Advanced Energy Perspectives

The past two months have been a whirlwind for energy efficiency policy in Pennsylvania. This period was marked by the high point of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) issuing a strong final rule for Phase III of Act 129, the next stage of the state’s energy efficiency mandate, and a low from the state legislature with the introduction of SB 805, which would exempt large industrial and commercial users, reducing funding for energy efficiency improvements by all customers and making efficiency gains subject to corporate whim.

In 2014, the Ohio legislature passed SB 310, which instituted a two-year freeze on the state’s advanced energy programs. In addition to hitting the pause button on energy efficiency and renewable energy investment in the state, the legislation also formed an Energy Mandates Study Committee that is tasked with examining the state’s energy policy and making recommendations on the fate of these requirements. But the real question for Ohio is not about mandates established in the past, or the lack of them now. Rather, the question is about Ohio’s energy future.

A new report, prepared for our state partner Ohio Advanced Energy Economy by the Analysis Group, looks at different scenarios the state could consider to meet its energy needs and provides a way to evaluate those strategies. Ohio has a choice between several options that utilize advanced energy technologies, all of which have positive characteristics, and one – propping up old, inefficient power plants with contracts that put ratepayers on the hook for above-market prices – that has the fewest pluses and the most minuses.

Last week, Advanced Energy Economy Institute (AEEI) and the Virginia Advanced Energy Industries Coalition (VAEIC) released a new report, “Assessing Virginia’s Energy Future,” which measures the employment outcomes of two potential Clean Power Plan (CPP) compliance strategies that the Commonwealth might consider. The topline finding is quite simple: Virginia could create thousands of permanent and temporary construction jobs by implementing the CPP, and double the number of jobs if the Commonwealth chooses to pursue a goal it has considered for a long time – producing within the state all the electricity needed to power the Virginia economy, instead of importing nearly 40 percent from out of state. It will be up to Gov. Terry McAuliffe and the General Assembly to choose which course to take.

VIRGINIA EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS BY YEAR; ENERGY IMPORT REDUCTION SCENARIO

Green area: New advanced energy job years; Red area: Job years lost

The two scenarios examined in the report are “Diversified Portfolio” and “Import Reduction” pathways. Both options are built on a baseline established by the state’s investor-owned utilities via the Integrated Resource Planning process. Even the plans submitted by the utilities have old, inefficient coal-fired power plants retiring, based on economic factors. These retirements will get Virginia much of the way to the emissions target set by the EPA in its proposed plan.

Energy efficiency is the fastest and cleanest way for the nation to meet our energy needs. It is also an enormous market opportunity for businesses within the sector and has the potential for billions in savings for consumers. Unfortunately, this win-win energy resource has come under attack in state legislatures across the country the past two years.