Back
China’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell by 1% in the second quarter of 2024 in the first quarterly fall since the country re-opened from its “zero-Covid” lockdowns in December 2022.
The new analysis for Carbon Brief, based on official figures and commercial data, shows China remains on track for a decline in annual emissions this year.
This annual outlook depends on electricity demand growth easing in the second half of the year, as expected in projections from sector group the China Electricity Council.
However, if the latest trends in energy demand and supply continue – in particular, if demand growth continues to exceed pre-Covid trends – then emissions would stay flat in 2024 overall.
Other key findings from the analysis include:
A slew of recent policy developments, summarised below, hint at a renewed focus in Beijing on the country’s energy and climate targets.
Yet the precise timing and height of China’s CO2 emissions peak, as well as the pace of subsequent reductions, remain key uncertainties for global climate action.
China’s CO2 emissions fell by 1% in the second quarter of 2024, the first quarterly fall since the country re-opened from zero-Covid, as shown in the figure below.
Within the overall total, power sector emissions fell by 3%, cement production fell by 7% and oil consumption by 3%.
The reduction in CO2 emissions was driven by the surge in clean energy additions, which is driving fossil fuel power into reverse. (See: Clean energy additions on track to top 2023 record.)
However, rapid energy demand growth in sectors such as coal-to-chemicals diluted the impact of changes in the electricity sector. (See: Rapid energy demand growth.)
The additions of new clean power capacity in China have continued to boom this year.
China added 102 gigawatts (GW) of new solar and 26GW of wind in the first half of 2024, as shown in the figure below. Solar additions were up 31% and wind additions up 12% compared with the first half of last year, so China is on track to beat last year’s record installations.
As a result of the strong capacity growth – and despite poor wind conditions – solar and wind covered 52% of electricity demand growth in the first half of 2024 and 71% since March. (The fall in wind speeds can be seen from NASA MERRA-2 data averaged for all of China.)
Indeed, the increase in power generation from solar and wind reported by the National Energy Administration in the first half of the year, at 171 terawatt hours (TWh), exceeded the UK’s total electricity supply of 160TWh in the first half of 2023.
Rapid demand growth in January–February, at 11%, had outpaced even the clean energy additions. But combined with a rebound in hydropower generation, the increase in non-fossil electricity supply exceeded power demand growth in the March to June period.
These shifts are shown in the figure below, illustrating how clean power expansion started to exceed electricity demand growth in recent months, pushing coal and gas power into reverse.
After stopping the publication of capacity utilisation data by technology in May, the National Energy Administration released data in July on power generation by technology for renewable sources – solar, wind, hydro and biomass.
The NEA’s data shows renewable electricity generation covering 35% of demand in the first half of 2024 and growing 22% year-on-year. This is much higher than the previously-published National Bureau of Statistics numbers – which under-report wind and particularly solar power generation – but is closely aligned with estimates previously published by Carbon Brief.
In terms of other clean energy technologies, the production of electric vehicles, batteries and solar cells – the so-called “new-three” due to their recently acquired economic significance – continued to grow strongly in the first half of the year, at 34%, 18% and 37%, respectively.
This growth in production indicates strong demand from China and overseas. The growth of solar cell production halted in June, however.
While clean technologies continue to surge in China, energy consumption has also continued to grow at a fast rate relative to GDP. This indicates that the energy-intensive growth pattern that China followed during zero-Covid is continuing.
In the second quarter of 2024, total energy consumption increased by 4.2%, while GDP grew by 4.7%, marking an energy intensity gain of only 0.5%. This energy demand growth is much faster than the pre-Covid trend.
China’s target is an annual improvement of 2.9%, a rate that was exceeded consistently until Covid-era economic policies shifted the country’s growth pattern. Economic growth during and after zero-Covid has been reliant on energy-intensive manufacturing industries.
The main structural drivers of recent energy consumption growth were the coal-to-chemicals industry, and industrial demand for power and gas.
