Scientific journal investigating UMass hydrogen study after revelations of gas industry influence
A peer-reviewed scientific journal has begun investigating a study it recently published on the use of hydrogen as a heating fuel in Massachusetts, citing a Globe investigation that found the authors failed to disclose gas industry funding and the role of a lobbyist aligned with the industry.
A research integrity specialist for the journal Frontiers in Energy Research, which published the study in September, said in an e-mail that the Globe’s account led the journal to open its “own internal investigation into the aforementioned manuscript to assess the situation and establish the facts of the matter.”
If the investigation finds conflicts that call into question the study’s findings, it could lead to a retraction.
The study, by scientists at the University of Massachusetts Lowell, endorsed the use of so-called green hydrogen for heating buildings in Massachusetts and recommended the state consider adopting hydrogen as a clean fuel. The American Gas Association and gas interests in Massachusetts have been promoting hydrogen as a climate-friendly alternative to carbon-emitting gas. Adopting such a plan on a large scale would allow gas utilities to continue operating and profiting much as they do now but with a different fuel.
But many scientists say using green hydrogen as a replacement for natural gas — or mixing it with natural gas or other fuels, as the gas industry has also proposed — isn’t feasible for reasons that include high cost, safety risks, and hydrogen’s potential to harm the climate. What’s more, they say, continuing to push green hydrogen as a climate-friendly option could delay progress on more realistic climate solutions.
…
Beyond that, many experts say there simply isn’t enough of either gas available to feasibly heat homes.
A report by National Grid found there is ample renewable natural gas in the Eastern United States, but Ben Butterworth, the director of climate, energy and equity analysis at the clean energy advocacy organization Acadia Center, said he has not seen any independent research supporting that conclusion. Studies including a 2021 Princeton report called “Net Zero America” have found that similar supply issues face green hydrogen, because producing it at scale requires so much wind or solar power.
“It makes absolutely no sense that we would be talking about using this for residential and commercial uses,” he said.
Read the full article in The Boston Globe here.
RGGI 58th Auction, 2022 in Review, and the Consequence for Climate and Clean Energy Transition
Media Contacts:
Ben Butterworth, Director: Climate, Energy, and Equity Analysis
bbutterworth@acadiacenter.org, 617-742-0054 x111
Paola Moncada Tamayo, Policy Analyst
ptamayo@acadiacenter.org, 860-246-7121 x204
BOSTON, MA- On Wednesday, December 7th, the eleven states participating in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) released the results of the 58th and final auction for 2022. Emissions allowances were sold for $12.99 each, generating $288 million for clean energy investments in participating states. The allowance price for the RGGI program is the lowest in 2022 but remains well above the historical average. The Cost Containment Reserve (“CCR”) Trigger Price of $13.91 per ton of CO2 was avoided, so no CCR allowances were sold in the auction. Both the proceeds from sales of allowances and the clearing price for this 58th auction ranked among the top five highest in the history of RGGI.
Higher RGGI allowance price is good for climate, clean energy investment
The clearing price represents the price that power plant operators must pay for each ton of CO2 emitted by their fossil-fuel-fired plants. The auction clearing price of $12.99 represents a modest 3% decrease from the previous auction in August, but, in total, the average 2022 auction price was 42% higher than the average 2021 auction price. The higher allowance prices seen in 2022 mean the RGGI program is sending a stronger incentive to produce electricity from carbon-free sources, like wind and solar. Recent auctions have demonstrated the growing significance of the CCR – the auctions in 2022 have all narrowly avoided the CCR trigger price, while the 54th auction in December 2021 represented the first time since 2015 that additional allowances were released because of triggering the CCR.
Since the program launched, the vast majority of RGGI proceeds have been invested in energy efficiency and clean energy projects as detailed in the most recent report on RGGI investments in 2020, released in May of this year. The $288 million in proceeds generated in this auction brings the annual to-date total to $1.19 billion, which is 29% higher than the total proceeds of 2021’s record-setting total proceeds. Auction proceeds have increased dramatically in recent years.
For example, the auction proceeds of 2022 so far are 128% higher than the total proceeds generated in all 2018 and 2019 auctions combined. This is great news for climate action, the economy, and the growing workforce in energy efficiency and clean energy.
RGGI Third Program Review Offers an Opportunity to Direct Proceeds Towards Clean Energy Investments that Directly Benefit Environmental Justice Communities
Since its establishment, RGGI’s priorities have centered around reducing pollution from fossil fuel power plants and achieving climate solutions for RGGI states. Every five years or so, RGGI undergoes a program review, giving the participating states the opportunity to consider the program’s performance and make various changes including the equitable disbursement of the program’s proceeds. RGGI’s Third Program Review is happening now. According to their recent Program Review Update, RGGI Inc. will be holding public meetings soliciting comments and engaging with Environmental Justice communities throughout Spring and Summer of 2023.
