Office of Energy Transformation Represents a Visionary Step Forward for Massachusetts

Navigating the phase-out of the sprawling natural gas system is a massive and complex undertaking, filled with thorny questions that could likely be the subject of years-long proceedings. To address this task (among other energy transition priorities), Massachusetts recently created the first-ever Office of Energy Transformation (OET), tasked with a duty “to accelerate the energy transformation, with a focus on gas-to-electric transition, electric grid readiness, and an affordable and just transition for workers, businesses, and communities.”  This office is intended to provide leadership in strategic planning, roadmap development, and stakeholder engagement to advance the transformation of the state’s energy system. Put simply, the OET is tasked with navigating those incredibly complicated questions that surround the transition, like how to decarbonize the peak and how to finance the transition. It will function as an invaluable connective tissue between the various branches of government and stakeholders.

A key component of the OET will be the Energy Transformation Advisory Board (ETAB), a board filled with a diverse cross-section of stakeholders that includes labor, environmental justice, utilities, building owners, finance, and others. This board will be crucial to guide and advise on the work of the OET. Acadia Center, which is a member of this board, recently attended the kick-off meeting for this board and was heartened by the impressive breadth of knowledge in the room and the resources that the Healey-Driscoll administration is devoting to the effort.

Work under the purview of the Office and ETAB will also be conducted in subgroups that focus on three priority issues. These issues are:

  • Transitioning Away from Reliance on the Everett Marine Terminal LNG Facility,
  • Decarbonizing the Peak, and
  • Establishing Alternative Mechanisms to Finance the Finance/Fund EDC Distribution System Infrastructure Upgrades

Acadia Center appreciates that the OET has chosen three exceptionally complex topics that are worthy of extended consideration and debate. The Everett Marine Terminal is one of the longest-operating LNG facilities in the United States, and its supposed purpose is to provide gas system stability on the coldest few days of the year or if the energy supply is disrupted. However, Acadia Center analysis has called into question how necessary this facility is, how fully alternative solutions have been explored, and how much its continued operations should cost ratepayers. Next, peaker plants are power plant facilities that only operate when there is significant demand on the electric system that cannot be met with normal supply. These are facilities that often only run for a few days every year. Unfortunately, they are also some of the most polluting facilities, spewing emissions into already overburdened communities. Figuring out how to retire these facilities through the use of creative solutions such as demand response and battery storage would be of incredible benefit to the Commonwealth. Finally, identifying how to fully finance the electric infrastructure needed as we rapidly electrify our transportation systems and buildings and decarbonize our electric supply remains an unsolved question. Currently, much of these costs are borne by ratepayers, through electric bills. However, in the long-term, that approach simply may not be sustainable for ratepayers at least under current rate design and cost recovery paradigms.  These three workstreams, while seemingly disparate, are closely tied together by nature of the fact that they span all sectors of the economy.

Next Steps

While it is still quite early in the process, Acadia Center is optimistic that this new office and its stakeholder engagement apparatus will be able to tackle the enormous task it has before it. As other states in the region navigate the difficult questions posed by phasing out fossil gas systems, they should look to Massachusetts as a model. Acadia Center believes that other states would benefit from setting up similar infrastructure to deal with these weighty questions.

Additionally, the OET should eventually broaden its subgroups to include other pressing concerns, such as an evaluation of the potential for stranded assets, reforms to performance-based ratemaking, or a reassessment of gas utility tariffs, policies, and practices on new and existing customer connections.

Energy Affordability, Rate Increases, and Regulatory Solutions in Connecticut

Ratepayers in Connecticut pay among the highest electricity rates in the country, and many low- and moderate-income (LMI) residents struggle to pay their energy bills. According to a 2023 report from Operation Fuel, which, among other services, provides emergency utility bill assistance to households across Connecticut, over 400,000 households in the state face unaffordable home energy costs.1 Energy burden—the percentage of household income spent on energy costs—is generally considered high when energy expenditures account for 6% of household income. Energy burden is severe when 10% or more is allocated to energy costs. Urban and rural households in Connecticut with an income of 0-30% of the state median income (SMI) experience a 19% energy burden on average. LMI households in Connecticut are currently paying hundreds of millions of dollars more for energy than they would if their energy burden was reduced to 6% of household income.

