Energy Exchange

Transforming transportation in New Jersey

UPDATE January 14, 2020: Yesterday, the New Jersey legislature passed a bill to create a statewide electric vehicle program, ultimately aiming for 85% of all vehicles sold to be electric by 2040.

The bill is designed to stimulate electric vehicle sales with a $30 million incentive program that offers up to $5,000 in rebates per eligible vehicle over 10 years, and sets targets for building charging infrastructure. While the bill focuses primarily on passenger vehicles, it also requires the NJ Transit to purchase an all zero-emission bus fleet by 2032 and asks that the state develop a plan for electrifying medium and heavy-duty vehicles by the end of 2020. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy is expected to sign this bill into law by the end of January.

With 40% of statewide emissions coming from transportation, this is a tremendous step forward for New Jersey — one that will reduce the Garden State’s reliance on fossil fuels, cut pollution and clean up the air.

There is no summer slowdown for New Jersey. State lawmakers are working hard to meet the state’s clean energy goals. Shortly before releasing the state’s Draft Energy Master Plan, Gov. Phil Murphy introduced the New Jersey Partnership to Plug-In, a first-of-its-kind collaboration between the Board of Public Utilities, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the Economic Development Authority to build the necessary infrastructure to support electric vehicle ownership statewide, cut pollution and clean up the air.

As one of five states in the U.S. requiring 50% of its power be sourced from renewables by 2030 and to reach 100% clean energy by 2050, New Jersey is moving on a path toward decarbonization, reducing its reliance on fossil fuels, to meet its aggressive climate goals, and to contribute to the nationwide – if not global – task of avoiding the worst consequences of climate change. But decarbonizing the power sector isn’t enough.

Read More »

Also posted in Air Quality, Clean Energy, Electric Vehicles, New Jersey / Comments are closed

FirstEnergy’s bailout campaign is filled with all kinds of wrong. Please let a failed HB 6 be the end of it.

Since it was first filed in the Ohio legislature, HB 6 has been pitched as a necessary savior for a struggling Ohio utility and employer. FirstEnergy Solutions’ nuclear plants are losing money, the sales pitch goes, and the publicly-traded company needs $150 million a year by June 30 or it will shut down the plants and Ohio will lose 4,000 jobs.

Let me suggest that everything about this is wrong.

The June 30 deadline was wrong

We know now that the June 30 deadline was wrong because, well, it’s after June 30. When the deadline passed, FirstEnergy told reporters that it will proceed with taking steps to shut down the plants, but it can reverse course at a later date. Perhaps FirstEnergy’s leadership knew it was a false deadline, like the many other times the company cried wolf.

Read More »

Also posted in Clean Energy, FirstEnergy, Ohio / Comments are closed

The FirstEnergy bailout bill benefits out-of-state executives and investors, not Ohioans

FirstEnergy and its supportive legislators have tied themselves in knots to sell their bailout bill (HB 6), a $1.4 billion money grab by a publicly traded company and its speculative, out-of-state investors that made a bad bet on a declining business.

They’ve been lying to Ohioans, claiming that HB 6 is a panacea that will clean the air, preserve local jobs and keep the lights on across Ohio. But it isn’t about any of that. And it’s barely about Ohio. Ohioans deserve to know the truth, and the legislature should reject this dishonest bill.

FirstEnergy claims it needs $150 to $190 million a year from Ohioans to keep two old nuclear plants online. And this would be the fifth time Ohioans will have paid for these plants. They first paid when the plants were built. They paid again in 1999 when the electricity market was restructured. They paid again when companies were allowed to add plants back into their supply plans in 2008. And finally, they’ve paid via the bailout ruling approved by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio in 2016.

Read More »

Also posted in Clean Energy, FirstEnergy, Ohio / Comments are closed

How to decarbonize California’s economy without breaking the bank

As temperatures rise and the impacts of climate change become more prevalent, California is aggressively implementing solutions that will take more greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere. California has one of the most ambitious climate goals of any state in the country, pledging to get to 100% clean electric power by 2045.

To get to 100% clean electricity, California will have to remove carbon (or “decarbonize”) in two major areas: vehicles and buildings. For California’s residential and commercial buildings – which, combined, make up about 25% of the state’s total greenhouse gas pollution — decarbonizing means changing how we heat (space heating for warmth, water heating and clothes drying are the best examples) and how we cook.

Read More »

Also posted in California, Clean Energy, Natural Gas / Comments are closed

Ohio Supreme Court ends FirstEnergy’s illegal subsidies in a win for customers and the environment

Update: On August 20, the Ohio Supreme Court rejected FirstEnergy’s motion for reconsideration of “credit support” charges approved by state regulators in 2016. The Supreme Court ordered the charge be removed, saying state regulators had failed to place the necessary conditions on how FirstEnergy spent the subsidies. 

In the three years’ time the appeals process has taken, FirstEnergy has collected nearly all of the $600 million it was seeking. Current law states that FirstEnergy gets to keep the $600 million rather than refund it to customers. Environmental Defense Fund and our partners have been working hard to change the refund law and today’s ruling should give added momentum to this effort.

The Ohio Supreme Court today rejected FirstEnergy’s “credit support” charges approved by state regulators in 2016. The Supreme Court ordered the charge be removed, saying state regulators had failed to place the necessary conditions on how FirstEnergy spent the subsidies.

For years, FirstEnergy has been seeking a bailout for its uneconomic coal and nuclear plants. The Ohio-based utility finally got its wish in late 2016, when the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio approved more than $600 million in customer-funded subsidies.

Today the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that those customer funded subsidies must be removed. In the three years’ time the appeals process has taken, FirstEnergy has collected nearly all of the $600 million it was seeking. Current law states that FirstEnergy gets to keep the $600 million rather than refund it to customers. We have been working hard to change the refund law and today’s ruling should give added momentum to this effort.

Read More »

Also posted in Clean Energy, FirstEnergy, Ohio / Comments are closed

New and better way to assess the climate impact of new pipelines

The urgent need to decarbonize the energy system makes it imperative for state and federal regulators to understand the climate impacts of proposed energy infrastructure. Officials deciding whether to approve new natural gas pipelines must be able to answer a crucial question: Will a particular pipeline reduce pollution by speeding the demise of more carbon intensive alternatives, or increase greenhouse emissions by locking in dependence on another fossil fuel?

Yet to date, natural gas utilities and pipeline developers have been largely unwilling to provide detailed life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) assessments to regulators reviewing their supply projects and plans. Nor have regulatory agencies been pressing for this data.

In fact just this morning, Federal Energy Regulatory (FERC) Commissioner Richard Glick testified to Congress that “the Commission is ignoring its statutory mandates under the Natural Gas Act by refusing to analyze reasonably foreseeable greenhouse gas emissions associated with new interstate natural gas pipelines and facilities used to import or export liquefied natural gas.”

But a new analysis released this week of a proposed interstate pipeline project in New York and New Jersey significantly advances this compelling need. The fact that it was commissioned by a utility company makes it even more significant.

Read More »

Also posted in Natural Gas, New Jersey, New York / Comments are closed