As discussed in more detail in Acadia Center’s blog post The Third RGGI Program Review Should Advance Equitable Investments and Climate Goals. The Third Program review offers a good opportunity to ensure that environmental justice communities are heard and are actively involved in the development of strategies to ensure a smooth, equitable transition to a carbon-free economy. This ongoing program review provides a chance for states to consider the recent auctions, history of investments across the states, the need to directly address environmental justice communities, and other mechanisms associated with the cap-and-invest program.
Acadia Center remains closely involved in RGGI policy conversations across the RGGI states and will continue to advocate for program reforms that drive equitable investment and climate action.
Acadia Center is a northeast-based nonprofit research and advocacy organization advancing a safe climate and a clean energy future that benefits everyone.
Acadia Center’s Impact in Eversource’s Rate Docket, DPU 22-22
On Wednesday, December 2, the Department of Public Utilities issued a ruling in DPU Docket 22-22, allowing Eversource to increase base distribution rates for electric service and approving a proposed Performance-Based Ratemaking (PBR) plan with a few changes championed by Acadia Center and other intervenors.
During the process and in its brief, Acadia Center argued that Eversource’s PBR plan should be approved, though with several significant alterations. Below represents Eversource’s petition, what Acadia Center asked for in modifications, and what was approved by the Department.
Negative X Factor – Rejected
Eversource: A productivity factor is an accounting tool that attempts to measure the difference in the expected growth rates of an electric utility’s productivity compared to the overall economy. Eversource’s last rate case in 2018 resulted in the DPU approving, for the first time in the country, a negative productivity factor, which added over $135M in automatic rate hikes with no strings attached over the last 4 years. As part of this year’s rate case, Eversource again sought a negative productivity factor, -1.45 percent. The company initially claimed that without the negative X-factor, the company would need to come in for rate cases more often than once every 5 years, driving up transaction costs.
Acadia Center: As we did in the last rate case, Acadia Center asked the Department to reject the use of a negative X-factor, noting that Eversource’s proposed solution did nothing to address the underlying problem that the utility was becoming less productive every year. We noted that Eversource has received annual revenue increases under this plan of between 2.97% and 3.55%, totaling $135 million, and that a negative X-factor is unprecedented in the United States outside of Massachusetts. Acadia Center contends that a negative X-factor can result in an increase in revenues for the utility without creating a real incentive to improve performance overall or to deliver better outcomes for customers.
DPU: The Department got rid of the negative X-factor – in a way. It approved an X-factor of zero, as Eversource relented to in rebuttal testimony, despite them stating in the same testimony that an X-factor set at zero would result in an unworkable PBR plan. As part of this compromise, the DPU approved other factors that will be advantageous to Eversource.
Length of PBR Term – Shortened
Eversource: After its 2018-2023 PBR plan, Eversource sought a ten-year investment plan, arguing that it would give them enough time to achieve its goals and to provide certainty needed to follow through with medium- and long-term strategic business decisions.
Acadia Center: Acadia Center asked the Department to approve a five-year PBR plan, as had been approved by the Department in the past, particularly in situations where a company is expected to undergo substantial capital investments. Additionally, given the fast changing nature of energy, the assumptions that all parties make today are unlikely to be true in 10 years, and it is better for all to be able to revisit these issues in 5 years.
DPU: The Department appeared to agree with Acadia Center’s arguments, ruling for a five-year term instead of ten. The Department noted that the substantial capital investments that Eversource is planning on undertaking, such as critical infrastructure projects and other investments necessary to comply with legislative and administration policy initiatives, were more in line with a five-year term. It determined that a five-year term would allow for the resources and flexibility necessary for Eversource to adjust its operations and investments efficiently, and, in turn, best ensure ratepayer benefits of increased operational efficiencies and improved service, and the opportunity for avoided administrative costs. The DPU also said Eversource could file a request to continue the PBR plan for another five years when this one ends.
Return on Equity (ROE) – Lowered
Eversource: An ROE represents the cap on what a utility can try to earn on its investments. Eversource sought an ROE of 10.5 percent, claiming it was needed to cover a revenue deficiency of $89 million.
Acadia Center: Acadia Center noted that a 10.5 percent ROE would be wildly out of step with ROE’s approved in the region for utilities in similar situation and asked the Department to approve no higher than a 9.25 percent ROE.