The coal-to-chemicals industry produces petrochemical products from coal instead of oil, supporting China’s energy security goals but at a great cost to climate goals, as the coal-based production processes have far higher carbon footprints.
China’s energy security drive and falling coal prices relative to oil prices have driven a boom in this industry. When coal supply was tight in 2022–23, the government was controlling coal use by the chemical industry to increase supply to power plants. As the coal supply situation has eased in 2024, this has enabled coal-to-chemicals plants to increase production, with coal consumption in the chemical industry growing 21% in the first half of the year.
Gas consumption increased 8.7% in the first half of the year, with industrial and residential gas consumption rising strongly, even as power generation from gas fell. Residential demand was driven up by extreme cold in the winter, however, rather than by structural factors.
On the flipside, the demand for oil products continued to fall, with a 3% drop in the second quarter that accelerated in the summer.
There are multiple factors driving the reduction: the shift to electric vehicles is contributing to the drop, with the share of EVs in cumulative vehicle sales over the past 10 years – an indicator of the mix of vehicles on the road – reaching 11.5% in June, up from 7.7% a year ago. This means that the increase in EVs cut the demand for transport fuels by approximately 4%.
The ongoing contraction in construction volumes, which is apparent in the fall in cement production, also affects oil demand, as the construction sector is a major source of demand for oil products for freight and machinery.
Another key driver is weak demand for oil as a petrochemical feedstock, which the rapidly increasing coal-to-chemicals production attempts to displace with the use of coal, albeit at a cost of increased CO2 emissions.
The contraction in construction volumes, caused by a slowdown in real estate that began in 2021, is weighing on the demand for cement and steel. Besides the direct effect of less real estate construction, local government revenues are dragged down by a fall in land sales, affecting their ability to spend on infrastructure construction.
These changes in demand for energy can been seen in the figure below, which shows contributions to the change in China’s CO2 emissions in the second quarter of this year.
While CO2 emissions did fall in the second quarter, the rate of CO2 intensity improvements fell short of the level needed to meet China’s 2025 carbon intensity commitment.
The country’s goal is to reduce emissions relative to GDP by 18% from 2020 to 2025, with progress until 2023 falling far short of the target.
As reported GDP growth slowed to 4.7% in the second quarter, and CO2 emissions fell by 1%, CO2 intensity improved by 5.5%, short of the 7% annual improvement needed in 2024-25 to get back on track.
Improvements are also easier to achieve this year than they will be in 2025, as the rebound of hydropower from the low availability in 2022–23 helps reduce emissions. This is a one-off tailwind that is not likely to be present in 2025.
One part of the energy-intensive industry that China has been relying on to drive economic growth is the manufacturing of clean energy technologies. In response, some commentators have exaggerated the CO2 impact of Chinese factories making solar panels, EVs and batteries.
In reality, however, the manufacturing of these goods was responsible for 1.6% of China’s electricity consumption and 2.9% of its emissions in the first half of 2024, based on calculations using publicly available data.
The same calculations show that their CO2 emissions and electricity consumption increased by approximately 27% in the same period, contributing a 0.6% increase in China’s total fossil CO2 emissions and 0.4% increase in electricity consumption.
Looking ahead to the rest of this year, energy consumption growth is expected to cool. The China Electricity Council projects electricity demand growth of 5% in the second half of the year, compared with 8.1% in the first half, and the National Energy Administration expects full-year gas demand growth to moderate to 6.5–7.7%, from 8.7% in the first half.
If these projections are accurate, then the continued growth of clean energy consumption would be sufficient to push China’s CO2 emissions into decline this year.
However, the faster-than-expected energy demand growth in the first half of the year dilutes the emission reductions from the country’s record clean energy additions, and adds uncertainty to whether China’s emissions will indeed fall in 2024 compared with 2023.
If the growth rates of energy demand, by fuel and sector, seen in the second quarter of this year continue into the third and fourth quarter, with similar continuity in the growth rates of non-fossil electricity generation, then China’s emissions would stay flat in 2024 overall.
