Massport seeks millions from EPA to cut shipping emissions at its container, cruise terminals

Grappling with health and environmental impacts of increased marine shipping in Boston Harbor, Massport is seeking $280 million in federal grants aimed at reducing emissions and expanding electrification at its container and cruise terminals.

Local environmental advocates say it is time for policymakers in Massachusetts to pay more attention to the shipping industry here.

“These are such high emitters that it’s definitely a mistake to not focus on them now,” said Kyle Murray, who directs state policy at the Acadia Center,an environmental and clean energy advocacy nonprofit based in Boston.

To read the full article from GBH News, click here.

Mass. DPU Approves 1st Round of Utility Grid Modernization Plans

The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities has approved grid modernization plans from electric distribution companies that outline longer-term strategies for handling increased electrification and the deployment of distributed resources.

The electric sector modernization plans (ESMPs) include five- and 10-year load forecasts, investments to meet forecasted demand and boost resilience, and cost-benefit analyses for the proposed investments. Overall, the plans predict major new costs for ratepayers. (See Mass. Utilities Submit Grid Modernization Drafts.)

Representatives of climate and environmental justice organizations expressed disappointment that the DPU did not take a broader approach to the ESMP proceeding.

“I wish they had gone further,” Kyle Murray of the Acadia Center told RTO Insider. There were “not a lot of significant changes from what the companies proposed,” and the DPU “didn’t take a lot of suggestions from the intervenors.”

However, Murray said the move toward long-term planning is a step in the right direction, and he applauded the DPU’s decision to lengthen the stakeholder process for the next round of ESMPs.

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

How ‘virtual power plants’ help reduce peak power demand in New England

On the hottest afternoons this summer, when residents across New England cranked their air conditioners, something noteworthy happened. Thousands of internet-connected thermostats, home solar panels and battery systems were called into action to help reduce the strain on the electric grid.

Welcome to the age of “virtual power plants,” or VPPs.

“I’m very excited about virtual power plants,” said Joe LaRusso, who manages the Clean Grid Initiative at the Acadia Center, a non-profit clean energy research and advocacy group. “There’s enormous potential for every house to behave as a grid asset.”

“On days when the grid is stressed, if each of our homes is serving as a grid asset — that is, we are turning stuff off in our homes or discharging batteries — we can, each of us, contribute to shaving the peak,” the Acadia Center’s LaRusso said. “And if the peak can be shaved across the region by thousands of megawatts, then we’re really talking about having a system that is much more nimble, and much more resilient and much more reliable.”

To read the full article from wbur, click here.

All EV drivers can save money, but Massachusetts drivers save the least

Drivers in all 50 US states could save money by switching from gas-powered cars and trucks to electric vehicles, adding up to almost $1,100 a year for an average consumer, according to a new analysis. But Massachusetts drivers would save the least, due in part to the region’s high electricity rates.

But the picture should improve for Massachusetts EV drivers as the state adds more renewable energy projects and reduces reliance on higher-cost natural gas generation, said Kyle Murray, Massachusetts Program Director at the nonprofit Acadia Center in Boston.

“The state continuing to keep the pedal to the metal … on solar and other low-cost renewables will be incredibly important,” Murray said. And the state is moving towards enacting lower electricity rates at night when the grid has excess capacity, which would reduce the cost of charging EVs at home overnight, he said.

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

Environmental Advocates Urge Update to Regional Cap-and-Invest Compact

PROVIDENCE — Environmental groups are putting pressure on the 10 states, including Rhode Island, to update the regional cap-and-invest compact that charges power plants for every ton of emissions they spew into the atmosphere.

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) has a set regional budget for CO2 among its member states, which include all of New England, New York, and New Jersey, since 1996. Power plants in participating states pay the program to emit carbon dioxide, money that in turn is divided among the states to use toward green projects.

But advocates say the latest update to the program, its third since it began, is taking far longer than expected. RGGI solicited public feedback virtually last year and was expected to make some kind of determination about its program revisions at the start of this year.

“We haven’t heard anything come out of their program review,” said Paola Tamayo, a policy analyst at the Acadia Center. “We were promised something in January, but it’s been six, seven, eight months now and there’s a lot of uncertainty with what’s happening. There’s a fear that they’re going to come out with a half-baked final product, with no room for input.”

The first program review took around two years, from 2012 to 2014. The second review lasted around a year, from 2016 to 2017. The third and current review process has been ongoing for almost three and a half years, kicking off originally at the beginning of 2021.