DPU: The DPU, for a number of complex reasons, chose to effectively split the difference and approve an ROE of 9.8 percent. They noted that this was within a reasonable range of rates that would preserve Eversource’s financial integrity, would allow it to attract capital on reasonable terms and for the proper discharge of its public duties, and would be comparable to earnings of companies of similar risk. In approving an ROE of 9.8%, not only did the DPU approve an ROE lower than what was requested, it approved an ROE that was lower than Eversource’s current ROE of 10%.
Stakeholder Engagement – Required
Acadia Center also advocated for better stakeholder processes and input going forward, noting deficiencies in the process in this docket and with PBR metrics. The DPU also noted deficiencies in the proposed PBR metrics and ordered refinements to be conducted through an inclusive stakeholder process over the course of the PBR plan. The Department then set out specifics for that stakeholder process, such as requiring reports on the number of stakeholder meetings held and lists of stakeholders that participate. Acadia Center thinks that the forthcoming Grid Modernization Advisory Council, a stakeholder body established by the 2022 climate bill to provide to grid modernization and planning like what the EEAC has done for efficiency, might be a good venue to handle development of the metrics for PBR, as well as grid modernization.
For more information:
Kyle Murray, kmurray@acadiacenter.org, 617-742-0054 ext. 106
5 takeaways from R.I.’s climate update report
PROVIDENCE — Rhode Island on Monday released a draft report outlining the progress it’s made and the progress it will need to continue to make in reducing greenhouse gas emissions to curb climate change.
The report is part of the state’s landmark Act on Climate law of 2021, which sets binding climate emission reduction targets starting in 2030. By 2050, the state must reach net zero emissions. A final version of the draft report is expected later this month, but this is pretty much what you’ll see in final form.
…
As noted, based on the models in this report, Rhode Island will still miss its emission reduction targets by 2030 even if it adopts certain efforts to curb climate change. So what more can be done that the report isn’t suggesting? Well, here’s one example: Advocates have called for the state to fully fund the state’s Transit Master Plan and its Bike Mobility Plan.
The report says those contain good ideas, but that’s “not possible at this time.”
Some disagree.
“I would say that like any other policy priority, it’s not accurate for the administration to say that fully funding those plans is not possible,” said Hank Webster, Rhode Island director of the Acadia Center. “It’s a choice, a policy decision not to fully fund those well vetted and approved plans that have been collecting dust.”
Still, Webster describes himself as an optimist, and was overall sanguine about the report and the state’s ability to get to where it needs to go.
“We have the technology and policy solutions that we need to get there,” Webster said.
Read the full article in The Boston Globe here.
Northeast States Remain Top Performers in New 2022 ACEEE Rankings
Rockport, ME – For the second year in a row, Massachusetts has lost its energy efficiency crown to California, after nearly a decade on top of the national rankings for efficiency, according to rankings released by the nonpartisan American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). As they have for over a decade, Northeast states performed well in the 2022 State Energy Efficiency Scorecard, with Massachusetts, New York, Vermont, and Maine filling out the top 5 spots, respectively. Rhode Island and Maryland tied for #7, Connecticut at #9, and New Hampshire at #19. Maine was also the most improved state in the nation, having passed laws to promote electrification and decarbonization in affordable housing, continued investing in weatherization and heat pump programs, adopted energy and water saving standards for more than 15 types of products, and developing a Clean Transportation Roadmap to equitably advance electric vehicle adoption.
“Investing in energy efficiency is the best way to reduce the energy burdens faced by consumers in the Northeast,” said Daniel Sosland, Acadia Center’s President. “The region’s continued strong showing in the national rankings is due to the last decade of successful efficiency policies and programs in these states – helping the Northeast lower carbon pollution while providing billions in economic and public health benefits, region-wide.”
For the first time, the Scorecard’s metrics included 10 scoring categories evaluating the states’ focus and impact on equity within the policies and programs. None of the Northeastern states (in fact no state in the nation) reached a perfect score on the equity metrics in the buildings sector, indicating that much more needs to be done to advance affordable, healthy, and decarbonized housing.
“The Northeast is a national leader in energy efficiency, but states can and must do more, especially on equity” said Amy Boyd, Vice President for Climate & Clean Energy Policy, and a member of the Massachusetts Energy Efficiency Advisory Council. “Acadia Center is working with states in the Northeast to keep energy efficiency funding high, serve low- and moderate-income communities better, and align energy efficiency programs more closely with climate targets. We need to ensure that all communities and customers can access the efficiency programs to improve their housing.”