This past summer, Connecticut residents experienced two significant rate increases, including an $800 million increase for Eversource customers in July. The Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel (“OCC”) published a Frequently Asked Questions document2 that provides detailed, evidence-based information explaining what is behind the rate changes. 80% of the $800M rate increase was the result of expenses related to the Millstone nuclear power plant, expenses that the Connecticut state legislature—not the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (“PURA”)—voted to approve. The remaining 20% was set to recover the cost of unpaid electric bills during the state’s COVID-era moratorium on shutoffs. The shut-off moratorium was in place for four years for customers with a financial or medical hardship designation on their accounts, which are income-based or for people with life-threatening or serious medical conditions. The OCC shared that only half of the residents eligible for a financial hardship designation actually benefited from it. The second rate increase Connecticut residents experienced took place in September and stemmed cost recovery on programs such as the Innovative Energy Solutions program and the Connecticut Electric Vehicle Charging Program.

Unfortunately, these costs are categorized on utility bills under the label of Public Benefits Charges, a large catch-all category that helps to fund a wide range of beneficial programs for Connecticut ratepayers, including energy efficiency, renewable energy, and bill assistance programs. These programs provide significant benefits to Connecticut residents. Although these programs have been pointed to as the cause of the recent rate increase, they are not the true reason why rates have gone up. Because the Millstone plant costs and the COVID-related uncollectible expenses are included in Public Benefits Charges, opponents have unfairly attacked all Public Benefit Charges as harmful and overly expensive for Connecticut ratepayers. Moreover, Eversource requested recovery for the expenses over a 10-month period despite recommendations by stakeholders, including PURA Chair Marissa Gillett, to extend the cost recovery period to reduce the risk of near-term rate shock.

In light of the recent rate increases, energy burden and affordability are increasingly important issues for Connecticut to address. Energy equity and affordability means avoiding, mitigating, and remediating social, economic, and health burdens stemming from the energy system, while ensuring equitable participation in—and an opportunity to benefit from—the clean energy transition. As Connecticut moves to a decarbonized, increasingly electrified energy system, PURA should strengthen its focus on energy equity and justice in their proceedings, including through updates to the agency’s statutory mandate. To fully consider energy burden in the context of Connecticut’s clean energy transition, PURA should also holistically review and plan for the future of the state’s gas sector.

PURA, under the direction of Chairman Gillett, is already starting to make progress on this front. For example, PURA’s Performance-Based Regulation proceeding could help to create a new framework for regulating utilities that more explicitly centers equity and affordability, among other issues. PURA recently established a low-income discount rate which should be helpful for residents dealing with high energy burdens. PURA also established a Stakeholder Group Compensation Program3 to support underrepresented organizations who might have not had access or legal support to adequately participate in PURA proceedings.

To further strengthen Connecticut’s focus on energy justice and affordability, Acadia Center recommends the following additional activities:

1. Open an Energy Equity and Justice Proceeding: Despite PURA’s critical role and impact on environmental justice communities, accessibility of regulatory processes is limited. A dedicated Energy Equity and Justice Proceeding should be established to fully address these important, interrelated issues, which would include:

  1. Review and analysis of existing energy burdens;
  2. Consideration of contributing factors such as housing quality, pre-weatherization needs;
  3. Review of and improvements to income-eligible utility discount programs;
  4. Optimal rate design to promote affordability and electrification in LMI households; and
  5. Other avenues for operationalizing procedural, distributive, contextual, and corrective equity4 in PURA proceedings and other forums in Connecticut’s acceleration towards renewable energy in alignment with the Global Warming Solutions Act5 (“GWSA”).

