Hey Mass. residents, your monthly gas bill is about to go down

The state has some good news for people who heat their homes with gas, just as they prepare to turn up the thermostat ahead of the weekend’s expected cold snap.

The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities on Thursday ordered utilities to reduce the price of natural gas they provide to customers. As that rate drops, so will your monthly utility bill.

The department estimates that the average household in the state could see a 4-5% decrease in monthly bills for the period beginning Feb. 1, though the amount you pay depends in part on how much gas you use.

Though this reduction in gas prices will provide some relief to Massachusetts residents paying really high utility bills, Kyle Murray of the Acadia Center hopes it also serves as a reminder of the benefits of moving away from natural gas.

“We are still extremely vulnerable to the whims of a competitive market that we have little control over because we are overly reliant on natural gas for both electricity generation and home heating,” he said.

“Transitioning to a diverse fuel mix of local renewables paired with home electrification would allow Massachusetts to have greater control over energy costs and supply while also delivering well-paying local jobs.”

Read more here.

Connecticut Releases Hydrogen Task Force Study: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Background & Context

In January, the Connecticut Hydrogen Task Force released its report with recommendations on hydrogen-fueled energy in the state. The Task Force was established by Special Act 22-8 with an assignment to examine the sources of potential clean hydrogen and recommendations for potential end uses of hydrogen-fueled energy. It’s important to note that the legislation did not specifically ask the Task Force to study the most reasonable and cost-effective use of hydrogen to help the state reach its overarching GHG reduction goal of 80% below 2001 levels by 2050 – a critical shortcoming in Acadia Center’s view. Acadia Center has been heavily involved in the stakeholder process informing the development of the Report, including sitting on the End Uses Working Group.

The Task Force’s report comes at a time when hydrogen is a hot topic in the state and region. In 2022, Connecticut joined six other northeastern states to develop a proposal to become one of at least four regional clean hydrogen hubs designated through the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs Program. If selected, the states could receive anywhere from $400 million to $1.25 billion to develop and deploy a hydrogen hub in the region. Simultaneously, DEEP is currently in the process of developing an update to the state’s Comprehensive Energy Strategy, the overarching document that covers a broad set of energy policy recommendations for the state. The role of hydrogen will be a key area of focus in the CES, but it remains to be seen how much the Task Force Study will influence the direction of the CES.

Largely Keeps the Focus on Hard-to-Decarbonize Sectors

As Acadia Center has previously explained in greater detail here, clean hydrogen is and will continue to be a limited resource that should be strategically used in the sectors of the economy that are hardest to electrify, not building heating and passenger vehicles. Fortunately, the Report largely echoes Acadia Center’s stance on this issue, concluding that heat electrification will ultimately be the most cost-effective option for reducing carbon emissions for residential and commercial customers, and that hydrogen fuel cell passenger cars will likely be more expensive in terms of both upfront purchase and fueling costs, and need for a whole new set of fueling infrastructure.

A Few Problematic Recommendations

However, Acadia Center does have some concerns with a few key recommendations stemming from the report.

• Hydrogen Vehicle Tax Exemptions: The Report recommends that “The Legislature should consider tax exemptions for hydrogen vehicles and critical facilities that produce or use clean hydrogen.” While it potentially makes sense to incentivize hydrogen vehicles in portions of the transportation sector that are challenging to electrify (e.g., shipping, long-haul trucking) it makes zero sense to incentivize hydrogen fuel cell passenger vehicles, which are inferior to battery electric vehicles by basically every measure (as the Repot itself acknowledges).
• Hydrogen Blending for Power Plants and Industrial Facilities: A second concern is that the Report categorizes hydrogen blending for “non-core gas customers” (i.e., power generation and industrial heat) as a “high priority hydrogen end use” that should be further investigated by DEEP. However, the report fails to specify that such blending should be done only at the facility level, and not into the gas distribution system that serves all customers.
• Encouraging Hydrogen Producers to Report Fuel Carbon Intensity: Finally, the Report recommends that DEEP “Develop accounting mechanisms that encourage hydrogen producers to certify carbon intensity of produced hydrogen.” This shouldn’t be a voluntary program – DEEP should require that hydrogen producers certify the carbon intensity of the fuel they produce. Only then can we be sure that clean hydrogen really is clean.