The Acadia Center sent letters to each member state asking for a new timeline on the program revisions, and repeating some long-sought-after updates. Advocates are asking the participating RGGI states to adopt a common definition of environmental justice; set a specific percentage of funds from RGGI auction proceeds; increase the availability of air monitoring around power plants close to frontline communities; and tie the programs allowances to the state’s ambitious climate goals, which have already outstripped RGGI’s original design.

To read the full article from ecoRI, click here.

Legislative Roundup: State-Level Battles for Clean Energy Progress

Acadia Center prides itself on advocating for the clean energy future, including within state legislature across the region. While our work spans further across the Northeast, we wanted to highlight a few states to which we dedicated a significant amount of our advocacy efforts in this past year of legislative sessions – including Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. Not only is it worth examining the progress made in these states, but we also identify the areas we will push our advocacy toward for the following legislative sessions to come. Overall, despite some modest victories and points of progress, it was a difficult and disappointing year for legislative action on climate and clean energy across the board. Acadia Center will be offering more reactions on and responses to this lack of progress in the weeks ahead.

Connecticut

In the 2024 Connecticut Legislative Session, Acadia Center was a strong proponent and advocate for climate and clean energy policies that supported emissions reductions targets and advanced energy equity goals. One victory aligned with our mission was an update to the Home Environmental Improvement Revolving Loan Fund program, passed in 2023, that now allocates funding for grants to support retrofit projects in multifamily residences in environmental justice communities. Throughout the session, momentum for increased heat pumps deployment resulted in the passage of a deployment study and an outlined heat pump rebate program. Looking ahead, following the failure of the prominent “green monster” climate package, much is left to be desired on key Acadia Center priorities such as increased energy efficiency funding, reforms and proceedings at the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority, and grid modernization measures to support our clean energy transition. Acadia Center is ready to lead efforts and ensure the 2025 Legislative Session moves Connecticut closer to being a climate and clean energy leader once again.

Maine

Acadia Center advocated for Maine bills that promoted several important climate and clean energy goals and defended against other measures that would have threatened progress. Acadia Center has coordinated with other nonprofits in Maine where appropriate, with some notable successes. Earlier in the two-year session, Acadia Center helped advocate successfully for a bill entitled “An Act Regarding the Procurement of Energy from Offshore Wind resources.” This bill established a robust system for offshore wind (OSW) development and required that the State procure 3,000 megawatts of OSW energy by 2040, a major leap forward. More recently, in the second year of the two-year session, Acadia Center was instrumental in authoring and supporting eventual passage of a bill that requires the Maine Department of Environmental Protection to study and report on opportunities and barriers to electric vehicle adoption in Maine, helping salvage some progress in the wake of the unfortunate demise of advanced clean cars regulations.

Acadia Center also successfully lobbied against bills that would have ended net energy billing, a Maine program that has successfully established a burgeoning solar and other clean energy resources in Maine, and also lobbied strongly against bills that would have unreasonably impeded the necessary development of electric transmission lines in Maine, while supporting improvements to developer-community engagement efforts.

Unfortunately, the Maine Legislature failed to pass a bill that would require the Public Utilities Commission to open a proceeding on Performance-Based Regulation (PBR). Acadia Center will continue to build support for PBR as a powerful tool for delivering better utility performance for Maine’s ratepayers.

Massachusetts

This legislative session, the Massachusetts House and Senate both passed legislation to reform the siting and permitting of clean energy projects in the Commonwealth in line with recommendations from the Commission on Energy Infrastructure Siting and Permitting. Both branches also included additional important climate measures in their packages.

For example, the Massachusetts Senate focused on reforms to the natural gas system which Acadia Center has championed and included measures that would reform the Gas System Enhancement Program (GSEP), a $40 billion gas replacement program, end the uniform right to gas service in the Commonwealth and require the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) to consider whether the expansion of gas service territory is reasonable and in the public interest. The Senate also banned competitive electric supply contracts for residential customers.

The House took a different approach and included provisions to specifically procure additional offshore wind resources and long-duration energy storage, ensure more widespread proliferation of EV chargers, and support fusion power.

Regrettably, negotiations between the two branches fell apart as the end of the formal legislative calendar approached, and they were unable to come to consensus – with disagreements reportedly centered on Competitive Electric Suppliers and the gas system reforms.

Rhode Island

Rhode Island’s 2024 legislative session yielded little action to tackle emissions in the building sector. Acadia Center’s top legislative priority, the Building Decarbonization Act (H7617/S2952), saw partial passage in the Senate and negotiations in the House resulted in the passage of a resolution to study benchmarking and building performance standards (BPS).

