Why is Connecticut No. 1 in the cost of electricity among the 48 lower states? Here are 7 reasons

Connecticut’s electricity prices are the highest among the lower 48 states, exasperating consumers and business owners and hampering economic development.

Jet engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney, for example, cited lower electricity costs when the subsidiary of Raytheon Technologies Corp. announced last year it will build an energy-devouring manufacturing plant in North Carolina rather than in its home state of Connecticut.

In 2019, the most recent year for which data are available, electricity in Connecticut cost about 18.7 cents a kilowatt hour, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. It’s cheaper than what residents of Alaska and Hawaii paid, but is more than double the price in Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska and elsewhere.

Cold winters, end of the line and zero-carbon power

Cold winters drive up demand — and the cost — of natural gas to fuel power plants; being at the end of natural gas pipelines adds to transit costs; and public policy is boosting costlier low- or zero-carbon power such as solar and nuclear. That’s only the start.

Ironically, electricity is increasingly expensive as wholesale prices fall due to lower demand, improved energy efficiency and rising use of renewable energy such as solar power. Transmission costs have soared more than six-fold between 2004 and 2019, according to the New England Power Generators Association.

Costs related to the electricity transmission and distribution systems that connect power plants with consumers are for construction, which is higher in the Northeast where land for generators is costlier and the price of labor is higher; operation and maintenance that includes repairing damage related to accidents or extreme storms; and improving cybersecurity, the power generators group said.

Another cited by the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection is that federal energy regulators allow an “unreasonably high” return on equity — a measure of the profitability of a corporation relative to stockholders’ equity — for transmission costs, ranging from 10.5% to nearly 12%.

Transmission costs in New England have risen from $869 million in 2008 to $2.3 billion a decade later, DEEP said.

In addition, electricity customers pay for transmission congestion that cost $205 million from 2015 to 2019, said Amy McLean, Connecticut director and senior policy advocate at the Acadia Center, a clean energy advocacy group.

 

Read the full article in the Hartford Courant here

Panelists discuss natural gas, heat pumps during virtual talk

BELFAST, Maine — The city’s Climate Crisis Committee and Belfast Free Library hosted a talk with four panelists March 29 called “After Summit: How Do We Get to Carbon Neutrality by 2045?” which looked at the relative merits of natural gas and heat pumps as heating sources.

It was prompted by Summit Natural Gas’s proposing, then rescinding, its estimated $90 million natural gas pipeline expansion through the Midcoast. The roughly 30 people who attended the forum had the chance to ask panelists questions and share comments.

The panelists were Matt Marks, executive director of the Association of General Contractors of Maine and a representative on the Maine Climate Council; Dan Sosland, president of the Acadia Center; Andy Meyer, senior program manager and expert in heat pumps with Efficiency Maine; and Jonathan Fulford, member of the executive committee of the Sierra Club’s Maine chapter.

Read the full article in the Republican Journal here

After passing a landmark climate law, officials now face the hard part: how to wean the state off of fossil fuels

Over the coming decades, the state’s largest utilities have plans to spend billions of dollars upgrading a vast network of aging pipes and mains that distribute natural gas, after billions they’ve already spent in recent years.

But much of those plans clash with a landmark bill that Governor Charlie Baker signed last month that requires the state to effectively eliminate its carbon emissions by 2050.

Some environmental advocates and lawmakers fear that continued investments in gas infrastructure could hinder the transition to renewable energy and leave ratepayers covering the costs of an obsolete energy system for decades. They support repairing leaky pipes and those that pose a danger to the public, but they’re pressing the utilities to spend far more on zero-emissions technologies.

….

Environmental advocates have said they worry utilities are trying to steer the state toward solutions that would allow them to continue to retain control of the market. They questioned, for example, utilities’ suggestions that they could repurpose their system to distribute hydrogen, which is highly combustible, expensive, and far more likely to leak.

They’re also pressing ISO New England, which operates the regional power grid, to change its rules to make it easier for renewable energy sources, especially offshore wind, to compete with gas, which has been a favored source of energy because of its relatively low cost and reliability.

Without changes to the rules, it’s unlikely the state will meet its emissions obligations under the new climate law, they said.

“If offshore wind is given a chance to compete, it will save ratepayers billions of dollars,” said Deborah Donovan, a senior policy advocate at the Acadia Center in Boston. “We need the ISO to help us achieve the state’s goals.”