Energy consumption growth could also be moderated by a renewed policy focus on energy and climate targets. In May of this year, the State Council, China’s top administrative body, issued an action plan on energy conservation and CO2 emission reductions in 2024–25.
This plan is notable both for the unusual time period, covering the last two years of the five-year plan period, and for its high-level nature – energy conservation would normally fall under the jurisdiction of the energy and environmental regulators, rather than the State Council.
This suggests that the government recognises the shortfall against the 2025 carbon intensity and energy intensity targets. The action plan calls for meeting both of these targets, and lists numerous measures to be undertaken in response.
Yet the plan did not set numerical targets for 2024 that would be consistent with meeting the 2025 targets, which could be seen as taking a hedged approach of pushing for more action but not guaranteeing that sufficient results will be achieved.
Another State Council plan, released in late July, calls for speeding up the creation of a “dual control system” to control total CO2 emissions and emissions intensity. (Historically, China has never set numerical targets for total CO2 emissions, only aiming to limit CO2 intensity.)
According to the July release, the 15th five-year plan will set a binding carbon intensity target in the 2026-30 period, in line with previous five-year plans. For the first time, there will also be a non-binding, “supplementary” target for China’s absolute emissions level in 2030. Then, for each of the following five-year periods, there will be a binding absolute emissions target.
After the shortfall against the 2025 intensity target, the 15th five-year plan period would need to set a demanding intensity target to fulfil China’s 2030 commitments under the Paris Agreement.
The most important political meeting of the year, the “third plenum” of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, took place in July. The readout of the meeting mentioned carbon emissions reduction for the first time, but did not signal a shift to stimulating consumption. This could have driven less emissions-intensive economic growth, reducing reliance on higher-carbon manufacturing or infrastructure expansion.
The key focus of the meeting was promoting “new quality productive forces”, meaning advanced manufacturing and innovation. In practice, this likely implies a continued emphasis on manufacturing, with the potential for the energy-intensive economic growth pattern to continue.
Another indication that carbon emissions are receiving more policy emphasis is that the government appears to have stopped permitting new coal-based steelmaking projects since the beginning of 2024.
Hundreds of coal-based “replacement” projects were permitted in previous years, preparing to replace up to 40% of China’s existing steelmaking capacity with brand-new furnaces.
The shift away from new coal-based capacity is consistent with China’s target of increasing the use of electric arc furnaces – but progress towards that target had been lagging.
On coal-fired power, the government issued a new policy on “low-carbon transformation” of coal plants, aiming to initiate “low-carbon” retrofitting projects of a batch of coal power plants in 2025, with the target of reducing the CO2 emissions of those plants 20% below the average for similar plants in 2023, and another batch in 2027 aiming for emission levels 50% below 2023 average.
Under this transformation plan, emissions reductions at targeted coal plants are supposed to be achieved by “co-firing” coal with either biomass or “green” ammonia derived from renewables-based hydrogen, or by adding carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS).
However, there are no targets for how many coal plants should be retrofitted, or what the incentives will be to do that, which will obviously determine the direct impact of this policy.
The impact could be small as biomass supply is limited, while the costs of ammonia and CCUS are high. For example, the International Energy Agency – among the more optimistic on power generation from biomass – sees its share rising from 2% in 2022 to 4.5% in 2035, if China meets its pledges on energy and climate IEA’s.
Furthermore, much of China’s coal-fired generation is already unprofitable, with almost half of the firms in the sector operating at a loss – even before taking on costly new measures.
The policy does however constitute Beijing’s first attempt at reconciling the recent permitting spree of new coal-fired power plants with its CO2 peaking goal for 2030, and looking for alternatives to early closure or under-utilisation of at least a part of the coal power fleet.
China’s emissions fell year-on-year in March and in the second quarter, as expected in my analysis for Carbon Brief last year.