We were glad to celebrate the passage of S2952A in the Senate, an important statement on the value of benchmarking energy usage in our buildings. This amended version of the bill includes benchmarking and BPS for large public and private buildings but removes any requirements for all-electric new construction. What was retained was the requirement for electric ready construction of public buildings; this section also includes provisions for registered apprenticeship programs and project labor agreements.

Unfortunately, negotiations in the House and with other state leaders not only rejected all-electric new construction, but also pushed back on the concept of benchmarking and BPS. Acadia Center contributed to the development of H7617A, a joint resolution directing the Executive Climate Change Coordinating Council (EC4) to study the implementation of benchmarking and BPS. The resolution successfully passed both the House and the Senate on the last night of session, thereby becoming law. Ensuring that the EC4 produces a timely and valuable report by the deadline of February 15, 2025, will require accountability over the coming months.

One victory worth celebrating was the passage of S2499, the Energy Storage Systems Act, which sets a deployment target of 600 MW of energy storage capacity by 2033 – which will help Rhode Island save costs and emissions during peak periods.

Climate Plans and Equity and Environmental Justice Advisory Boards

Following years of research on the global impact of climate change, states in the Northeast and the nation at large have begun to pass laws aiming both to curb greenhouse emissions and to instill equity and environmental justice into emission reduction efforts. Being less than three decades from 2050, many states have codified their mandate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) to 80-85% from 1990 levels and achieve net zero by that timeframe. To help keep states on track to achieve those goals, states have charged climate leadership governing bodies and/or state agencies to carefully guide the decision-making process and lead states to achieve their GHG reduction targets in the various sectors of the economy. Each state designates its climate leadership body slightly differently: for example, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts assembled the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) Implementation Advisory Committee (IAC); Rhode Island refers to its governing body as the Executive Climate Change Coordinating Council (EC4); the state of Connecticut’s climate governing body is the Governor’s Council on Climate Change (GC3); and the Maine Climate Council (MCC) spearheads the climate plans for the state of Maine. Other variations exist in different states in the region.

Though these climate leadership councils are critical for comprehensive climate planning, they have been focused first and foremost on emissions reductions, and some of their members may have limited understanding or direct experience of underlying issues of inequity and environmental injustice in the context of climate action. This poses a challenge in properly crafting climate solutions for many communities that are in a disadvantaged or underserved position in the transition to a clean energy future. Many states, recognizing this limitation, began putting together a second similar council to provide equity and environmental justice guidance for climate solutions and work alongside the climate leadership councils/bodies. These equity and environmental justice forums were created by a mix of legislative and executive actions and were tasked with the responsibility of providing an equity and justice lens and guidance to the climate plans.^1,2,3 However, many states in the Northeast have formed these equity forums as either working groups or advisory bodies for input and consultation, which in turn has presented some limitations in the scope and effectiveness of their roles to influence and shape climate policy decision-making.

For the protection of low-income and environmental justice communities, equity-related barriers in the transition must be considered at the beginning of the formulation of the climate plans. Researching states’ climate plans showed that most of the input from the equity advisory councils and working groups were considered comments or recommendations in response to already-drafted climate plans, written separately by their states’ climate councils. While better than lacking recommendations, soliciting equity-focused feedback to already-crafted climate plans hinders innovative and well-thought-out solutions that could work better for environmental justice and low-income communities.

Another major limitation of the equity and environmental justice advisory council model in the Northeast is their role as advisory forums with limited capacity to spearhead the inclusion of equity causes in climate plans. States in the Northeast must find ways to establish both legal direction and agency resourcing/backing for environmental justice initiatives if there is to be a consistent, effective championing of equity and environmental justice as a concept with consequences throughout the development and implementation of each state’s climate plan. Creating agencies or offices and hiring full-time public servants dedicated to environmental justice is a first step. Massachusetts recently took this leap in 2023 with the creation of the Office of Environmental Justice and Equity within the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA). Another promising model was California’s Bureau of Environmental Justice within its state Department of Justice to provide state entities with a means to maintain accountability when equity standards are not upheld.  The Northeast can do even better; however, it begins by empowering equity and environmental justice councils as more than just advisory bodies but as partners in co-designing equitable climate solutions.

