The same challenges hold true for other utilities that don’t already get a significant share of their energy from hydropower or nuclear power, the two primary carbon-free resources in the country. While we welcome all perspectives, not all parties have the same responsibility we do for providing energy that’s cleaner, reliable and affordable." "We are working with stakeholders and policymakers on a cost-effective path forward for the Carolinas’ energy transition that’s equitable for all. "Achieving the clean energy transition we and these organizations envision will require supportive policy," Duke spokesperson Erin Culbert said in an email. The gas-free scenario is also reliant on the greatest mix of as-yet-untested technologies such as long-duration energy storage or small modular nuclear reactors - and it would involve keeping some of its coal plants open past 2030, to ensure it can provide reliable power in the winter when solar power is scarce. The one scenario that avoids them would raise 15-year revenue requirements to about $108 billion, compared to between $80 billion and $84 billion for its base cases, which, according to the utility, would add another $20 per month to the average customer bill increases of $23 to $25 per month already included in its base cases. All but one call for new natural gas plants. Utilities responded to Sierra Club’s analysis by highlighting the high costs and reliability disruptions that could come with a too-rapid abandonment of fossil-fuel-fired power plants, which provide the chief source of dispatchable energy to the grids they serve.ĭuke Energy’s IRP for its North and South Carolina utilities, for example, provides six “pathways” for halving its carbon emissions by 2030 and reaching net-zero carbon by 2050. From decarbonization imperatives to utility realities "Despite the pressing deadline of 2030, utilities are either not moving fast enough toward these goals or not moving at all," said John Romankiewicz, senior analyst for Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign. But that's only one-fifth the amount that would be required to replace their existing or planned fossil fuel generation over the coming decade, she said. Taken as a group, the 50 utility holding companies studied have a total of 100,000 megawatts of new wind and solar in their IRPs, Sierra Club Electric Sector Analyst Cara Bottorff said in a Tuesday press conference. And only two - Northern Indiana Public Service Co.and AEP’s Public Service Company of Oklahoma - won an “A” grade, by pledging to close all coal plants by 2030 and not build any new gas plants. Only a handful of utilities received grades above a "C" under Sierra Club's methodology, among them Puget Sound Energy and Great River Energy. These utilities’ IRPs indicate little difference between their decarbonization pathways and those of utilities that haven’t set zero-carbon pledges, such as Berkshire Hathaway Energy, NextEra Energy and PPL Corp.Īnother group falling in the midrange of scores include some with zero-carbon commitments such as Xcel Energy, Portland General Electric, Ameren, Arizona Public Service and Entergy, as well as some that don’t, including American Electric Power (AEP) and Tri-State Generation and Transmission. The report gives some of its worst marks to some of the biggest utilities with goals to be net-zero carbon by 2050, including FirstEnergy, Duke Energy, Dominion Energy and utilities operated by Southern Company. utilities that still rely on coal and natural gas for most of their generation capacity. electricity sector by 2035, and the cost imperatives of U.S. The analysis underscores the gap between the policy imperatives of the environmental community and the Biden-Harris administration, which has set a goal of zero carbon emissions from the U.S. Instead, most utilities’ integrated resource plans (IRPs), which set their generation investment pathways over a decade-plus horizon, will put them on a path to much more modest carbon reductions, the report concludes. utilities are on track to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 80 percent by 2030 compared to a 2005 baseline, the target needed to prevent global warming beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius, as called for in the Paris Agreement. New research asserts that most have undermined those goals by keeping coal plants running and building new natural-gas plants planned to operate for decades to come.Ī new report from the Sierra Club finds that almost no U.S. utilities have promised to eliminate their carbon emissions by midcentury.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |