Funding, infrastructure delays have held up electrification of the commuter rail

For years, the idea to replace the existing diesel engines on the Massachusetts commuter rail system with electric ones has promised a slew of potential benefits across the region. Decreased carbon emissions and air pollution, increased economic opportunities and more frequent, reliable and quiet services are among them.

So why is the idea still just an idea?

The Fairmount line was chosen as the test line for a variety of reasons. Its current emissions negatively and disproportionately affect environmental justice communities predominantly made up of Black, brown and immigrant residents. It’s also the shortest of the 12 commuter rail lines and it is fully within the city of Boston.

“The hope of the [Fairmount line] project is that we can show that we can really do this. That is just the first step towards the electrification of the entire commuter rail,” said Daniel Gatti, director of the Transportation Program at the Acadia Center.

“We know that trains that are powered by electricity, they accelerate faster, they stop faster. They’re more reliable in their service in difficult conditions,” Gatti said. “They just provide a better passenger experience. But can we come up with the upfront cost? Can we come up with the capital that we need to make these kinds of investments? That’s the issue that we’re seeing in climate policy again and again.”

To read the full article from Boston Business Journal, click here.

Trump administration suspends five offshore wind projects, including Vineyard Wind, escalating attack on renewables

Citing national security concerns, the Trump administration suspended five federal leases for offshore wind projects on Monday — the latest salvo in the White House’s fight against renewable energy. Two New England projects, Vineyard Wind and Revolution Wind, were among those caught in the crosshairs.

Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director for the advocacy group the Acadia Center, called the decision Monday an unjustified attack by this administration on clean and cheap electricity.

“The end result will be higher energy costs for ratepayers and higher profits for fossil fuel companies and utilities,” he said.

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

‘It just seems like amateur hour’: As climate bill worked through Beacon Hill, industry donations poured in

In early November, state Representative Mark Cusack found himself in a difficult position.

Environmental advocates were apoplectic about a climate bill the new chairman had authored that would weaken the state’s historic climate goals. But the well-funded energy industry had an interest in the bill, too; they argued it would help consumers and businesses facing high energy costs.

However, environmental advocates warn, cutting programs like Mass Save would put the state’s climate goals even further out of reach. The program is the only real tool the state has for getting people to trade in fossil fuels for electric heat pumps, which can be powered by renewable energy, a key part of the state’s plan to reduce emissions.

Kyle Murray, of the clean energy policy nonprofit Acadia Center, said taking a pause on the bill is a good thing. He hopes the final version of the bill will maintain the state’s commitment to reducing emissions and other climate targets.

“Energy is a very complicated subject,“ he said. ”I would hate for us to make some rash decisions that actually set back energy affordability.”

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

PUC Considering Cuts to R.I. Energy’s Efficiency Programs

WARWICK, R.I.— Is it time for the state to cut its energy-efficiency programs?

That’s the question state utility regulators are considering as the year draws to a close. Rhode Island Energy, the main utility company and sole administrator of the programs, says it’s time to cut the budget and “right-size” the amount of money Rhode Islanders are charged.

Environmental groups and advocates, however, including the state council on energy-efficiency programs, say it’s not the time to downsize key initiatives that let Rhode Islanders use less energy and save money.

Those benefits have a direct dollar amount, both in Rhode Island and around the country. Collectively, state-level energy-efficiency programs in New England between 2012 and 2023 have delivered $55 billion in benefits to families and businesses, with a return of $3.40 in benefits for every dollar invested, according to a study completed earlier this year by the Acadia Center.

“How I describe the programs to ratepayers and customers, is that while it shows up as a line item on their utility bills, efficiency helps them reduce the other items on the bill,” said Emily Koo, Rhode Island program director for the Acadia Center. “That includes supply, transmission, and distribution charges.”

Rhode Island Energy’s proposed cuts have been opposed by the Acadia Center, multiple elected officials in the General Assembly, and Providence Mayor Brett Smiley.

To read the full article from ecoRI, click here.

Acadia Center’s Presentation at the New England Restructuring Roundtable

Acadia Center’s Presentation at the New England Restructuring Roundtable 2025

Lawmakers advance worrying bill that could have disastrous long-term impacts: ‘It will drive up costs for ratepayers’

With rising electricity costs a nationwide concern, lawmakers across the country are seeking ways to bring prices down.

A recent proposal in Massachusetts has sparked widespread backlash, with critics warning it would set back years of progress, sacrificing long-term affordability for short-term gains.

“The best you could say is that it is going after short-term affordability at the expense of long-term affordability,” added Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director at Acadia Center, a climate-action nonprofit. “Unfortunately, because it misunderstands the actual drivers of cost, it will drive up costs for ratepayers.”

To read the full article from The Cool Down, click here.

Raab Associates’ Restructuring Roundtable Looks Back on 30 Years

BOSTON — Raab Associates held its final New England Electricity Restructuring Roundtable on Dec. 5, bringing reflections from speakers about the legacy of restructuring and the future of the power sector in the region.