Importantly, many households in the Northeast—particularly those living in older buildings in environmental justice communities—suffer from excessive indoor air pollution, unhealthy temperature swings, and other inadequate living conditions. The communities most impacted by this substandard housing disproportionately consist of people of color. These buildings also emit more climate pollutants than better-weatherized housing. Existing efficiency programs must embrace this chance to marry traditional energy savings with crucially important equity and climate goals. Acadia Center is working with a wide range of partner organizations on policy changes that will enable efficiency programs to seize this opportunity.
The ACEEE rankings, released annually, are based on scoring in categories including state government initiatives, building efficiency policies, utility and public benefits programs, transportation policies, and appliance standards. The Northeast’s success in the rankings is largely the result of a policy championed by Acadia Center that requires programs to pursue all energy efficiency that is cost-effective, rather than defining a prescribed level of funding, and to involve stakeholders in developing efficiency plans. Connecticut is unique among the other all-cost-effective states in that it sets its budget first, then designs its programs to achieve a lower level of savings than possible. Despite Connecticut’s earning additional points due to being one of only two states in the nation (the other being Montana) to adopt the 2021 version of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), it fell overall in the rankings due to these budget-constrained savings goals and lack of appliance standards.
Acadia Center is regionally focused, non-profit organization headquartered in Rockport, Maine, working to advance a clean energy future that benefits all.
For more information:
Amy Boyd, VP Climate & Clean Energy Policy, aboyd@acadiacenter.org, 617.742.0054. Ext 102
Massachusetts Clean Heat Commission Report Delivers a Bold Vision for a Decarbonized Future
The much-anticipated Massachusetts Clean Heat Commission (CHC) report dropped yesterday and was a breath of fresh air. Despite the Commission’s composition with fossil fuel and business-focused Commissioners outnumbering consumer and environmental advocates, they have delivered a strong proposal for real progress on decarbonization. Acadia Center staff are thrilled to engage with the incoming administration on how to implement the recommendations of this report and excited for the potential impact on the Commonwealth and the clean energy future we strive to achieve.
Among the best parts:
- Finally Saying the Future is Electric: Despite not mentioning the DPU 20-80 “Future of Gas” docket or the gas utility business model at all, the report directly identifies that “[t]he Commonwealth’s long-term building decarbonization strategy requires transitioning customers from existing pipeline gas infrastructure to electric infrastructure and, where appropriate given technical and financial feasibility, networked geothermal districts.”
- Identifying the Need for Joint Energy System Planning: The CHC proposes that the Governor and Legislature direct the DPU and DOER to conduct statewide joint energy system planning across Massachusetts’ gas and electric utilities and municipal gas and electric companies and in conjunction with key stakeholders and communities. In other words, “agencies, go do RESPECT – Acadia Center’s framework to modernize energy planning.”
- Embedding Equity, Engagement, and Representation in Decision-Making: Centering equity, engagement, and representation in all aspects of our Commonwealth’s building decarbonization principles and practices is critical to ensuring that no ratepayer is left behind. The report recommends that these core principles inform the design of all programs and policies. Acadia Center wholeheartedly agrees.
- Focusing on Institutional Coordination and Alignment: As Acadia Center has been arguing across the region for years, our climate goals are only as strong as the agencies empowered (or not) to implement them. Without buy-in from every entity across our state government, we will not be able to achieve our net zero requirements. The CHC’s recommendation for cross-cutting coordination will be critical to the Commonwealth’s success.
- Ending Investment in New Gas Infrastructure: The report echoes what Acadia Center and other climate champions have been highlighting about natural gas infrastructure in a bold and powerful statement. “Investments that would support new or increased natural gas infrastructure or capacity should instead be deployed to advance measures that help support the net zero future.”
- Considering New Ideas Like a Clean Heat Standard: Although details on the specifics of the proposed Clean Heat Standard (CHS) remain sparse, if properly designed, the CHS could serve as another valuable policy tool for cost-effectively electrifying and improving the efficiency of buildings in the Commonwealth without driving up costs to electric ratepayers. The details of how biofuels and hydrogen are treated in the CHS will be of critical importance and Acadia Center is looking forward to engaging on this topic as the details of the CHS get fleshed out.
- Being More Realistic About the Decarbonization Potential of Alternative Fuels: Unlike the DPU 20-80 “Future of Gas” analysis – that completely ignored lifecycle emissions from biofuels – the CHC is clear about the need for a science-based, full lifecycle analysis of various biofuels to determine their carbon intensity. This is an essential step for determining whether supporting the use of specific biofuels in buildings via policy makes sense. The report also highlights that alternative fuels are “…not a long-term solution for most of Massachusetts’ building stock.”