Faster-than-expected growth in coal demand for the chemical industry, however, as well as industrial demand for power and gas, has diluted the emission reductions from the power sector, making the fall in emissions smaller than expected.
Nevertheless, China is likely still on track to begin a structural decline in emissions in 2024, making 2023 the peak year for CO2 emissions.
In order for this projection to bear out in reality, clean energy growth would need to continue and the expected cooling in energy demand growth in the second half of the year would need to materialise, with the new policy focus on energy savings and carbon emissions proving lasting.
The trends that could upset this projection include the economic policy focus on manufacturing, and the expansion of the coal-to-chemicals industry.
The surge in coal use for coal-to-chemicals is also a demonstration that even if power sector emissions begin to fall, as long as China’s climate commitments allow emissions to increase, there is the potential for developments that increase emissions in other sectors.
China has committed to updating its climate targets for 2030 and releasing new targets for 2035 early next year. These targets will be key in cementing the emissions peak and specifying the targeted rate of emission reductions after the peak – both of which have seismic implications for the global emissions trajectory and the level at which temperatures can be stabilised.
Data for the analysis was compiled from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, National Energy Administration of China, China Electricity Council and China Customs official data releases, and from WIND Information, an industry data provider.
Wind and solar output, and thermal power breakdown by fuel, was calculated by multiplying power generating capacity at the end of each month by monthly utilisation, using data reported by China Electricity Council through Wind Financial Terminal.
Total generation from thermal power and generation from hydropower and nuclear power was taken from National Bureau of Statistics monthly releases.
Monthly utilisation data was not available for biomass, so the annual average of 52% for 2023 was applied. Power sector coal consumption was estimated based on power generation from coal and the average heat rate of coal-fired power plants during each month, to avoid the issue with official coal consumption numbers affecting recent data.
When data was available from multiple sources, different sources were cross-referenced and official sources used when possible, adjusting total consumption to match the consumption growth and changes in the energy mix reported by the National Bureau of Statistics for the first quarter and the first half of the year. The effect of the adjustments is less than 1% for all energy sources, and the conclusion that emissions fell in the second quarter holds both with and without this adjustment.
CO2 emissions estimates are based on National Bureau of Statistics default calorific values of fuels and emissions factors from China’s latest national greenhouse gas emissions inventory, for the year 2018. Cement CO2 emissions factor is based on annual estimates up to 2023.
For oil consumption, apparent consumption is calculated from refinery throughput, with net exports of oil products subtracted.
The bulk of steelmaking around the world still relies on coal-based blast furnaces.
As a result, the steel and iron industry is responsible for 7% of greenhouse gas emissions and 11% of carbon dioxide emissions globally, according to the consultancy firm Global Efficiency Intelligence.
This is more than the total emissions from all the world’s cars and vans.
With steel critical to the building out of decarbonised energy infrastructure, production is expected to continue to rise over the coming years, meaning the potential for decarbonisation is “enormous”, according to not-for-profit data organisation Global Energy Monitor (GEM).
GEM’s annual “Pedal to the Metal” report reveals that 93% of new steelmaking capacity announced thus far in 2024 promises to use lower emission electric arc furnaces (EAFs).
It also shows that 49% of the world’s steelmaking capacity under development now uses EAFs, up from just 43% in 2023 and 33% in 2022.
Of this, nearly all of the capacity announced since the beginning of 2024 operates using EAFs, the non-governmental organisation’s Global Steel Plant Tracker (GSPT) shows.
The tracker covers 2,207m tonnes per year (mtpa) of operating steelmaking capacity and an additional 774mtpa of steelmaking capacity under development globally, across 1,163 individual plants in 89 different countries, analysis of which is captured in its annual report.
However, while the report suggests a positive progression towards lower emission technologies in the sector, the increase in the announced projects is not yet leading to a construction of EAF overtaking coal-based production methods.