Read the full article in the Boston Globe here

New England Power Grid Operator Shelling out Millions on Salaries

The organization that oversees New England’s power grid — essentially the same role as the one blamed for Texas’s winter electricity woes — is being zapped by advocates for its executives’ sky-high salaries and a lack of transparency.

ISO New England CEO Gordon van Welie was the recipient of a total of $2,305,770 as of the last tax filing made public by the nonprofit, which was for 2019. Executive VP and COO Vamsi Chadalavada hauled in $1,746,314.

Another four employees made more than $800,000, and 38 people made more than $100,000 — including eight of the nonprofit’s board members. Various nonprofit-governance publications say it’s unusual for nonprofit board members to be paid, but not illegal.

A Delaware-organized nonprofit, ISO New England is funded largely by fees off the top of residents’ electricity bills, and brought in $194 million in 2019.

ISO NE, which says it takes just over a dollar a month from the average ratepayer in fees, defended its bigwigs’ pay.

….

Progressive environmental advocates have their own issues with ISO NE, mainly around transparency and what they see as a slowness to embrace green energy.

“The board members are well compensated and there’s an opaqueness as to the way they operate,” Jeremy McDiarmid of the Northeast Clean Energy Council told the Herald.

He cited a lack of public access to some board meetings, and what he said was just a general lack of responsiveness to groups looking to engage with them. And, he said, the ISOs are essentially the gatekeepers for what energy is going to customers — so if people want it to be cleaner and greener — and locally produced — this is the place to start.

In that vein, Deborah Donovan of Acadia Center said she worries that the board has taken on a focus of “reliability — to the exclusion of everything else,” including the cost to consumers and the inclusion of green energy.

“We’re paying too much for the wrong thing,” she said.

Read the full article in the Boston Herald here

How Massachusetts Can Make this Decade Count: Acadia Center Weighs in on the Interim CECP

Overview

As the decade opens, Massachusetts is breaking new ground in climate policy with stronger, legally binding carbon emission targets and an ambitious 10-year plan that will set the course for a just, equitable, and decarbonized economy by 2030. These advances are the outcome of several years of focused advocacy, analysis, and stakeholder engagement. Acadia Center is pleased to have been a leader in this process through ACES coalition engagement, as an original member of the Implementation Advisory Committee, and by drafting and organizing comments on the Interim Clean Energy and Climate Plan (CECP) for 2030.

Overall, Acadia Center believes that the interim Clean Energy and Climate Plan (CECP) provides the Commonwealth and its stakeholders a solid basis upon which to advance climate policy. Acadia Center provided extensive detailed comments to the Plan, including several overarching points:

  • With the passage of S.30 into law on March 26, 2021, Acadia Center recommends EEA update its Roadmap Modeling scenarios and issue a final 2030 CECP that accounts for the more stringent, science based 50% economy-wide target and the new statutory requirements related to all major carbon-emitting sectors; and
  • Acadia Center urges EEA to refine the final CECP’s specificity regarding how the state will achieve the components of the plan. This should include: establishing the timing for each action in the plan, identifying the agency or department responsible for overseeing the action, estimating any additional funding necessary, and determining the need for additional statutory or regulatory authority to fully implement all actions in the plan.

The bulk of Acadia Center’s comments focused on buildings and energy supply.   Acadia Center is committed to supporting the effective implementation of the final CECP for 2030 through engagement with the Executive Office for Energy and Environmental Affairs and other responsible agencies and the many interested and affected stakeholders seeking to ensure that Massachusetts reaches its 2030 climate goals and set the state on a path to reaching a net-zero economy.

Transforming our Buildings

As Massachusetts prepares to implement an unprecedented policy program to reach zero net emissions by 2050, the targets included in the interim CECP for the buildings sector are appropriately ambitious. Acadia Center commends the Commonwealth for recognizing the critical role that a decarbonized commercial and residential building stock will play in reducing overall emissions. Buildings account for nearly a third of the Commonwealth’s annual emissions, and rapid building electrification is the only reasonable way to eliminate these emissions.