- Creating One-Stop Shopping for Climate-Positive Projects: Acadia Center agrees that Mass Save could use some reforms and that the whole suite of building decarbonization programs should get pulled together under an umbrella that provides a single point of contact for consumers. But the devil is in the details on the Building Decarbonization Clearinghouse, and we would hate to lose the transparency and stakeholder leadership brought about through the Massachusetts Energy Efficiency Advisory Council (EEAC). We are excited to get to work on this issue further and have a lot to say about it.
- Expanding Building Benchmarking: Acadia Center has supported DOER’s work to expand building labeling and energy scorecards for years and continues to think it is one of the best ways to demonstrate the value of decarbonized buildings to owners and renters. The CHC’s recommendation to expand existing energy labeling programs to cover buildings under 20,000 feet is critical for driving rapid deployment of energy efficiency in residential and smaller commercial buildings.
- Funding the Transition with New Resources: The CHC recognizes that ratepayer funds, payments from regulated suppliers, and market-based funds may not be enough to finance the decarbonization of buildings that we need. Although the discussion of using taxpayer funds focuses on effective use of federal funds, rather than opening the state coffers, we appreciate the willingness of the Commission to think creatively about how we’re going to pay for this. The Climate Bank, too, has the potential to inject needed finance dollars into this cause.
- Creating Strategies for Decarbonizing the Affordable Housing Sector: Creating strategies for decarbonizing affordable housing represents an incredible opportunity for the next administration…or a potential for major failure if not properly centered. We simply cannot afford to leave our LMI households and environmental justice (EJ) populations behind, and the CHC astutely recognizes that fact.
- Additional Ideas Worthy of Merit:
o Workforce Training and Education
o Research and Development
o Public Outreach and Awareness
o Expanding Green Communities and Leading by Example
o Electric Operating Cost Reductions
Though this report represents exactly the kind of bold thinking necessary to drive Massachusetts toward its decarbonization requirements, some difficult questions are omitted, and others require additional detail. Acadia Center will tackle those in a separate piece.
Overall, the Massachusetts Commission on Clean Heat produced a visionary set of recommendations that show impressive foresight. Members of the Commission should be proud of their work, and we laud the administration for its dedication and output under an extremely tight deadline.
For more information:
Kyle Murray
Senior Advocate and Massachusetts Program Director
kmurray@acadiacenter.org
617-742-0054 ext. 106
Solving the Winter Energy Problem with Acadia Center
Year after year, the operator of New England’s electric grid, ISO-New England (ISO-NE), announces a risk of blackouts during the winter. New Englanders are stuck in a Groundhog Day scenario, asking: if this threat to the region’s electric grid happens every year, why hasn’t it been fixed by now? At a recent webinar for the Acadia Center community, our staff took on these vital questions.
Melissa Birchard, Acadia Center’s Director of Clean Energy & Grid Transition, explained how ISO-New England operates the region’s power grid and electricity markets. ISO-NE, with the backing of the federal government, has the power to institute measures like rolling blackouts to keep the electricity system safe during the winter. Although rolling blackouts would only occur if winter weather were to be unusually severe and prolonged, state utilities have been asked to plan for this possibility.
The region’s overreliance on natural gas is the root cause of these problems. New England has increased its use of natural gas to generate electricity by a massive amount in the last 20 years. New England relies on natural gas for over 50% of its fuel mix each year, which is risky both because an overreliance on any one fuel creates a liability and because natural gas is not produced locally in New England and is, therefore, more difficult to have on hand and subject to price spikes. Because natural gas is a fossil fuel, it also contributes to extreme weather, perpetuating the risk of blackouts. Our targets for climate health all involve eliminating the use of fossil fuels like natural gas now and in the coming years.
In the winter, natural gas is in high demand not only in New England, but around the country and the globe. It’s this increased demand that threatens rolling blackouts and that causes consumer bills to rise, as gas supplies are preferentially delivered to utilities to provide heat, rather than merchant generators to keep the lights on. This winter has added challenges due to Russia’s war in Ukraine, restricting global imports from a major global supplier of natural gas. In addition, supply chain issues due to the pandemic and climate change are elevating risks. These factors have made prices skyrocket and the chance of blackouts rise.
Acadia Center’s answer to this problem, which we detailed in a recent explainer written with our partners, is clean energy. Clean energy provides solutions for near-, medium- and long-term problems.
These solutions include:
- Resource Diversity – Stopping the overreliance on gas.
- Demand Management – Managing consumer demand in smart and strategic ways. This can include using residential solar and batteries to support the electric grid, automatically adjusting lighting and device charging, or delaying energy intensive processes in industrial facilities to help lighten the load on the grid during key stretches of time.
- Bringing online clean, renewable energy – Resources like offshore wind are strong in the winter and healthy for our planet.
