Faith & Clean Energy Campaign Kickoff

Tuesday, October 24 at St. Olaf Catholic Church, 215 8th St. S., Minneapolis, MN  55402. Registration and lunch begins at 11:30 AM. Livestream is available for the program from noon to 2 pm. 

RSVP: Click HERE to RSVP<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeQO0NPUR4ZoOEei_VJtRgY0sw7WBLmtIye8id3Zf_jtxp7nQ/viewform>

WHO SHOULD PARTICIPATE:   Leaders in congregations – pastors, youth leaders, other staff, lay leaders, congregants who can help lead on clean energy

WHAT TO EXPECT:

*  Learn more about what YOU can do at a practical level in your church to move Minnesota into much more renewable energy

*  Learn about bipartisan legislation related to clean energy in Minnesota

*  Strategize about what the faith community can do to pass that legislation in 2017

*  Participate in a press conference

Sponsors: Lutheran Advocacy – Minnesota; Minnesota Interfaith Power and Light; Ecofaith Network of the Minneapolis Area Lutheran Synod; ISAIAH; EcoFaith Network of the Northeastern Minnesota Lutheran Synod

Current Actions: Faith Letter for Clean Energy

Please sign a letter and add a note<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bfpI669bQEEq6XyKZA9eYHPxAndpiNdKNLEX13cJJ9c/edit> for legislators in support of an improved Renewable Energy Standard.

Then invite other people of faith, especially faith leaders!

Background:

The Renewable Energy Standard (RES) Minnesota passed in 2007 with broad bipartisan support, mandate that 25% of Minnesota’s energy come from renewable sources by 2025 (30% for Xcel Energy). Minnesota is on target to exceed the mandate, and various studies have shown that Minnesota could dramatically increase renewable energy usage without sacrificing reliability or causing grid issues. Wind is Minnesota’s cheapest energy, and now solar is also competitive. Bipartisan legislation for an updated RES of 50% renewable energy by 2030 was introduced during the 2017 legislative session. Unfortunately, several current state legislators oppose these changes based on outdated concerns, cost misunderstandings, and significant pressure from fossil fuel campaign contributors.