2. Open a Proceeding on the Future of Gas and Affordable Heat: As Connecticut seeks to meet the emissions reductions targets of the GWSA. a Future of Gas and Affordable Heat considering the role of gas distribution companies should (1) examine the gas distribution industry and regulatory and policy changes needed to support the achievement of Connecticut’s mandated GHG emission limits; (2) implement lesson learned from other Future of Gas proceedings around the region, including but not limited to Massachusetts and Rhode Island, so as to promote regional consistency and minimize rework and inefficiencies for Connecticut; and (3) determine what near- and long-term adjustments are necessary to maintain a safe and reliable gas distribution system, minimize stranded costs, conduct joint electric- and gas-system planning, and protect consumer interests as the state transitions from fossil fuels to a clean, increasingly electrified, and decarbonized energy future by 2050.

3. Review and update PURA’s mandate to include emissions, equity, and environmental justice responsibilities: Legislators should amend PURA’s statutory mandate to include climate and equity responsibilities and add a requirement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with the GWSA. PURA and other agencies should have a legislative mandate not only to do all that it can to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but also to prioritize the reduction of greenhouse gases and other pollutants in environmental justice communities, as well as to alleviate disproportionate environmental burdens. These new responsibilities would allow for targeted reforms that are not considered today. Instead of choosing the cheapest solution in the moment, PURA can be empowered to choose the best solution for both today and tomorrow’s ratepayers.

Current and upcoming Dockets to watch:

  • Performance-Based Regulation Framework for the Electric Distribution Companies (Docket No. 21-05-15)
  • Equity, Accessibility, and Stakeholder engagement (Docket No. 24-09-07)

1 Mapping Household Cost Burdens: A Study of Energy, Transportation, Water, and Housing Affordability In Connecticut. By Justine Sears and Leslie Badger (VEIC), produced for Operation Fuel (2023). https://operationfuel.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/VEIC-affordability-study-May-2023.pdf

2 Office of Consumer Counsel Frequently Asked Questions: https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/occ/occ-ram-qa-final-09042024.pdf

3 PURA Stakeholder Compensation Program: https://portal.ct.gov/pura/public-participation/stakeholder-group-compensation-program#:~:text=The%20Stakeholder%20Group%20Compensation%20Program,cases%2C%20or%20small%20business%20customers.

4 ACEEE’s Energy Equity Topic Page: https://www.aceee.org/topic/energy-equity

5 An Act Concerning Connecticut Global Warming Solutions: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/act/pa/2008pa-00098-r00hb-05600-pa.htm

Moving Towards a Clean Energy Future: The Crucial Role of State and Local Leadership

With the federal election looming, Acadia Center has often been asked how a new administration might impact the fight for a sustainable and clean energy future. Over the past four years, huge strides have been made at the federal level thanks to efforts like the Inflation Reduction Act, which made unprecedented progress on a federal level towards the clean energy future we all strive for. Will a new federal administration halt all the progress that has been made?

Luckily, Acadia Center knows that real power for change also lies in the hands of state and local governments. The work at this level is vital, and only through state and local action can aggressive 2030 climate goals be met. Acadia Center plays a critical role in advocating for transformative change through state and regional legislation, consumer-focused climate advocacy, and coalition building.

The Steady Impact of Local and State Legislation

Local and state governments are often the most effective drivers of clean energy policy. State governments have a duty to respond to local conditions swiftly and accurately, and often have more legal authority than the federal government when it comes to implementing change within their district. This allows them to implement bold measures to reduce carbon emissions and promote renewable energy, regardless of the direction of federal policies.

Acadia Center understands that local action is key. By working directly with state lawmakers, it helps craft policies that not only protect the environment but also benefit consumers and spur economic growth. States like Massachusetts and New York have demonstrated that setting ambitious renewable energy targets and creating energy efficiency programs can serve both environmental and economic goals. These state-led efforts are critical for energy independence, and Acadia Center’s research and advocacy provide the data policymakers need to make informed decisions.

By focusing on state and local initiatives, Acadia Center ensures that policies are tailored to the specific needs of each region, creating more consumer-focused solutions that align with local conditions. This also allows communities across all socioeconomic levels to benefit, ensuring a just and equitable transition to clean energy.