- Energy storage – Saving energy for the times of highest demand, in short, medium, and long duration.
To implement these solutions, we need to scale up clean energy and transmission lines for newly generated clean energy to travel across the region. We also need to get behind new technologies and modern energy markets. Many of these solutions need to be driven by the New England states and ISO-New England working together.
Amy Boyd, Vice President, Climate & Clean Energy Policy, detailed some solutions consumers can implement in the near term. The biggest thing consumers can do is make sure their homes are as energy efficient as possible and shop around to get off fossil fuels. Alternatives like community choice aggregation offer more options and often come in at a lower cost than traditional utility bills due to greater diversity and added renewable energy. Community solar can also be a great way to participate in clean energy located in your community, even if you can’t add solar panels to your own roof.
It’s important to remember that rising energy costs and the risk of blackouts can disproportionately affect renters, lower income people, non-English speakers, and environmental justice populations. These communities are most likely to live in homes that are not weatherized or connected to green energy, meaning they are on average 25% less efficient, cost five times more to heat, and create 50% of greenhouse gas emissions The winter energy problem is a threat to everyone but presents even more serious concerns for these communities, so we need green solutions to help these communities that need it most.
You can watch the webinar any time to hear more about this topic, find more for consumers looking to lower energy bills, and hear Amy and Melissa answer questions from the audience. This webinar was made possible by the Acadia Center donor community, and we’re so grateful for the support. If you’d like to join Acadia Center in the fight for the clean energy system of the future, please donate here.
Massachusetts Utilities Hope Hydrogen and Biomethane Can Keep the State Cooking, and Heating, With Gas
There is great uncertainty in Massachusetts’ path to decarbonization, and two conflicting visions are emerging for the future of the state’s gas system. Central to the conflict are questions over the role of alternative gases in the transition to clean energy, as well as the future of the gas industry as a whole. And as invisible as the gas is itself, some of the industry’s influence on the energy transition has been hidden from view, as underscored by emails released this week by a watchdog group.
…
As gas utilities and advocates debate the future of the gas system, state regulators have deferred to the utilities to construct the initial plans for decarbonization. In a variety of avenues throughout the state, utilities have used their influence to promote their preferred decarbonization options, often out of the public eye. Environmentalists argue this is putting the state’s climate goals in jeopardy.
“Is a gas utility going to plan against its best interests for the sake of the Commonwealth’s decarbonization goals, or for the sake of ratepayers in the Commonwealth?” asked Kyle Murray, a senior policy advocate at the Acadia Center, a nonprofit that focuses on climate and energy policy. “I’m not sure that’s even fair to them, as they have shareholders that they need to deliver a profit to. So there’s a fundamental problem with who draws up the plans.”
Read the full article in Inside Climate News here.
Heat Pumps in Real Life – Part 2
If you’ve been hanging around Acadia Center’s blogs for very long, you’ve heard about how air source heat pumps work by moving heat, rather than generating it – so they can be 3-4 times as efficient as gas, and how “a heat pump is probably the biggest thing that consumers can to do help fight the climate crisis.” You might have even seen my colleague Ben Butterworth’s multiple photos in the Boston Globe as the face of heat pumps, or read about the lessons I learned back in May when investing in seven mini-splits to electrify my 1880s house.
But have you heard that under the Inflation Reduction Act, starting in 2023, heat pumps will be eligible for rebates and tax credits of up to $8,000, in addition to the rebates already in place from state programs like MassSave?
Here’s what I’ve learned from living with my heat pumps through one of the warmest summers in Boston, and into a fall that’s been both cooler than usual and repeatedly hit 70 degrees in November.
Power Cool: Even though this August was the hottest on record, my heat pumps kept my family comfortable and well air conditioned. Last year, we had one AC unit and a ton of fans to see us through August, and it was miserable. We spent too much time and money at the movie theater, mall, water parks, and other desperate ways to keep cool. This year, we happily spent our days at home in comfort. My daughter even discovered a “power cool” setting that sounded like a jet engine but felt amazing as it rapidly cooled her room. We did use 38% more electricity in August than the year prior but were easily 100% more comfortable, and spent roughly the same, once you factor in the movies and water parks. Although my home isn’t a good candidate for solar, I’m going to look into a community solar program, to be able to reduce our bills for next summer.