Coal-based blast furnace-basic oxygen furnaces (BF-BOFs) – where blast furnaces are used to produce iron from ore and oxygen converters then turn this, with some additional elements, into steel – continue to dominate the projects under construction, meaning “pressure must be maintained all the way through to project completion if real progress is to be seen”, the report finds.
Incoming steelmaking capacity is more heavily EAF-based than ever before, according to GEM’s new report.
There is currently 774mtpa of steelmaking capacity under development, of which 223mtpa is in the advanced development stage.
Based on data from April 2024, the GSPT shows that nearly half of the capacity under development (337mtpa) is EAFs.
Just 36% of steelmaking capacity announced in 2020 with a known production route used EAFs, while in 2023 that number had increased to 92% according to GEM. This grows to 93% of capacity when looking at steelmaking capacity under development announced in 2024.
This “indicates a significant shift toward electric arc furnace steelmaking in the years to come”, the report notes.
Meanwhile, of the 212mtpa of steelmaking capacity slated for retirement, 88% if BOF-based.
However, a net increase in BOF-based capacity is expected over the coming years. If all planned developments and retirements take effect, an additional 171mptpa of BOFs is expected to be added to the global fleet, along with 310mtpa of EAF and 80mtpa of unknown technologies.
Despite this growth in BOFs, the surge of EAF means the steel sector is getting increasingly close to meeting the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) suggested 2030 target.
In its net-zero by 2050 roadmap, the IEA suggests that the share of steel produced by EAF should grow from 24% in 2020, to 37% by 2030 and then 52% by 2050.
Considering all planned capacity and retirements, GEM now estimates that the global steel fleet is expected to reach 36% EAF by 2030, noting: “This is still not sufficient to meet the IEA [net-zero] climate target, but with heightened momentum the goal is increasingly attainable.”
While EAF-steelmaking is being announced at “record rate”, GEM finds that less than 14% of this potential capacity has moved into construction.
Of those that have moved into construction, around 46% are still BOF-based. As such, “while we may be within reach of net-zero targets based on proposed electric arc furnace capacity, actually achieving these goals requires follow-through”, the report notes.
Caitlin Swalec, program director for heavy industry at GEM, said in a statement:
“The progress is promising for a green steel transition. Never before has this much lower-emissions steelmaking been in the pipeline. At the same time, the buildout of coal-based capacity is concerning. What the industry needs now is to make these clean development plans a reality, while backing away from coal-based developments.”
As well as the buildout of new coal-based capacity being out of alignment with a net-zero future, it poses a threat of carbon lock-in and stranded assets, GEM notes.
Blast furnaces are becoming riskier investments given the limited options to mitigate emissions from both the furnaces themselves and the upstream emissions from the metallurgical coal mining, it adds.
Estimating an investment of $1-1.5bn per mtpa capacity at an integrated BF-BOF site, GEM found that the future stranded-asset risk could be as high as $554bn in 2023, falling to $400bn in 2024 due to the continued fall in BOF capacity under development.
Astrid Grigsby-Schulte, project manager for steel at GEM tells Carbon Brief:
“As we grow closer to key decarbonisation milestones, coal-based developments get further out of alignment with the direction the industry is moving and present a greater risk of stranded assets to steelmakers. Coal-based, emissions-intensive blast furnaces represent significant investments that often require decades to recoup. This makes them extremely risky for developers, particularly in countries with stated net zero commitments.”
The limited options for mitigating the climate impact of BOF-steelmaking was also highlighted within a recent report from the thinktank Sandbag.
While carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) is often touted as a “catch all” solution, its effectiveness varies widely across applications, Sandbag’s “Steel & CCS/U” report finds.
For steel production, BF-BOFs with carbon capture are unlikely to be cost-competitive with EAFs, the report finds. Although given the slow pace of technological and market development, Sandbag anticipates capturing carbon will play a limited role in the steel industry.
India has now replaced China as the top steel developer globally, with a pipeline of 258mtpa of capacity, of which 177mtpa is BOFs, according to GEM.
China has a pipeline of 150mtpa meaning, collectively, China and India are responsible for 53% of all developments globally.
