NC carbon plan draws criticism over lack of detail, focuses on gas

[ad_1]

Gareth McGrath | USA TODAY NETWORK

For clean energy proponents, the carbon reduction plan announced by the NC Utilities Commission just before the start of the new year relies too heavily on old, expensive and often dirty solutions, namely natural gas, instead of renewable energy sources. It also leaves the tough choices until a later date, including whether a 2030 deadline to dramatically reduce the state’s carbon emissions is still feasible.

But Duke Energy calls the commission’s order that sets out the state’s path to a carbon-free energy future a realistic and economically viable plan that promises to keep the lights on and protect consumers during the transition from North Carolina towards a cleaner energy grid. .

“We believe this is a constructive outcome that advances our clean energy transition, supporting a diverse approach to all of the above approaches that is essential for long-term resource planning,” said the company in a press release.

Under legislation drafted by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper, the Republican-controlled General Assembly and Duke, the state’s electric utility providers have until 2030 to cut carbon emissions by 70% compared to 2005 levels and achieve net zero emissions by 2050. The law asked the Public Utilities Commission to develop a roadmap to achieve this, with the first edition expected by the end of 2022.

ENERGY EQUATIONHow to keep the lights on in the future: Duke and environmentalists jostle over future grid

The goal is to reduce the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gases the state releases into the atmosphere, and thereby help slow global warming. Power plant emissions are the second largest source of greenhouse gases in North Carolina, accounting for just under 33% of pollutants, according to the state’s latest greenhouse gas inventory report. Emissions from transportation sources top the list. According to the United States. Energy Information Administration, North Carolina, the current energy mix based on 2021 data is 31% nuclear, 33% natural gas, 21% coal, and 15% renewables.

Upcoming challenges

A day before the Dec. 31 deadline, the commission released its 137-page order that didn’t tell Duke how best to achieve that goal, but mandated the company to seek out a range of energy sources, including including the possibility of a new natural gas. plants.

The move frustrated many clean energy advocates and environmentalists who said the commission had shifted renewable and increasingly affordable energy sources like solar and wind power and potential energy-savings programs. energy efficiency in favor of traditional power generation options such as natural gas-fired power plants and emerging but unproven technologies. such as hydrogen and small modular nuclear reactors (SMR).

“I think there’s been a lot of disappointment that the public utilities commission hasn’t taken a more serious look at these alternative pathways,” said David Neal, senior counsel at the Southern Environmental Law Center, which represents a number of groups. clean energy and environmental issues before the commission.

Joel Porter, policy manager at CleanAIRE NC, said the plan had some good ideas and proposals, but there was clearly room for improvement, especially when it came to moving away from a future dependence on fossil fuels, a choice that could make it possible to reach the objectives of 2050. goal of net zero emissions almost impossible to reach.

“The potential addition of future natural gas makes it increasingly dangerous for our climate,” he said.

But not everyone is against adding more natural gas power to the state grid. The John Locke Foundation asked why the commission seemed to show a bias towards adding solar power at the expense of more reliable and proven energy sources, such as natural gas. The Raleigh-based conservative think tank was also concerned that the commission’s proposals would achieve the legislation’s lower cost goal, noting that the plan released last month does not include any financial analysis.

POWER OUTAGE Could the slowing economy take the financial wind out of North Carolina’s offshore wind farms?

“The public deserves to know what this plan will cost, and it should be transparent whether it meets the least-cost parameters prescribed by law,” the group said in a statement on the commission’s carbon plan.

The commission’s order requires Duke to retire its last “dirty” coal plants by 2035, which the company had already agreed to do. The plan also called for the utility giant to:

Purchasing more solar power, with the aim of bringing it online by 2028. Improving transmission lines. Studying the development of offshore wind. Seeking renewal of licenses for its existing nuclear power plants and studying the addition of SMR. Add more battery storage capacity.

But the commission appeared to send mixed messages on whether the 2030 compliance requirement was still in place or should be extended. Although the plan includes nearly all of Duke’s proposals included in its near-term action plans, the company said moving forward with those options would most likely mean missing the 2030 reduction target.

Neal said he believes the 2030 deadline is still possible due to the rapid growth of renewable energy sources in the state, “but it’s going to be tough to get there.”

“Orderly Transition”

The order was issued on December 30, less than a week after a freezing Canadian cold front blew through the state just before Christmas and sent temperatures plummeting. Falling temperatures forced Duke to take nearly 1,300 megawatts of coal and natural gas power offline during a period of peak demand, prompting the company to implement blackouts for the first time. of power that affected nearly 500,000 customers in the Carolinas at one point.

The utility’s solar energy resources. meanwhile, started as normally as the sun came up, unaffected by the cold. Duke officials told state regulators last week that it helped prevent even more power outages over Christmas.

Neal said the ongoing power outages are a sign that North Carolina needs to change its energy mix and think more about reliability and resiliency. This should include increasing the battery storage capacity for solar power and possibly the possibility of adding more offshore wind power, which is an excellent complementary power source to solar power, as it often blows strongest along the North Carolina coast during the night and early morning. Duke currently has no offshore wind in its energy portfolio, although the company has secured the rights to develop a wind farm south of Bald Head Island in Brunswick County.

“The assumption that fossil fuel power plants are inherently reliable and other power sources are not as reliable needs to be challenged,” Neal said.

Porter said a thorough review of what happened in late December and how to avoid a repeat should be the focus of regulators and Duke officials.

“Is natural gas really necessary for grid reliability compared to battery storage, solar, or other types of energy?” he said. “There are a lot of question marks that this event has raised.

The Utilities Commission also took note of the power cuts, although the event was unlikely to have influenced what was in its plan as it happened just days before the order was issued.

“This month’s shutdown events particularly underscore the need for an orderly transition from fossil fuels to low-to-no carbon dioxide-emitting generating resources while maintaining or improving power grid reliability.” , says the statement of the commission.

POWER ON? Duke wants hydrogen to be part of NC’s future energy mix. Others say it’s too risky a bet.

The commission will now reassess the carbon plan every two years, starting in 2024, with Duke submitting a new proposal by September 2023 that will begin the review process.

Porter said the plan released last month is just the first step in a long process, calling it “a framework to build on over the next few years.”

A lot of those early decisions aren’t set in stone,” Neal said.

Journalist Gareth McGrath can be reached at [email protected] or @GarethMcGrathSN on Twitter. This story was produced with financial support from 1Earth Fund and the Prentice Foundation. The USA TODAY Network retains full editorial control of the work.

[ad_2]