Acadia Center presented a number of recommendations for the interim CECP’s approach to building electrification, including:

  • The creation of a specific framework for electrifying one million homes and 300-400 million square feet of commercial real estate by 2030;
  • The necessity of a regulatory or legislative target to ensure rapid progress and jump-start the marketplace for zero-emissions-ready technologies in buildings;
  • Address Mass Save program’s design and cost-effectiveness accounting methods that may limit electrification;
  • Prioritize weatherization, supported by strong education and awareness campaign and implemented through expanding workforce development and jobs;
  • Use solid data to carefully track the progress of the deployment of the measures in buildings;
  • Fully prepare for the challenges in electrifying and weatherizing older, substandard housing;
  • Target improving housing in environmental justice communities and make it possible for renters to participate in weatherization and electrification programs; and
  • Revisit electric rate design to ensure that electric rates reflect and support the Commonwealth’s electrification policy goals.

Transforming our Energy Supply

Similarly, Acadia Center reviewed the interim CECP’s plans to achieve the 2030 target through strategies aimed at the state’s Energy Supply.  A successfully decarbonized electric grid will serve as the backbone to economy-wide decarbonization efforts in the building and transportation sectors. Acadia Center’s comments on the Energy Supply sector focused on the need to ensure continued progress in meeting the Commonwealth’s renewable energy procurement targets while ensuring proper siting and equitable outcomes. The comments also reinforced the need for significant reforms of both the regional market and the distribution-level system.

Acadia Center detailed its concerns regarding the interim CECP’s lack of commitment to further deployment of clean energy generation beyond what is already planned in anticipation of future market reforms. Those regional reform processes, particularly at the ISO-NE level, are likely to take years, and this should not be a justification to pause or curtail renewable generation procurements in the meantime.

Acadia Center’s comments presented a range of recommendations about Energy Supply, including:

  • Expand solar power while protecting farmland and forests, incentivizing development on contaminated and brownfield sites, and providing stakeholders with clarity, predictability, and technical assistance to address siting challenges;
  • Extend the applicability of the state’s climate and clean energy policies to include Municipal Light Plants;
  • Require that future imported energy under the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) be subject to stringent attribute accounting procedures and tracking systems;
  • Explore using existing and possibly new transmission resources in a bi-directional method to employ existing Canadian hydropower as a form of pumped storage; and
  • Exclude additional buildout of hydroelectric impoundment dams in Canada and elsewhere from eligibility in procurements and other clean energy policies.

Acadia Center-led Coalition Comments on the Future of Gas

Acadia Center was the lead author and coordinator of coalition comments focusing on the need for the CECP to address the use of natural gas in buildings. The Commonwealth continues to use gas in buildings for space heating water heating and other uses, contributing to more than 18% of the state’s emissions as of 2016.  Yet gas companies continue to build new pipelines and solicit new customers, who install new gas equipment, which in turn increases emissions, damages public health, and locks in more stranded assets each year.  Acadia Center and 37 co-signers urged the Commonwealth to add clarity to the goals of the CECP as they relate to gas, so future planning will take into account the Commonwealth’s targets.  The specific recommendations include:

  • Creating a cross sector infrastructure plan that addresses both the increase in demand for electricity through electrification and winding down of gas use in buildings;
  • Retaining an independent consultant to support EEA’s capacity to address the public’s needs and as a counterbalance to the gas companies’ consultants engaged in the DPU’s inquiry into the future of gas companies;
  • Focus on electrification rather than alternative fuels like hydrogen and renewable natural gas to reduce emissions in buildings;
  • Require accurate accounting for methane leakage from the gas pipeline and distribution system
  • Design the next Mass Save 3 year plan with the gas phase out in mind;
  • Accurately and holistically account for the costs of the health impacts cause by maintaining or expanding gas infrastructure; and
  • Provide realistic and well-publicized pathways away from gas for low-income and other marginalized households.

Other Joint Coalition Comments

Acadia Center contributed to and signed on to the following joint comments with a broad range of advocacy and activist groups on both transportation and environmental justice.

Transportation recommendations prioritized a multi-pronged approach to reducing transportation emissions, including tailpipe pollution that disproportionately harms marginalized communities and greater emphasis on public transit.  These provisions include:

  • Expanding public transit service and electrifying transit buses and trains;
  • Ensuring equitable and timely investment through the Transportation and Climate Initiative Program;
  • Increasing EV sales goals to 50% by 2030;
  • Modifying EV rebate programs to accelerate deployment and expand access to electric mobility options;
  • Accelerating the coordinated deployment of EV charging stations;
  • Prioritizing electrification of cars, trucks, buses and private fleets in environmental justice (EJ) communities;
  • Implementing strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT); and
  • Improving and expanding public transportation and biking and pedestrian infrastructure.