For more information:

Joy Yakie, Environmental Justice and Outreach Manager  jyakie@acadiacenter.org, 617–742-0054 x110

_{____________________________________}

1. _{About the Environmental Justice Council, MA: https://www.mass.gov/info-details/about-the-environmental-justice-council-ejc}
2. _{Maine Climate Council Equity Subcommittee: https://www.maine.gov/future/initiatives/climate/climate-council/equity-subcommittee}
3. _{New York State Climate Justice Working Group: https://climate.ny.gov/Resources/Climate-Justice-Working-Group}

Observations and Takeaways from the Vineyard Wind Blade Incident: An Unfortunate Episode for an Indispensable Energy Resource in the Northeast

Acadia Center has been monitoring the Vineyard Wind blade damage incident as it has unfolded off the coast of Nantucket over the last several weeks. We recognize and appreciate the impact that the incident has had on Nantucket residents and business owners, and wish to express the organization’s support to the response crews – both formal and informal – who continue to aid in the safe collection and removal of the resulting debris that came ashore.

The blade’s initial damage and subsequent breakdown in the ocean was an extremely unfortunate accident, and it comes at a challenging time for the nascent offshore wind industry in the United States. The underlying cause that led to the incident must be determined and remedied swiftly, and a full public accounting must be provided – recognizing that a complete diagnosis of the situation may take some time. Matters of health and safety are of paramount importance, and it is vital that the ongoing response efforts protect local communities, project workers, wildlife, ocean navigators, and others who stand to be directly affected. Measures must also be taken to avoid any chance of recurrence in the future, so offshore wind can continue forward in a sustainable and safe manner – and so that coastal communities can be reassured that this source of clean energy will not pose any safety or environmental threat.

More details continue to emerge about the underlying cause of the blade incident, with signs pointing to a manufacturing defect (e.g., inadequate fiberglass bonding) rather than damage sustained during installation. But even as the facts are still being gathered and an investigation remains underway, misinformation is already spreading online, with the images of a broken blade and fiberglass shards being manipulated via viral means, including by some that cheer the accident as a setback to offshore wind. This incident is a regrettable and newsworthy event, and we all must learn from it to strengthen the region’s offshore wind industry – with the many energy, environmental, and economic benefits it provides – while ensuring the safety and security of local communities. Nevertheless, a deliberative and purposeful approach must be taken as experts collectively diagnose, understand, and remedy this unfortunate episode.

Offshore wind is and will remain indispensable to meeting the Northeast’s energy needs and to the nation’s future. Offshore wind fills a crucial role in fighting to prevent the worst human and environmental impacts of a warming climate. It is also among the most cost-effective options the Northeast has at its disposal to deliver energy reliably during the winter, reducing the use of fossil fuels for power generation and providing clean electrons needed to keep families and businesses warm. Virtually all major studies examining the region’s changing energy mix forecast a major reliance on offshore wind, with 20 to 40+ gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind installed by 2050. By way of comparison, the power production capacity of all 400 of the region’s electric generating facilities is currently 29.7 GW. While offshore wind is relatively new in the United States, the industry is well established internationally, and incidents like this are very rare (although not unheard of). Actors across industry, government, and civil society have a role to play in ensuring this remains the case here in the U.S. as the industry continues to make inroads.

Everyone with a stake in the growth of offshore wind should learn from this incident. Acadia Center offers some observations and recommendations on steps that can be taken in the near future:

1. Establish and execute better, clearer communication protocols and lines of accountability during emergency response conditions: To keep communities, local officials, and the broader public better informed during unexpected incidents, project proponents must improve the timeliness, frequency, and level of detail of their communications. Establishing these protocols in advance and equipping local communities with designated emergency liaisons from the get-go are vital given the many different entities involved in situations such as this – from the project sponsor and the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) to the companies responsible for installation and continuous monitoring. Building trust requires bringing officials and the public into the circle of awareness as events unfold.
2. Strengthen and deepen low probability event planning in the federal permitting process for offshore energy resources (both clean and fossil): Currently, project proponents in offshore energy lease areas must follow an extensive application process governed by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), housed within the Department of the Interior (DOI). Although these ‘construction and operations plan’ (COP) filings do contain some language on response activities for so-called ‘low probability events,’ those application materials must be strengthened considerably in light of the nature of this incident – which differs fundamentally from the existing focus on rare events like vessel collisions and allisions, fuel spills, and other accidental releases of liquids from construction equipment.
3. Consider a centralized regional monitoring and response infrastructure, right-sized for the need: For offshore wind, a centralized apparatus for the region as a whole, or at least coastal states, might be better suited to monitor conditions and coordinate response activities during rare events such as this. The Vineyard Wind incident happened to be a Massachusetts project (in federal waters) that primarily affected Massachusetts communities, but this may not always be the case. While a blade break of this nature will hopefully remain extremely rare or may never occur again in the region, some degree of multi-state or regional coordination on basic monitoring and emergency management activities would seem prudent, given the multi-gigawatt build-out that the region will need to see. Perhaps, there may already be readily available infrastructure to better make use of – for instance, via existing U.S. Coast Guard installations or NOAA offices in the region.
4. Leverage the region’s R&D/engineering prowess to drive safety with innovation: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts was an early pioneer in turbine blade testing and safety through the investments made at MassCEC’s Charlestown Wind Technology Testing Center (WTTC). As the root cause analysis is completed and lessons are learned, those learnings should be directly incorporated into the ongoing testing activities at the WTTC and other similar facilities. Other centers of applied offshore wind R&D around the region – including the National Offshore Wind R&D Consortium (NOWRDC), operated out of New York State – can and should also double down on their focus on safety and accident-prevention for the technologies the region will install in the decades ahead (see, e.g., an NOWRDC investment for a project verifying blade integrity during manufacture). Across the board, more of this work must be done, and the region should put its collective institutions and brain power to work to bring forward new engineering solutions that improve safety, reduce risk, and bolster resilience.