Balancing Federal Leadership with Sub-National Action

While federal leadership plays a vital role in clean energy, state and local governments have increasingly shown that they have many of the necessary tools to push progress forward.. Pro-climate administrations at the federal level can provide critical funding and guidance, as we’ve seen under the current administration’s Inflation Reduction Act. This legislation empowers states by allocating significant funding for clean energy but leaves them in control of how those resources are spent, recognizing that local governments are best equipped to design policies that meet their unique needs.

However, even when federal leadership falters—as it did when the previous administration pulled the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Agreement—states continued to meet emissions reduction targets. By sticking to the climate goals set out by international agreements, many states have not only maintained momentum but have also served as a counterbalance to regressive federal policies. The steady, consumer-focused work of states during such times shows how essential sub-national governments are in driving the clean energy transition.

Climate Advocacy: Mobilizing Communities and Supporting Local Action

Effective climate action begins with the community, and grassroots advocacy plays a pivotal role in influencing policy. Acadia Center’s climate advocacy efforts help amplify community voices, mobilizing public pressure to prioritize environmental issues. This community-based approach highlights the urgency of local action in response to the specific impacts of climate change, such as rising sea levels and extreme weather events that disproportionately affect the Northeast.

By tailoring climate solutions to the unique challenges of individual states, Acadia Center helps foster a sense of ownership among local communities. Residents become active participants in the transition to clean energy, making climate policies not only more effective but also more sustainable.

Coalition Building: Strengthening Local Initiatives

Coalition building is one of the most powerful tools in advancing clean energy initiatives. By forming alliances with like-minded organizations, businesses, and community groups, Acadia Center has amplified the effectiveness of state and local policies. These coalitions serve as a unified front against entrenched interests, providing strength in numbers to push for systemic change.

At the state and regional levels, where competing interests often make energy policy complex, Acadia Center’s ability to facilitate dialogue and consensus-building ensures that clean energy initiatives remain resilient and adaptable. This collaborative, inclusive approach strengthens the long-term sustainability of clean energy efforts, ensuring they endure political and economic shifts.

Local and Regional Actions Lead the Way

Real momentum for clean energy often comes from local and state actions. Sub-national governments have shown that by prioritizing innovation and community engagement, they can lead the transition to a low-carbon economy. Programs like utility rate design, energy efficiency initiatives, and cap-and-trade agreements such as RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative) have proven highly effective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting clean technologies.

The flexibility of state-level actions allows for a diversity of solutions that match local conditions and needs. This bottom-up approach to clean energy policy accelerates progress and provides a model for other regions to follow.

Conclusion

State and local leadership is essential in the fight against climate change. By advancing consumer-focused policies, fostering coalitions, and acting steadily even when federal leadership is absent, sub-national governments continue to lead the way toward a clean energy future.

When it comes to the 2024 election, if the administration that is elected is hostile to clean energy efforts, the need for states to step up to meet ambitious climate goals will be greater than ever. Acadia Center remain a key player in this movement, ensuring that state and local actions are not only bold but also equitable and effective. In this scenario, the collective work of state and local governments will be critical in achieving a sustainable and resilient energy system that benefits both current and future generations.

If an administration who understands the importance of the climate goals we’ve set in place is elected, they will serve as an effective partner for state and local action. Acadia Center will continue to partner with both federal and local governments in the case, advocating for clean energy solutions that benefit all.

The path forward lies in empowering local communities, supporting innovative and consumer-focused policies, and ensuring that state and local leaders continue to advocate for transformative change.

Growing cruise ship industry splits a Maine island town and worries Boston residents

Hundreds of thousands of cruise ship passengers head to the small town of Bar Harbor, Maine, from May through August, swamping the quaint streets and infusing local shops with cash.

Residents concerned about air pollution from the ships and the crush of tourists brought forth a ballot initiative two years ago meant to slash the number of visitors to 1,000 a day. Though lawsuits from local businesses stymied much of that effort, village officials now hope a compromise bill limiting numbers to 3,200 will be approved on Nov. 5.

As environmentalist Kyle Murray watched tugboats muscle the 3,660-passenger ship Enchanted Princess to the wharf at Flynn Cruiseport recently, he questioned the push for such massive ships here.