Dehumidification settings matter: My son’s asthma was flaring up late this summer and his room smelled even funkier than you’d expect for a 9-year old’s bedroom. I had a mold inspector come check things out. He didn’t find any mold but did find that the humidity levels in most of the house were 68-72%. Way too high. After some frustration, I dug into the settings on my heat pumps and discovered that the dehumidification mode (rather than the auto-cool setting I originally chose) resulted in a much lower humidity home with a much cooler feel. Better idea all around! So, watch out for humidity weirdness and play with settings. You may be surprised by what you find. Also run a full dehumidification cycle when you’re switching from cooling mode to heating season to make sure that you clear out all the moisture and prevent mold in the air handlers.
Keep it Clean: Although my instruction manuals said that I should clean the air filters monthly (and other filters periodically), I have only done it twice in the 6 months the heat pumps have been part of our family. Both times, though, there has been a lot more dust than I predicted. These things really are filtering the air! It’s important to keep the filters clean to maximize air flow, reduce the amount of energy they need to expend, and keep your air quality high. I’m going to put an alert on my calendar to make it more of a habit. I’d also encourage folks to install indoor units where they can reach them for maintenance – 10 feet into the air (like two of mine are) isn’t a great spot unless you love hanging out on ladders.
Shoulder season: I have been loving the flexibility that my heat pumps offer to heat up one room at a time or turn them on just enough to take the chill out of the air. With our radiators, it’s all or nothing and that first burst of heating inevitably wakes up my kids with all the banging. Especially on these days when it’s cold in the morning, but lovely by mid-day, I appreciate having the option to micro-adjust the temperature in my office or bedroom while leaving the rest of the house to float (because it also holds its temperature well after upgrading our insulation). And on the surprise 70-degree days, it’s nice to just turn the units off and not deal with residual heat like we would have with the radiators. As climate change makes our weather weirder, I’m glad to have equipment that can handle extremes in both directions and change up quickly.
Be a New Englander, Wear the Sweater: The first few days I tried to switch to heating mode, my heat pumps would run for a few minutes, then pause seemingly mid-cycle and show me an icon like a water droplet on top of a snowflake. This error message wasn’t included in any of the instruction manuals, and after some googling, I determined that it means that the outdoor temperature and humidity levels aren’t different enough from the indoor temp I’ve requested. In other words, my heat pump was telling me to suck it up and put on a sweater. It was right. Indeed, on the days when the temperature fell further, the error went away, and the unit started cranking out toasty warm air. I also remembered to lock closed all my windows, and that helped immensely, too.
The Financials: I got my full rebate from MassSave two months after it was submitted by my vendor. I’ve heard that it’s taking longer than in recent months because there’s been such a flurry of activity and rebate requests. Stay patient and keep checking the online tracker to see what’s happening. As I mentioned, my summer electric usage was 20-38% higher than last year (but we got a lot more AC out of the deal), but my fall usage has been within 15% of what it was. My gas use, however, was down 77% for the month of October. The biggest portion of my gas bills is now the $10 a month customer charge – indicating that once I get an induction stove and heat pump water heater, I can save even more by ditching gas entirely.
The Bottom Line: For me, the investment in heat pumps was more about comfort and doing what we could to decarbonize than it was about saving money. We have not saved much from the summer, but that’s to be expected with so much added air conditioning. I am excited to see how much we’ll save this winter! Check out the MassSave heating comparison calculator if you want to see the potential savings for your home. This year, I’m even looking forward to snow, so we can really see how the heat pumps fare and hope to make it through the winter without turning on our backup system. I’ll let you know in the spring!
Why Keeping Hydrogen Out of Easily Electrifiable Sectors Matters
Is hydrogen a clean energy source?
It depends. Hydrogen does not release greenhouse gas emissions when it is used, so, similar to electricity, what really matters from a climate perspective is how the hydrogen is produced. That can range from very dirty to very clean. The vast majority of hydrogen used today is made from natural gas and produces a lot of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Hydrogen produced in this manner is often referred to as “gray hydrogen.” There are also methods of producing “green hydrogen,” most notably by using renewable electricity to break water into hydrogen and oxygen through a process known as electrolysis. But, regardless of how hydrogen is produced, emerging research has found that – just like natural gas – hydrogen that leaks directly into the atmosphere is damaging to the climate.
What is hydrogen’s current role in our economy?
Today, hydrogen is used in industrial processes like oil refining and fertilizer production. In recent years, there has been expanded focus on the potential for using hydrogen to help decarbonize other sectors of the economy including power generation, transportation, and the natural gas distribution system. The question of whether to blend hydrogen into the natural gas distribution system to reduce the overall GHG emissions associated with using natural gas has been a particular hot button issue across the country, and particularly in the northeast.
Why is hydrogen suddenly a hot topic in the Northeast?