Much Work Still to Be Done to Define a Reasonable Role of Hydrogen in Connecticut

Ultimately, before DEEP can determine the most reasonable, cost-effective role for hydrogen to play in helping Connecticut reach its long-term GHG emissions reduction goals, it’s necessary to evaluate the tradeoffs between different future “pathways” through an economy-wide modeling analysis, similar to what Massachusetts did in the 2050 Decarbonization Roadmap. This type of analysis would help the state to clearly understand how hydrogen fits into the overall, long-term decarbonization puzzle in the state. Connecticut still hasn’t undertaken that type of comprehensive analysis and this Report does not (and doesn’t pretend to) fill that void. As a result, the recommendations from the Report are of limited value and really serve as only the first step in understanding the appropriate role for hydrogen in Connecticut.

The Report highlights next steps for DEEP which Acadia Center is on board with, including advising DEEP to:

• Develop a definition of clean hydrogen appropriate for Connecticut.
• Evaluate the sufficiency of zero-emission electricity sources to meet both electric sector decarbonization goals and hydrogen production targets.
• Lead interstate and interagency coordination to develop a hydrogen roadmap and strategy that, among other things, examines the cost and availability of zero-carbon renewable energy resources to produce clean hydrogen and examines overall alignment with state policies and goals, including GHG reduction goals.

It’s critical for DEEP to follow through on these recommendations and economy-wide pathways modeling will be essential in supporting them in this task.

For more information:

Ben Butterworth, Director of Climate, Energy, and Equity Analysis, bbutterworth@acadiacenter.org, 617-742-0054  ext. 111

Hot Topic: Dispelling the Myths about Induction Stoves

Induction stoves have become a hot topic as of late. With the push for the transition to renewables getting stronger than ever, so does the push from fossil gas advocates. Their newest target is induction stovetops, and creating fear around the move away from gas stoves. We’re here to dispel some of the myths and misinformation around induction cooktops.

Myth: Induction is not as powerful as gas and doesn’t get as hot

Fact: Induction is actually far more powerful than gas, given how efficient they are at dispersing heat across the surface of the cookware. While open flames wrap around a pot or pan, losing temperature and equal heating, induction is able to cook more precisely.

Myth: You’ll have to replace all of your cookware, costing you hundreds more

Fact: Induction cooktops do require cookware made of magnetic materials, meaning copper and aluminum pans are unable to work. However, most good quality alloy, cast iron, and other ferromagnetic material pots and pans will work well on induction cooktops. You likely already have all of the cookware you would need for an induction system.

Myth: Glass cooktops aren’t strong and will break much easier

Fact: Induction cooktops are incredibly strong and are all safety tested to withstand significant weight and pressure. When shopping, look for ceramic glass top induction stoves for the safest and strongest option.

Myth: Induction stoves are more expensive than gas

Fact: While induction cooktops can be expensive, the Inflation Reduction Act has made it more affordable than ever. Even if installing a full induction stovetop is outside of your budget, there are single burner induction cooktops available for as little as $50. Once you have your induction cooktop, the actual cost of operating it is significantly less than a gas range or an electric range. Because induction stoves are incredibly efficient, they utilize 85-90% of the energy they generate, making them the most energy efficient cooktop option.

Myth: Induction stoves can interfere with medical devices like pacemakers

Fact: There has never been a recorded instance of pacemaker interference with induction cooktops. The American Medical Association has never listed induction cooktops as a risk to those with pacemakers, despite listing many other everyday devices that can interfere. The magnetic wave of an induction stove only extends about an inch off the surface when not covered in a pot or pan.

Additional benefits to switching to induction:

IRA rebates make it more affordable, with rental households and households earning less than $210k getting rebates of up to $840 to switch to induction from gas. Many state energy efficiency programs also offer incentives – for instance MassSave offers a $500 rebate. 

Switching to induction means fewer preventable illnesses and diseases in your household. In the last few years, studies have shown that natural gas infrastructure leaks more often than previously thought – making the greenhouse gas impact higher than coal in some cases. In addition, the gas mixture contains many toxic chemicals and stoves in the Boston area were found to leak even when not in use. Finally, gas in the household has proven to increase respiratory illnesses like asthma by as much as 12.7% for children.  

Massachusetts residents are feeling the crunch as utility prices soar

Power to the people: How activists are working to change New England’s grid operator from the inside

In Pennsylvania, heat pumps could be a climate change solution

Buildings are second only to transportation as sources for greenhouse gasses, according to Amy Boyd, vice president of Climate & Clean Energy Policy at the Acadia Center in Boston, which helps Northeastern states meet climate targets.

A University of California, Davis study found installing a heat pump could cut carbon dioxide emissions, the main cause of global warming, around 38 to 53 percent from home heating.

“Eliminating the greenhouse gas emissions that are coming from our heat, particularly in the Northeast, is one of the biggest things that an individual consumer can do to fight climate change,” Boyd said.

Because it’s only moving heat around, not creating it, heat pumps are up to four times more efficient than a standard furnace. In the summer, they can reverse themselves, doubling as air conditioners. They rely on heat exchangers, clever pieces of technology that are behind refrigerators and freezers. On a modern heat pump, they can pluck heat out of even the coldest outdoor air.

“Even if it seems cold to your eye, if it’s any warmer than the vacuum of space, then there is heat out there to be moved,” Boyd said.

Right now, about 10 percent of homes in the U.S. use heat pumps. That number will have to go up if the country is going to meet its climate goals.

Top environmental issues facing RI lawmakers in 2023: Solar farm siting, curbing emissions

PROVIDENCE — How do you follow up on two legislative sessions that have been heralded as the best for policymaking on the environment in Rhode Island history?

With even more bills aimed at tackling climate change, protecting natural resources, reducing trash and expanding investments in renewable energy.

That’s what advocates with some of the state’s leading environmental groups want to see in the new session as it gets underway.

They say that state legislators can’t rest on their laurels after a pair of groundbreaking years in the General Assembly that began with passage in 2021 of the Act on Climate, the emissions-reduction law that’s designed to form the foundation for Rhode Island climate policy, and followed last year with, among a flurry of other bills, one that updates a key law for purchases of cleaner power and another aimed specifically at ramping up offshore wind development.

But if Rhode Island were to adopt a statewide ban, it would be the first in the nation, said Hank Webster, Rhode Island director of the Acadia Center, one of the groups that proposed a moratorium on new gas hookups on Aquidneck Island. And he believes it may not even require legislation but could rather be done by the administration of Gov. Dan McKee.

“I think the Act on Climate anticipated this question,” Webster said, pointing to provisions in the law that he and others argue empowers state agencies to take action to rein in emissions.

The Acadia Center, a regional clean-energy group, and a host of other organizations including The Nature Conservancy and the Audubon Society of Rhode Island, are also focused on revamping energy efficiency programs. The state’s efforts to insulate homes, replace outdated appliances and take other steps to conserve energy have long been viewed as among the most effective in the nation, but observers say there is still a lot of room for improvement.

Read the full article here.

Climate change is making power outages more common

New England clean energy goals slam into oil reality

New England power plants burned more oil for electricity on a single day during last month’s deep freeze than they have in four years, underscoring the gap between Northeastern states’ clean energy targets and the current resource mix in the region.

Oil resources supplied 29 percent of a six-state region’s power on Dec. 24 as temperatures hovered in the teens, natural gas supplies tightened and some generators failed to perform as expected. The amount of electricity generated by oil that day was higher than it had been since a weekslong polar vortex hit New England in January 2018, according to an E&E News review of annual reports from the regional grid operator on fuel use.

New England and New York are the only parts of the country that rely extensively on oil resources for backup power when other electricity supplies are expensive or in short supply. In both regions, oil is used sparingly throughout the year, having accounted for 0.2 percent of the total electric load in New England in 2021, according to ISO New England, the area’s nonprofit grid operator.

“It’s been years that this back and forth switching between fossil fuels has been going on, and it’s not improving,” Amy Boyd, vice president of climate and clean energy policy at Acadia Center, a New England-based environmental advocacy group, said in an email. “We need to instead come to a better solution.”

‘There’s a dam breaking:’ Cities and towns start to kick fossil fuels with new building code

Brookline and Watertown last week became the first communities in the state to adopt a new building code discouraging the use of fossil fuels in new buildings, and 22 more cities and towns have signaled they intend to take similar action, in what climate advocates say is the first large-scale test of Massachusetts’ willingness to wean itself from gas and oil.

The new code, finalized by the state Department of Energy Resources last month, adds new requirements to the current building codes in communities that choose to adopt it. It stops short of being an outright ban of fossil fuel heat, but by requiring stringent energy efficiency measures and add-ons like solar panels in buildings that plan to install gas line connections, it is likely to sharply curtail it.

Even some of the most staunch supporters of the electrification movement have some concerns about the new code. Kyle Murray, the Massachusetts program director for the clean energy advocacy group Acadia Center, said that some additional measures may be needed to ensure low income residents are not negatively impacted, though he noted that on the whole, things are moving in the right direction.

“Cities and towns are leading the way, and I think we’re going to see a sort of point where — I don’t want to use disaster metaphors — but there’s a dam breaking,” Murray said. “We’re going to see these cities and towns do it and then we’re going to see so many more cities and towns say, ‘Oh, yeah, we can do this too.’ ”

Read the full article here.