NC’s ‘compromise’ energy bill is moving quickly. Do more groups support this version?
A pair of Senate committees approved comprehensive energy legislation Tuesday that puts Duke Energy on a path to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 but allows the utility to set rates in three-year chunks.
The Senate’s Agricultural, Energy and Environment Committee approved a revised version of House Bill 951, followed a short time later by the Senate Finance Committee. The bill is expected to appear in Senate Rules on Wednesday and, if it passes, receive a vote before the Senate later in the day.
Legislative leaders and Gov. Roy Cooper announced a compromise on the bill last Friday. The bill would establish greenhouse gas reductions from the power sector as state law, with the N.C. Utilities Commission overseeing the energy transition via reviews of Duke Energy’s plans to reduce carbon once every two years. The bill also allows Duke to request to rates two or three years at a time, with maximum rate hikes of 4% after the first year in each of the following years.
“This legislation requires North Carolina to get on a clean energy path. It will help us switch to renewables, it will attract clean energy jobs. And when you look at who climate change affects, it affects the most vulnerable people and minority communities the most,” Cooper told media Tuesday after a Council of State meeting.
Where the bill approved by the House ran 49 pages, the replacement is 10 pages long. The original bill prescribed plant closures and some replacement energy sources, but the new version simply sets a clean energy target and leaves energy sources up to the Utilities Commission, with requirements that it consider affordability and energy reliability.
It is clear that electric generation is moving from carbon-heavy sources like coal to other sources, said Sen. Paul Newton, a Cabarrus County Republican and former state president of Duke Energy.
“We can take action now, which we believe we’ve done with this bill, to choose a path that’s right for North Carolina and ensures we do not suffer blackouts like Texas or California, ensures that energy prices do not become volatile — no price spikes — and rates stay as affordable as possible given the desire to reduce carbon,” Newton said.
Where the original bill met widespread opposition, reaction to the new bill has been mixed.
Environmental groups have said that Cooper’s energy targets becoming law marks progress but expressed concerns about the bill’s potential impacts on people in North Carolina who struggle to pay their bills.
In a written statement, Cynthia Satterfield, director of the N.C. Sierra Club, said, “While HB 951 sets respectable goals to reduce carbon emissions, it falls short on protecting low-income ratepayers and supporting communities that continue to be harmed by dirty fossil fuel power plants.”
The N.C. League of Conservation Voters said the new version of House Bill 951 represents an improvement, but still has “serious deficiencies.”
“The bill still allows Duke Energy too much room to wiggle out of carbon reductions, and we can’t squeeze our noses hard enough to support it. It would allow Duke too much power to thwart our clean energy future and pad its profits at the expense of low-income communities and North Carolinians of color, and could give Duke veto power equal to that of the Utilities Commission,” Dan Crawford, the League of Conservation Voters’ director of government relations, said in a statement.
Newton said the bill includes nine provisions protecting low-income ratepayers, including a plan that allows them to make improvements to their home that help with energy efficiency and then pay those back over time on their utility bills. The idea, Newton said, is that energy savings will pay for the improvements.
Some customer groups have said the multi-year rate plan could mean rate hikes, but others have said that the scheme offers some protections to consumers by capping Duke’s earnings.
Preston Howard, president of the North Carolina Manufacturers Alliance, said he and other groups requested that the multi-year ratemaking and performance-based provisions from the House bill be included in the Senate version. While moving away from coal means rates are likely to go up, Howard told Senate energy committee, the language does include “numerous important guard rails that we believe will provide significant cost containment protection for ratepayers.”
The Carolina Utility Customers Association, a non-profit that represents manufacturers, still opposes the legislation. Kevin Martin, the group’s executive director, said approving the bill will lead to large rate hikes.
“We pray that we’re wrong with that but when we’re not, we will all see, every 30 days, a friendly reminder from the utility of that mistake,” Martin said.
It is impossible to say how much the new version of House Bill 951 will cost ratepayers, Newton said, because it does not mandate any replacement sources.
“Our bill is very different and it says we’re not going to prescribe for you what you should adopt, utilities commission. We are going to prescribe the guardrails,” Newton said.
This story was produced with financial support from 1Earth Fund, in partnership with Journalism Funding Partners, as part of an independent journalism fellowship program. The N&O maintains full editorial control of the work.
This story was originally published October 5, 2021 at 4:21 PM with the headline "NC’s ‘compromise’ energy bill is moving quickly. Do more groups support this version?."