Many of the gas utilities in the Northeast have proposed hydrogen blending as a core strategy in their decarbonization plans and some are actively pursuing hydrogen blending pilot projects. The appropriate use of hydrogen was a key point of debate in the Massachusetts Future of Gas docket and four northeastern states (New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Massachusetts) have partnered to pursue a portion of the $8 billion of funding available through the Department of Energy to create a “regional hydrogen hub.” Hydrogen is a central point of discussion in the currently underway updates to Connecticut’s Comprehensive Energy Strategy and Connecticut recently formed a Hydrogen Task Force to study hydrogen’s role in the state’s economy and energy infrastructure. Hydrogen will also undoubtedly be a focal point in Rhode Island’s own “Future of Gas” docket that recently kicked off.
What are the key problems and limitations associated with hydrogen?
Even if hydrogen is “green” (i.e., produced with 100% renewable electricity), it still faces a number of issues and limitations. Perhaps most importantly, most experts agree that hydrogen can only safely replace 7% of the total energy flowing through the gas distribution system, dramatically limiting any potential climate benefit of hydrogen blending. We still need to decarbonize the other 93%. How? Gas companies have proposed replacing the remaining natural gas with so called “renewable natural gas” which is extremely problematic.
Additionally, the process of producing green hydrogen is inefficient and requires a huge amount of renewable electricity. As a result, for most sectors of the economy, it makes more sense to use clean electricity to “directly electrify” those sectors, rather than adding the inefficient middle step of converting that clean electricity to hydrogen. For example, using clean electricity to run a heat pump for heating a home is about five times more efficient and significantly more cost effective than using that same clean electricity to produce green hydrogen, blend that hydrogen into the gas system, and then burn that hydrogen in a boiler.
Because green hydrogen requires so much clean electricity to produce, producing green hydrogen at scale would require a ton of land to site the wind turbines and solar panels. We simply will not have enough land to produce green hydrogen at the scale necessary to decarbonize the whole economy. The limited green hydrogen we will have should be allocated to the sectors of the economy that are hardest to electrify, like aviation, shipping, and certain industrial processes. It is critical to use this limited resource strategically, and not waste it in sectors of the economy that are relatively easy to electrify, like building heating and passenger vehicle transportation.
Are there safety concerns associated with hydrogen?
Hydrogen does present unique safety challenges. It is the smallest molecule in the universe and is prone to leaks, highly combustible, and burns with a nearly invisible flame. So, while hydrogen is relatively safe in an industrial facility where trained professionals can constantly monitor the equipment, it does pose significant safety risk when you consider scenarios like people burning hydrogen in a furnace at their home.
What are the alternatives to hydrogen and why should we use them?
It is going to depend on the sector. As mentioned before, there are sectors of the economy that are exceedingly difficult to electrify such as shipping, aviation, certain industrial end uses, and chemical production. We are almost certainly going to need some amount of green hydrogen to decarbonize these sectors, but for many parts of the economy the main alternative is direct electrification using technologies like heat pumps and electric vehicles. For cars and home heating in particular, direct electrification is the superior alternative from basically any angle you can think of: Cost, efficiency, safety, and overall practicality.
Why should people be concerned about the gas company proposals to blend in hydrogen?
Direct electrification of homes using heat pumps and electric water heaters is a more cost-effective and safer means to decarbonize homes and save consumers money. Allowing gas utilities to blend hydrogen into the gas distribution system is a short-sighted decision that will only marginally reduce greenhouse gas emissions, cost ratepayers money, and distract from the more practical solution of electrification.
How do Acadia Center’s CLEAN-E and Beyond Gas Initiatives address these concerns?
Acadia Center is actively engaged in discussions around hydrogen in various forums in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. Acadia Center is leveraging our technical expertise related to hydrogen and our analytical capabilities to question modeling assumptions through independent quantitative analysis, develop detailed public comments, present to state agencies, and educate partners. Acadia Center is also a member of the Connecticut Clean Energy Task Force Hydrogen Uses Working Group. Throughout all these processes, Acadia Center is providing technical analysis and research to demonstrate the limitations of using hydrogen in the gas distribution system and the benefits of electrification paired with energy efficiency.
How can people act on this and push for renewable, efficient sources of energy?
There are a few ways for people to get involved. You can write a letter or call your congressperson and advocate for hydrogen to be left out of the easy-to-electrify sectors like home heating and light-duty transportation. Additionally, weatherizing and electrifying one’s home with heat pumps and electric water heaters would lower demand for natural gas. The Inflation Reduction Act has made weatherizing our homes far more affordable, and you can learn more about that here.
For more information:
Ben Butterworth, Director of Climate, Energy, and Equity Analysis, bbutterworth@acadiacenter.org, 617-742-0054 ext. 111
Follow us