Environmental Justice recommendations focused on the need to center and prioritize justice, equity and worker rights in the CECP to address unequal burdens to impacted and vulnerable communities and avoid further harms to those communities as Massachusetts transitions toward a pollution-free economy.  Among the many important recommendations are the following:

  • Improve community engagement and EJ considerations in infrastructure siting
  • Require diverse hiring and workforce development practices across all sectors to achieve quality jobs
  • Not assume that any biogenic feedstocks are “zero emission” or “net zero”
  • Prioritize investments in overburdened and underserved communities
  • Address the environmental justice and low-income needs for public transit, EV incentives, electrification of public transit fleets and school buses, diesel phase out, alternative transportation modes
  • Address heating fuel emissions from existing buildings, and provide funding and other support for LMI and EJ populations
  • Focus Mass Save/Energy Efficiency programs on pre-electrification, weatherization, and electrification
  • Remove MSW and woody biomass from eligibility in clean energy incentive programs
  • Eliminate existing and ban future high heat waste facilities (MSW) and employ zero waste policies
  • Preserve existing trees and plant new trees in urban areas
  • Allocate funds and jobs for climate adaptation projects that benefit EJ populations

Contact for more information:

Deborah Donovan, Massachusetts Director
ddonovan@acadiacenter.org
617-742-0054 ext.103

New England Governors’ Energy Vision: Shifting Power on the Regional Electricity Grid

Acadia Center works at the forefront of the effort to move toward a just, equitable and climate-focused future for New England and the Northeast. Central to that shift is the urgent need to fundamentally reshape the system we rely on to deliver electricity over the regional grid.  We must ensure the region has an electricity grid that can serve the needs of a fully electrified economy while rapidly evolving toward greater reliance on newer, cleaner, and more advanced energy technologies, including renewable generation powered by the wind and sun, energy storage, and flexible energy demand. The region must approach this transformation by putting the needs of customers at the center, especially the needs of those hose communities have borne a disproportionate economic burden of the detrimental impacts of energy, endured the damaging impacts of the fossil-fueled system and are at greatest risk when it comes to climate-driven disasters.

Today, the way the region’s electricity grid is planned and operates neglects to consider the climate crisis and environmental justice priorities while perpetuating our dependence on fossil fuels.  That is largely because the grid is not currently managed to embrace viable clean energy technologies or consider the impacts of its decision on vulnerable communities. Over the last year, Acadia Center, states, and a multitude of stakeholders throughout the region have intensified their commitment to transform the electricity grid through reforms that will reduce the burdens the grid places on consumers and the planet and broaden the universe of stakeholders providing input into goals and priorities for the region. The outcome of these ongoing discussions will have far-reaching implications for achieving state climate policy goals and establishing a clear pathway toward a fully decarbonized economy.

Who’s got the power now?

The Independent System Operator of New England (ISO-NE) is a non-profit entity formed over 20 years ago to oversee the electricity grid that serves all six New England states. It manages the wholesale electricity market so there is sufficient electricity generation capacity to reliably and cost-effectively meet consumer demand at all times. When the ISO was created, electricity mostly came from centrally dispatched plants fueled by nuclear, hydropower, coal and oil, mostly owned and operated by for-profit corporations. Over the last two decades, the region’s energy needs have been increasing met through gas-fueled power plants as fracked gas became increasingly cheap and was perceived as lower-polluting than dirtier coal and oil.

There is one notable success story that demonstrates the meaningful benefits that state clean energy commitments provide to consumers and the climate.  Investments in energy efficiency programs and solar energy have cut the region’s energy use by 15%, and continued expansions of efficiency and solar could result in as much as a 25% reduction, conferring significant savings and carbon reductions.

In many ways, ISO-NE’s decisions are stuck in this out-of-date world centered on fossil fuels. The status quo benefits the owners of today’s fleet of plants and is holding the region back from fully achieving a clean energy future. What’s more, the byzantine, exclusionary decision-making forums dominated by ISO staff, its board, and the powerful incumbent energy companies shut out the people most affected by the decisions that result.

What is needed?

