A bill on Gov. Josh Stein’s desk would eliminate Duke Energy’s 2030 carbon pollution reduction goal. Supporters of Senate Bill 266, or “The Power Bill Reduction Act,” in the General Assembly say it would lower electricity rates, but environmental advocates and clean energy trade groups disagree.
Every two years, state regulators approve Duke Energy’s plan to build infrastructure and meet North Carolina’s energy and climate targets. Current law requires the utility to cut carbon emissions by 70% by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.
When Republican Sen. Paul Newton introduced the bill in March, he said it would lower energy rates in the long run. But Matt Abele, executive director of the N.C. Sustainable Energy Association, said that claim assumes a “best-case scenario” for fuel costs. He added that the bill also “removes any sort of milestone or checkpoint” on the state’s path to carbon neutrality.
“Instead of focusing on ‘power bill reductions,’ this legislation increases risk exposure and costs at a time already marked with significant uncertainty,” said Cassie Gavin, N.C. SEA’s policy director, in a written statement.
Removing the interim climate target favors natural gas combustion turbines over other energy sources, such as solar, wind, or hydro — in the short term. An N.C. State analysis found that the bill would expose ratepayers to greater price volatility from natural gas. That could cost ratepayers up to $23 billion by 2050.
The bill also changes how Duke Energy recovers its costs of building large infrastructure projects, such as nuclear power plants. Sustain Charlotte’s Shannon Binns said those changes would put ratepayers on the hook for incomplete projects, citing examples such as South Carolina’s abandoned V.C. Summer nuclear plant and Georgia’s Plant Vogtle, which experienced years of costly delays while constructing new units.
Duke Energy released a statement in March when the bill was first introduced in the North Carolina House, saying the utility was “supportive of policies that enable us to meet the state’s growing energy needs, including those that advance efficient and always-on baseload generation resources.”
Regarding changes to how the company recovers its costs on new infrastructure, a Duke Energy spokesperson wrote:
“Policies that enable more timely recovery of investments in modern infrastructure, like always-on nuclear power plants, help keep overall costs down for customers and result in more predictable energy prices by avoiding sudden spikes," a Duke Energy spokesperson wrote. "This process would be subject to regulatory oversight to ensure the protection of customers’ interests.”