Dan Sosland, president and co-founder of the Acadia Center, said the Roundtable has been somewhat unique among power industry events for its inclusion of climate and environmental perspectives.

“At the Roundtable we were co-equals,” Sosland said. “We were included, and that’s a testament to” Raab Associates President and Roundtable convenor Jonathan Raab.

While most demand growth projections forecast peak demand to roughly double by 2050, “I don’t think these have to be written in stone,” said Jamie Dickerson, senior director of energy and climate programs at Acadia. He pointed to a Brattle Group study indicating that grid flexibility could reduce New York’s 2040 winter peak by about 21%. (See Study Finds Considerable ‘Grid Flexibility’ Potential in New York.)

Jesse Jenkins, a Princeton University associate professor focused on the decarbonization of energy systems, echoed Dickerson’s comments and said even greater demand flexibility gains may be achieved if costs come down for technologies like thermal storage.

“There are lots of ways we can cut [peak demand forecasts], including ground-source geothermal, which is often twice as efficient, if not more, than air-source heat pumps,” he said.

Dickerson also stressed the importance of energy efficiency investments while urging policymakers to find more progressive ways to fund EE programs, including through the tax base.

“We do need to lean on those with a greater ability to pay,” he said.

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

Skyrocketing energy costs have shocked Massachusetts residents. Here’s what happened.

Everyone is mad about their energy bills — and with good reason.

The skyrocketing bills have emerged as a flashpoint in Massachusetts, as residents increasingly cite them as a major contributor to the high cost of living in the state. More than 20 percent of respondents to a new Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll said utilities bills were the single largest strain on their household budgets.

But the reason for the extreme bills goes far beyond the base cost of the natural gas or electricity sent to our homes. Rather, the costs hinge on a series of political decisions and expensive undertakings that have ballooned energy bills.

Some of those extra charges, such as for energy efficiency programs, save you in the long run. For every dollar spent on Mass Save, residents will receive $2.69 back in benefits, according to an analysis by the Acadia Center, a nonprofit focused on clean energy policy.

Noah Berman, senior policy advocate and utility innovation program manager at the Acadia Center, said that when a utility goes before Massachusetts regulators seeking higher reimbursements, it “has 100 percent of the information. They can choose what to pass on, what not to pass on, and how to pass it on to make it look like their preferred option is the only option.”

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

Northeast Partnership to Reduce Climate Emissions Loses Dirtiest Member

Last month, some 360 miles from the Statehouse in Providence, the governor of Pennsylvania and the state Legislature reached a budget deal that will impact Rhode Island and the rest of southern New England.

The deal ended Pennsylvania’s passive participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a multi-state program that sets a cap on planet-warming emissions and requires power plants in the 10 participating states to buy allowances to release carbon dioxide. Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut are RGGI members.

Pennsylvania’s exit from RGGI will cost that state a projected $20 billion in foregone revenue over the next 12 years, according to the Acadia Center, removing the state’s most promising, cost-effective policy lever to reduce harmful emissions from the power sector and leaving it without any meaningful climate and energy affordability policy.

“Instead of allowing the state Supreme Court to rule on RGGI’s legality, Pennsylvania’s elected officials have chosen to abandon the program outright at a time when the program’s benefits are most urgently needed,” according to Paola Moncado Tamayo, the Acadia Center’s senior policy and data analyst. “This is a grave setback for Pennsylvania’s energy, climate, and affordability policies, and it leaves literal billions of dollars in revenues on the table that could have been invested to improve household affordability, reduce energy consumption, improve public health in polluted communities, and insulate everyday families from rising energy costs driven by data center development in Pennsylvania.”

Jamie Dickerson, senior director of climate and clean energy programs at the Acadia Center, noted the value of the RGGI program for both consumers and the environment has been proven year after year, yielding more than twice as many energy bill savings ($20.2 billion) versus program revenues ($9.7 billion) since its Jan. 1, 2009 inception.

To read the full article from ecoRI, click here.

Data center proliferation driving up power needs

STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, Dec. 3, 2025…..Power demand from U.S. data centers is expected to surge to 106 gigawatts by 2035, according to a new forecast, a spike that’s driven by growth in artificial intelligence and that may influence the state’s decarbonization and AI leadership goals.

The projected demand is up from the just 40 gigawatts of energy U.S. data centers currently need and a 36% rise over what Bloomberg projected in April, according to a BloombergNEF report released Tuesday. The rise in demand is bolstered by an influx of early-stage data center projects Bloomberg has identified.

Advocates have raised concerns about data centers’ potential environmental effects. These are especially pressing as President Donald Trump has hampered progress on regional renewable energy projects, potentially leading data center operators to turn to less clean sources like diesel generators, said Noah Berman, senior policy advocate at the Acadia Center.

“It’s literal local pollution that has pretty significant health impacts,” Berman said. “…The impacts are real, and they are being felt in real communities all around and unless these facilities are really monitored closely, there’s also not a lot of transparency when it comes to data center development.”

Along with this, data centers strain water supplies and can cause noise or aesthetic concerns in neighborhoods where they are built, he said.

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