Times have changed and our grid must change with it. Today, access to affordable, clean sources of electricity, and investing in efficiency and emerging technologies will enable us to transform the grid yet again into the grid of the future, one that equitably meets everyone’s needs as we face the climate crisis.  And that means changing the mission of the entity that operates the grid to one that:

  • Prioritizes attaining state policy goals for clean energy and climate emission reductions
  • Supports the expansion of renewable energy resources, including community-based sources
  • Ensures full consideration of the justice and equity implications of the grid’s impacts
  • Makes decisions by accounting for all benefits (reducing carbon emissions) and costs (damaging public health and the climate)

Where’s it going? New England Governors’ Energy Vision of Regional Cooperation

In October 2020, the New England Governors released a Vision Statement expressing dissatisfaction with this status quo, and committing to fully transparent, publicly accessible regional discussion about three major areas of concern:  wholesale energy market design; transmission infrastructure planning; and governance.  After issuing their public commitment to regional cooperation in March 2019, the states have been frustrated with the slow progress and narrow scope of discussions happening behind closed doors between ISO leadership and members of NEPOOL, the regional stakeholder body. The Governors’ October Vision Statement describes in detail the states’ mutual concerns about the inability for the regional market to enable the states to meet their clean energy and climate goals in a timely and optimal way.  Specifically, the statement:

  • Lays out a set of minimum principles necessary to address the fundamental shortcomings of the energy market rules;
  • Articulates the priorities for a significantly re-engineered transmission planning process; and
  • Calls for an update of the ISO’s mission statement, governance structure, and mechanisms for stakeholder participation.

“A clean, affordable, and reliable regional electric grid – together with transparent decision-making processes and competitive market outcomes that fully support clean energy laws – is foundational to achieving our shared clean energy future… To achieve these goals, we need a decarbonized grid capable of supporting the accelerated adoption of more sustainable electric, heating, and transportation solutions for families and businesses.”

— Governors’ Statement on Electricity System Reform

The states committed to holding a series of public forums focusing on the three topics (wholesale energy market design, transmission infrastructure planning, and governance), and are seeking stakeholder input in the form of written comments. Overall, the Governors have set the stage for the region to reach resolution on a range of interrelated issues by putting state climate policy and stakeholder needs at the center of the process. Acadia Center strongly supports and presses for the commitment to reaching consensus solutions, understanding that politically durable progress must begin with states asserting themselves and taking control of the dialogue.  Acadia Center and its coalition partners have attended three forums and have prepared comments on Market Design, Transmission Planning, and Governance issues.  In Acadia Center’s comments, we have raised substantive policy reforms for consideration, including their implications for a just transition.

Thus far, calls for fundamental reforms have been met with strong resistance by the ISO and incumbent stakeholders that dominate the NEPOOL and ISO agendas.  With the states opening the forums up to everyone, this process has the potential to bring about reforms that can bring the region an electricity system that is centered on the states’ climate commitments and protective of all the region’s residents. This process has the makings of a major paradigm shift.

What’s next? The Energy Vision Forum on Equity and Environmental Justice

While Acadia Center applauds the states for launching the Energy Vision initiative, we were concerned about the initial lack of focus on equity and environmental justice outcomes.  It is essential that these values be considered when weighing the range of market design, transmission, and governance reforms. And that can only happen when the voices of front-line communities are part of the conversation from the beginning. After hearing about these concerns, the state organizers agreed to add a fourth forum focusing on environmental justice and equity.

On March 18, 2021, the states convened the fourth and final forum designed to be a dialogue between state policymakers and the public to address equity and environmental justice concerns. The virtual forum was free and presented in both English and Spanish.  A recording of the session is located on the New England Energy Vision website as well as presentations by the speakers.  Stakeholders can join the mailing list to hear about next steps by signing up here. In addition, stakeholders are invited to submit written comments regarding equity and environmental justice perspectives on the regional energy grid. Comments should be sent to Claire.Sickinger@ct.gov by April 29, 2021.

Conclusion

Acadia Center is working to ensure that New England has an electricity grid that can rapidly evolve toward greater reliance on cleaner, safer, and more affordable energy technologies, including renewable generation powered by the wind and sun, energy storage and flexible energy demand. The region’s governors have opened a dialogue on a range of interrelated issues by putting state climate policy and stakeholder needs at the center of the process. As the initiative progresses, Acadia Center will be pressing states to set and meet a high bar when it comes to delivering forward looking solutions that put equity and environmental justice concerns that their center.  Acadia Center will work with allies to unlock the door to a clean energy future while pushing for greater accountability, transparency, fairness, and equity for the communities that bear the worst burdens of our fossil fueled electricity grid.