“Because [the cruiseport] is pushed off to the side, not as visible, people aren’t as aware of how big [the ships] are and how much how much pollution it contributes,” said Murray, who directs state policy at the Acadia Center, an environmental and clean energy advocacy nonprofit based in Boston. “It’s just not sustainable to keep going bigger and bigger.”

To read the full article from GBH, click here.

Massachusetts DPU Approves Electric Sector Modernization Plans

On August 28, 2024, the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) issued its final Order in the Electric Sector Modernization Plans (ESMP) proceeding (DPU 24-10, 24-11, 24-12), marking a major milestone in the ongoing efforts to modernize the state’s electric grid.

The ESMPs are the utilities’ plans to proactively upgrade Massachusetts’ distribution system to improve reliability and resiliency in the face of increasingly severe climate change impacts. The ESMPs are also a roadmap for how the state’s utilities will prepare the grid for broad deployment of distributed energy resources and help facilitate the electrification of our buildings and transportation sectors.

The DPU has now approved an ESMP for each of the three investor-owned utilities in the state. This is the culmination of many years of work from many different stakeholders, not only since the passage of the Act Driving Clean Energy and Offshore Wind (2022) that required the ESMPs, but also from the previous years of work on grid modernization that has taken place in Massachusetts. Acadia Center is an executive member of the Grid Modernization Advisory Council (GMAC), which was set up alongside the ESMP process to guide the development of the plans and provide input and recommendations before the plans were submitted to the DPU. Acadia Center served as a member of the GMAC, as well as the GMAC Equity Working Group.

Over the course of the first five-year term, the utilities plan to spend billions of dollars across a range of activities to upgrade the distribution grid and enable a cleaner and more flexible system, all of which will result in billions of dollars’ worth of benefits for customers and the state. For example, the utilities plan to invest in infrastructure to support the deployment of advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), electric vehicles, virtual power plants (VPPs), and distributed energy resources (DER) such as rooftop solar and battery storage; network and communications upgrades to optimize the use of distributed energy resources; and grid hardening, automation, and other resiliency measures, among many other investments.

The ESMPs are strategic five-year plans to guide future proposals that the utilities will then submit to the DPU for approval. By issuing its Order, the DPU has approved the plans but has not guaranteed approval or cost recovery for any specific project, which will have to go through more detailed assessment in the future.

Here are some key highlights from the Order:

  • The DPU directs the utilities to establish a long-term stakeholder planning process (LTSPP). The LTSPP will start as a six-month process, beginning in October 2024, and will consider a range of issues, including how best to enable distributed generation hosting capacity in specific locations and the role of flexible interconnection in avoiding the need for system upgrades.
  • The Order builds on the DPU’s groundbreaking 2023 Future of Gas decision (20-80-B), which required Integrated Energy Planning (IEP) to better coordinate electric and gas system planning efforts. The DPU now provides more detail on how the IEP process will be developed and how the utilities will work with stakeholders to establish a Joint Utility Planning Working Group.
  • The utilities and other stakeholders are directed to develop a statewide community engagement framework to improve stakeholder engagement in utilities’ distribution system planning processes. The utilities will then follow the framework before filing electric distribution system infrastructure projects for approval by the DPU and/or the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB).
  • The utilities are required to submit biannual filings to the DPU throughout the ESMP term. The reports will include updated forecasts and an assessment of how the latest forecasts lined up with actual demand; a description of any reprioritization of investments; updates on how the utilities are addressing structural and distributional equity in the implementation of the ESMPs; as well as updates on financing that the utilities are seeking (e.g. state and federal grants, tax incentives, etc.) to help fund the ESMP investments. Future ESMPs will also need to include data from advanced metering infrastructure and smart meters, which are currently being deployed across Massachusetts; rate design solutions, particularly time-varying rates as AMI is deployed; as well as updated distributional and structural equity analyses.
  • The DPU makes clear that it now expects the utilities to incorporate Non-Wires Alternatives (NWA) into “their typical planning processes.” This is a major win for customers, as NWA such as energy efficiency, demand response, battery storage and other DER, can often be cleaner and cheaper than traditional infrastructure investments.
  • The Order maintains the Provisional Program for DER from DPU 20-75 in terms of how upgrades to accommodate new DER projects are paid for. Rather than having the individual DER developer be responsible for the entire cost of any necessary system upgrades, which can often be financially prohibitive, customers will help fund the initial cost of the upgrades. Customers will be reimbursed over time from fees charged to future distributed generation facilities that are able to interconnect due to the prior upgrades.