Maine PUC Establishes Integrated Grid Planning Process

On July 12, 2024, the Maine Public Utilities Commission (PUC) released the final Order in its Integrated Grid Planning (IGP) proceeding. The Order is the culmination of several years’ worth of effort from the PUC, the Legislature, Maine’s investor-owned utilities, nonprofit advocacy groups (including Acadia Center), the Governor’s Energy Office, the Office of the Public Advocate, Efficiency Maine Trust, and numerous other entities.

With its recent Order, the PUC lays the foundation for a formal 18–month grid planning process, which will occur every five years. As part of their planning efforts, Central Maine Power and Versant Power must develop a 10-year vision for Maine’s electric grid, as well as an investment roadmap for improving reliability and resiliency while keeping costs affordable and enabling the cost-effective achievement of Maine’s climate policies and greenhouse gas emissions reductions requirements. 

Integrated Grid Plans Offer a More Holistic View of Future Utility Investments

The required grid plans are intended to ensure that Maine’s investor-owned utilities are well prepared to meet the challenges of climate change and the needs of a rapid transition to clean energy. In developing their grid plans, the utilities are directed to place equity and environmental justice impacts more centrally within their planning efforts and to ensure greater transparency and stakeholder input compared to previous utility planning processes. 

The PUC directs the utilities to prioritize load flexibility through measures such as demand response that can shift energy demand to times of day when electricity is less expensive and less polluting. These kinds of load flexibility programs can enable more dynamic grid operations and reductions in peak demand. The plans must also identify strategies to accelerate the deployment of non-wires alternatives (NWA) like energy storage, which are often cleaner and cheaper than traditional infrastructure investments. And the utilities must develop a roadmap for more advanced modeling of the distribution system, which will allow for detailed analysis of the impact of electric vehicles, heat pumps, and other distributed energy resources on the grid.  

After the completion of an extensive modeling and forecasting process, the utilities will conduct a broad assessment of possible solutions to meet anticipated grid needs, including both traditional investments and a wide range of clean and distributed energy alternatives. The solutions identified in the grid plans will inform the utilities’ subsequent investment proposals, which they will put forth in rate cases before the PUC.  

Next Steps

Despite the PUC’s Order, there are still key questions left to be answered, such as the exact process for stakeholder input and review throughout the 18-month planning period, as well as concretely defining the equity and environmental justice metrics to be used in the solution evaluation scorecard. While advocates pushed for clear definitions throughout the PUC proceeding, the Order leaves it up to the utilities and other stakeholders to determine which definitions will be included and how the equity and environmental justice assessment will be conducted.

While the Integrated Grid Planning process will not address every challenge relevant to Maine’s energy and utility sectors, the PUC’s recent Order is an important milestone and marks a pivotal moment in the state’s clean energy transition. Acadia Center looks forward to continuing to work with the PUC, utilities, and other stakeholders as we finalize the details of the planning process and set the course for the years to come.  

Mass. Legislature Faces Looming Deadline to Pass Permitting Reform

With Massachusetts’ legislative session ending July 31, lawmakers are on the clock to reach an agreement on a major climate bill centered around clean energy permitting and siting reform.

Culminating over a year-and-a-half of work on a wide range of proposed climate legislation, the Senate passed an omnibus bill in late June (S.2838), and the House of Representatives followed with its own legislation on July 17 (H.4884).

The bills contain closely aligned changes to how the state permits clean energy infrastructure but vary significantly beyond the permitting provisions and have elicited mixed responses from clean energy advocates in the state.

“The Senate’s provisions on the gas system are really important,” said Kyle Murray of Acadia Center, adding that they would “give the DPU the tools necessary to pursue an ordered transition off of natural gas.”

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