Additional Resources:

 

Advocating for an Ambitious and Equitable TCI Program in Connecticut: The Power of Coalitions

The Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) project continues to move forward in Connecticut with strong support from the Lamont Administration and many others, attesting to the strength of the TCI Coalition that Acadia Center has been working to build over the past two years. An important milestone occurred on March 8, 2021, when the Connecticut General Assembly’s Environment Committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill No. 884, a governor’s bill that would establish the TCI Program as state policy and require the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) to adopt implementing regulations.  The hearing was well attended by numerous and wide-ranging supporters who countered misinformation provided by the fossil fuel industry, spoke to the benefits the TCI Program would bring to the state, and called on state leaders to adopt additional measures to ensure equitable outcomes. Following the hearing, Governor Ned Lamont, legislative leaders and Middletown officials held a press conference on March 17, 2021, to express their support for the program and to highlight the state’s first electric school bus—the type of investment that could be replicated across the state with TCI funds.

Acadia Center has led and coordinated the advocacy efforts of the Connecticut TCI Coalition since 2019.  The TCI Coalition now includes over 50 environmental, transportation, labor, justice and energy policy advocacy groups and businesses. This broad group of stakeholders from across the state has been coordinating virtually over the last year, extending outreach, amplifying campaign messages, and meeting regularly with state agencies to communicate our shared vision.

The success of the legislative hearing is the result of months of preparation on the part of Acadia Center and our coalition partners, sharing regional data and studies with the coalition, and refining a coordinated message. The TCI Coalition coordinated and conveyed a positive narrative that addressed the many benefits of the TCI program, from cleaner air and achieving climate targets to transportation improvements that will help businesses and communities thrive. Testimony from Acadia Center and our allies also called on Connecticut to go above and beyond the terms of the regional agreement by strengthening equity provisions and dedicating more TCI-P funds for investment in the state’s overburdened and underserved communities. Early modeling projects that TCI could save Connecticut over $360 million in public health costs annually by 2032; if implemented equitably, most of those health benefits will occur in the communities hardest hit by transportation pollution.

Staff from the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) responded to misinformation about the TCI-P. As in other states, members of the fossil fuel industry exaggerated the program’s costs, ignored its benefits, and offered no alternative to address the climate, public health, and transportation challenges facing Connecticut. Katie Dykes, Commissioner of the Connecticut DEEP, and the other representatives of the Lamont administration gave strong testimony. Commissioner Dykes noted:  “This is an environmental program that will cap greenhouse gas emissions and require the oil industry to pay for the damage it is causing to public health and the climate … I believe that Connecticut, being a leader on addressing climate and air pollution, is going to provide significant benefits to our communities,” Dykes told members of the committee. “I am very confident that if we do move this program forward, that we will see more states joining.”

Senator Christine Cohen, Co-Chair of the Environment Committee, expanded on her testimony by publishing a pro-TCI op-ed in the Connecticut Post. “Turning climate change around is the challenge of our time, and we owe it to future generations to do all we can to mitigate its impacts. We need bold action. I look forward to doing my part, along with my colleagues in the legislature, to ensure that Connecticut enacts legislation to implement TCI.”

Amy McLean, Acadia Center Connecticut Director,  testified that “Connecticut has an opportunity to deliver the clean air and improved transportation options that the state’s residents and businesses deserve. Chronic under-investment—both in marginalized communities and in alternatives to personal vehicles—has resulted in congested roads, inadequate public transit, and neighborhoods lacking access to economic opportunities. At the same time, the imported fossil fuels used to power vehicles remain Connecticut’s greatest contributor to climate change and a major source of the air pollution that disproportionately harms minority residents. It is time to end that toxic combination by passing Senate Bill 884 to advance a modern, equitable, and sustainable transportation future.”

Acadia Center and its TCI Coalition partners look forward to continuing their partnerships to support this program that will bring enormous benefits to all Connecticut residents. The Environment Committee is expected to vote on SB 884 by March 31st, and the conversation will continue from there. For more information on the next steps and how you can support an equitable and ambitious TCI-P in Connecticut, contact Amy McLean, Senior Policy Advocate and Connecticut Director at amclean@acadiacenter.org

Climate pact hinges on other states

BOSTON — Massachusetts is largely in the driver’s seat on a regional plan to reduce carbon emissions from cars and trucks, but the initiative, which could lead to higher gas prices, now hinges on the approval of lawmakers in two neighboring states.