In approving the ESMPs, the DPU chose not to implement a number of recommendations from Acadia Center and other stakeholders that were intended to strengthen the plans and ensure that they delivered even more benefits to customers. For example:

  • Acadia Center and other stakeholders strongly recommended that the DPU reject utility proposals for “hybrid heating” systems (i.e. projects that include both electric heat pumps and gas or fossil-fuel backup systems), renewable natural gas, and hydrogen. In the Future of Gas proceeding (DPU 20-80-B), the DPU was not persuaded that pursuit of a broad hybrid heating strategy, which would itself necessitate maintenance of the natural gas system to support backup heating systems, is a viable path forward for the Commonwealth. In making that argument, the DPU specifically pointed to improvements in cold climate heat pump technology that will generally eliminate the need for backup heating systems in the future. In the ESMP Order, however, the DPU decided not to take a position on “specific decarbonization pathways,” which the 2022 Clean Energy Act prohibited as part of the ESMP approvals, and declined to explicitly reject hybrid heating, hydrogen, or renewable natural gas projects. However, the DPU noted that the LDCs will be filing Climate Compliance Plans in April 2025, in which those types of projects will be explored in more detail, so the DPU has not ruled out an official determination on the matter.
  • Stakeholders pointed to inconsistencies across the utilities in terms of their forecasting methodologies, inputs, and assumptions. Although the DPU determined that the utilities’ approach to forecasting satisfied the original statutory requirements, it will require the utilities to incorporate new and updated data in future ESMPs and to work with the GMAC going forward on sensitivity analyses.
  • Stakeholders recommended a clearer directive for the Joint Utility Planning Working Group and expectations around timelines and work products. While some specifics were left undecided, the Joint Working Group is nevertheless tasked with (1) developing a shared understanding of the utilities’ networks and network planning processes; (2) leveraging Integrated Energy Planning best practices; (3) conducting joint gas-electric planning studies; (4) creating a roadmap to strengthen IEP capabilities; among other activities.
  • The DPU determined that the estimated bill impacts of the plans were reasonable given expected benefits that will result from the ESMPs. Stakeholders had argued that the ESMPs did not present an accurate picture of ratepayer impacts, in part because of the categorization of certain investments and the lack of clarity in terms of benefit-cost analysis.
  • Stakeholders including Acadia Center identified a number of concerns with the Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) used in the ESMPs. Although the Department did not ultimately require changes to the BCAs in the plans, it noted that more detailed BCAs will be required when the utilities request cost recovery for specific investments in future rate cases.

Despite these gaps, the ESMPs represent a major turning point in Massachusetts’ path towards a modernized and decarbonized electric grid.

Webinar – Bridging the Power Gap: How Bidirectional Clean Energy Benefits the US Northeast and Eastern Canada

 

 

Last week Acadia Center, Environmental League of Massachusetts, and New England for Offshore Wind hosted a webinar – Bridging the Power Gap: How Bidirectional Clean Energy Benefits the US Northeast and Eastern Canada.

Panelists Hannes Pfeifenberger, Adrienne Downey and Emil Dimanchev shared their considerable expertise, and Acadia Center’s Senior Director of Climate and Clean Energy Programs, Jamie Dickerson, led a lively discussion on the possibilities of joint US/Canadian coordination and planning of energy resources, including enhanced reliability, cost and resiliency, as well as increased trade opportunities.

