — or recalibrate their goals with a focus on practical, cost-effective solutions.

Conclusion

Electrification and net-zero policies are noble in intent but potentially disastrous in execution if not grounded in economic and technical reality. This comprehensive analysis shows that the Pacific Northwest, including British Columbia, risks trading reliable, affordable energy for symbolic climate action with massive financial consequences. A more prudent, diversified approach toward decarbonization is the key to a sustainable and economically viable future.