Gov. Charlie Baker, the governors of Connecticut and Rhode Island, and the mayor of Washington, D.C., signed a regional agreement in December that aims to substantially curb tailpipe emissions while drumming up revenue for projects to mitigate climate change and improve transportation infrastructure.

The Transportation and Climate Initiative won’t be put to a vote in Massachusetts, but it still must be ratified by Connecticut and Rhode Island in order to go forward.

….

Former Gov. Gina Raimondo, a Democrat who signed the climate pact, has left to serve as President Joe Biden’s commerce secretary. It’s not yet clear where her successor, Democratic Gov. Dan McKee, stands on the issue.

But Hank Webster, director of the Rhode Island chapter of the Acadia Center, said he expects the pact to be ratified. He noted the Legislature is in the process of approving a massive climate change bill, and he anticipates something will “emerge soon.”

Read the full article in the Gloucester Times here

Regional Clean Energy Groups from Across the Nation: Congress Must Pass 100% Clean Electricity Standard to Benefit All

BOSTON, MA – Six of the nation’s best-known groups fighting climate change at the state and regional levels today asked Congress to quickly pass President Biden’s proposal for 100% clean electricity nationwide by 2035. Such a measure, the groups say, would dramatically build on proven local successes in using clean-energy mandates to create jobs, clean the air, and fight climate change.

As a candidate, Joe Biden pledged to quickly enact legislation mandating that all the nation’s electricity be carbon-pollution free by the year 2035. That legislative vote will likely come before Congress soon – sometime this spring.

In a letter to House and Senate leaders today, the regional leaders said such a policy was “vital” in the fight against global warming while rebuilding the US economy with environmental justice. Read the letter here.

The six signatory groups are active in 27 states whose populations, collectively, exceed 155 million people.

“Clean energy will benefit everyone in the country by improving public health, supporting employment and economic benefits, and addressing long-standing pollution burdens imposed on poorer communities that disproportionately have born the burden of energy pollution. Equity must be at the center of our clean energy future,” said Daniel Sosland, president of Acadia Center, one of the signatory groups. “Northeast states have made a commitment to clean energy and are moving to reap the benefits for all citizens.  It’s time the whole country benefited from this approach and takes the action needed to assist all in this transition to cleaner energy future.”

Groups signing today’s letter to Congress are:

  • Acadia Center – Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York
  • Chesapeake Climate Action Network – Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, D.C.
  • Climate Solutions – Oregon, Washington
  • Southern Alliance for Clean Energy – Florida, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Mississippi
  • Western Resource Advocates – Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming
  • Fresh Energy – Minnesota

Contact:
Daniel L. Sosland, 207-236-6470 x301
dsosland@acadiacenter.org

###

Acadia Center is a regionally-focused, non-profit organization headquartered in Rockport, Maine, working to advance a clean energy future that benefits all.

 

Does Aquidneck Island need more natural gas?

PROVIDENCE — Is the answer to a projected shortfall in natural gas supplies on Aquidneck Island a new facility that can tap into liquefied stores of the fossil fuel, or can a solution be found by tamping down usage, converting more customers to electric heat and putting an end to new gas connections?

….

“We look at the Aquidneck Island case as really being representative of this broader concern of whether it makes sense to keep building gas infrastructure,” said Hank Webster, Acadia’s Rhode Island director. “The community has expressed a preference that the infrastructure does not get built. But it seems like this filing is taking us in the opposite direction.”

….

Acadia sees the island as the perfect place to begin changing the state’s heating sector, which accounts for about 40% of greenhouse gas emissions. That’s in part because of location. The island sits at one of the endpoints of the pipeline network that sends gas around New England, and with only one connection to that system — a line running across the Sakonnet River into Portsmouth — it’s more vulnerable to problems than other areas of the state.

The organization is proposing a moratorium on new connections to the gas system on the island and then switching customers to electric heat pumps and implementing more efficiency measures.

Even its most expensive alternative — weatherizing nearly 5,000 homes at a cost of $48.6 million — would be cheaper than National Grid’s spending over just the next three years, according to Acadia’s analysis. The group’s cheapest option — switching about 3,000 gas customers to high-efficiency water heaters — is estimated at $9.2 million.

Webster says utility companies generally make more money by building infrastructure, so they’re more likely to put in more pipelines. Faced with rising pushback, they’re rushing to get approvals for new investments now, he argues.

“We believe that much of the infrastructure in this docket will become stranded assets in very short order,” he said.

Read the full article in the Providence Journal here