“Offshore wind is ‘pretty much a match made in heaven’ with hydropower when there is enough transmission capacity to enable hydro to firm up the intermittencies of wind.” – Adrienne Downey of Hexicon and Power Advisory

The presentation slides for the event can be found here: Bridging the Power Gap Slides

To stay engaged in the conversation, please follow Northeast Grid Planning Forum (NGPF), a joint effort of Acadia Center and Nergica, on LinkedIn. If you have questions, please reach out to Carolyn Dykema cdykema@acadiacenter.org.

Massachusetts again leads on climate change. The state (finally, almost) has a sweeping climate bill.

Months after the close of the formal legislative session, when lawmakers on Beacon Hill came oh-so-close to passing significant reforms only to fall short at the 11th hour, House and Senate negotiators announced a comprehensive bill on Thursday that addresses the climate crisis and promotes more clean energy adoption. The legislation would again put Massachusetts near the front of pack of state houses fighting climate change.

Thursday’s announcement was met with an outpouring of support from advocates and activists.

Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director for the advocacy group the Acadia Center, called it a “major win for the Commonwealth: for ratepayers, public health, climate resiliency, and our clean energy future.”

To read the full article from the Boston Globe, click here.

Hispanic/Latine Heritage Month Event Identifies Challenges, Celebrates Leaders

Hartford, CT – Tuesday morning, 40 environmental justice advocates, community leaders, legislators, and supporters gathered at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford for a roundtable discussion in celebration of Hispanic/Latine Heritage Month, hosted by the Connecticut Commission on Women, Children, Seniors, Equity, and Opportunity (CWCSEO) and Save the Sound. Conversation centered around the environmental challenges faced by Connecticut’s Latine communities, and the impactful work of Latine leaders advocating for environmental justice in the state.

“As intersectional as our communities are, so are our environmental and energy justice challenges. At a time when Connecticut communities are experiencing some of the highest energy costs in the country, Black and Latine communities are disproportionately impacted,” said Jayson Velazquez, Climate and Energy Justice Policy Associate at the Acadia Center. “Energy burden, which is the percentage of income a household pays for energy, is extremely high in our communities. We must ensure our programs, such as the state’s energy efficiency programs, are deeply invested in to meet the needs of folks who could benefit the most as we continue our clean energy transition. We are missing the mark, and as leaders with access, proximity, and power in processes, we cannot leave each other behind.”

To read the full press release from Save the Sound, click here.

Power Sharing Pitched To Ease Clean Energy Transition

OCT. 9, 2024…..Policymakers across the northeastern United States and eastern Canada are grappling with the best way to navigate a complicated transition to clean energy, and a group of experts wants them to consider sharing power more directly across the border.

Clean energy advocates and academics laid out a case Wednesday for embracing a “bidirectional” approach, which would split Canadian hydropower and New England offshore wind energy for the two countries depending on fluctuations in availablity and demand.

“Adopting a bidirectional planning approach affords us the opportunity for the region’s whole to become greater than the sum of its parts, which otherwise might look like the states and provinces and their respective system operators acting by themselves,” said Jamie Dickerson, senior director of climate and clean energy programs at The Acadia Center.

But turning that concept into reality requires more work, Dickerson and other experts said at a discussion hosted by the Environmental League of Mass., the New England for Offshore Wind coalition and the Acadia Center.

New England governors, including Gov. Maura Healey, and eastern Canadian premiers last month announced they would revive a cross-border energy committee with a goal of boosting regional collaboration and planning.

“It’s happening in pieces, and now it’s about stitching it all together,” Dickerson said.

To read the full article from State House News, click here.

Panel Calls for Greater Interregional Planning Across the Northeast

Unlocking the full potential of Quebec hydropower to balance renewables through the Northeast will require major efforts to overcome barriers to transmission planning and development, speakers at a webinar led by the Acadia Center emphasized on Oct. 9.

While studies have shown increased bidirectional transmission capacity between the Eastern Canadian provinces and the Eastern U.S. could significantly reduce the costs of decarbonizing the grid, such transmission projects so far have struggled. (See Québec, New England See Shifting Role for Canadian Hydropower and National Grid Backs out of Twin States Clean Energy Link Project.)

To read the full article from RTO Insider, click here.