Asia operates 68% of all steelmaking capacity (1,508mtpa), the majority of which is in China (1,075mtpa), India (123mtpa) and Japan (109mtpa).
When looking specifically at emissions-intensive BOF production, Asia’s share of total operating capacity increases to 80% (1,181mtpa), of which 918mtpa is in China.
Currently, China has 157mtpa of operating EAFs (22% of the global capacity), followed by the US, Turkey, Iran and then India.
According to a new report from the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), China did not issue any new permits for coal-based steelmaking in the first half of 2024. This is the first time this has happened since the nation’s “dual carbon goals” were announced in September 2020.
During the first six months of 2024, Chinese provincial governments permitted 7.1mtpa of steelmaking capacity, all of which were EAFs marking a “turning point” for the country’s steel industry, CREA notes.
Xinyi Shen, researcher at CREA and the report’s lead author, tells Carbon Brief: :
“China’s EAF steelmaking has been developing rather slowly in the past few decades, mainly due to the constraint of scrap supply. However, as China’s steel demand reaches its peak and more scrap becomes available, a major opportunity arises to reduce emissions in the next 10 years. The government has accelerated plans to expand the national ETS to include the steel sector by the second half of 2024. By implementing carbon pricing on carbon-intensive products, EAF steelmaking would become more economically competitive and continue the growth.”
Despite India now overtaking China in terms of announced steelmaking capacity, China remains the biggest developer of EAF capacity overall, GEM’s report states. And while India has the most steel in development, 84% has not moved into construction.
As such, there is still an opportunity for India’s plans to change, with the percentage of BOFs to EAFs less set.
Chris Bataille, adjunct research fellow at the Columbia University Center on Global Energy Policy and lead author at the global Net Zero Steel project tells Carbon Brief:
“India’s core demand for steel is set to increase from 125mtpa to ~450mtpa by 2050, especially to meet key building and infrastructure needs. Our modelling suggests EAFs consistently rise from ~35 to 150mtpa by 2050. So the +250mtpa BF-BOFs is just barely feasible, but only over ~25 years and with some exports of BF-BOF steel.
“The difference will be between a world where strong climate policy succeeds and fails. If it fails and coal based BF-BOFs are built, then the +258mtpa looks barely feasible. If it succeeds, India is short on the necessary gas and especially clean electricity to power this amount of steel production. While the country does build a lot of EAFs, it builds up to 250mtpa of clean iron making over time, making the short term shortfall with clean HBI iron imports.”
UTILITIES: As Duke Energy prepares to face North Carolina regulators and defend its plan to invest in 9 GW of natural gas plants and delay meeting an emissions reduction mandate, it makes small concessions in a proposed settlement and wins support from the state’s ratepayer advocate. (Energy News Network)
ALSO:
COAL ASH: Environmental groups press the U.S. EPA to take control of Georgia’s coal ash program from state regulators because they’ve allowed utilities to keep unlined coal ash ponds where the waste is in contact with groundwater. (Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Georgia Recorder)
SOLAR: Texas saw a spike in the number of homes adding small-scale solar facilities even before Hurricane Beryl, which caused widespread outages that could encourage more state residents to add solar installations. (Inside Climate News)
GRID:
CLIMATE:
OVERSIGHT: Louisiana and Mississippi commissions sue federal regulators over an order that sets requirements for long-term electric grid planning, one of the first challenges to a federal agency since the U.S. Supreme Court opened up ambiguous agency decisions to legal challenges. (E&E News)
EMISSIONS: The U.S. EPA will evaluate air quality at two national parks in Texas as part of a settlement in a lawsuit by environmentalists. (Marfa Public Radio)
STORAGE: An energy company closes on financing for three standalone utility-scale battery energy storage projects in Texas that will be built near solar farms. (Utility Dive)
POLITICS: An official from Kentucky’s attorney general disputes the science behind climate change in testimony to state lawmakers, arguing against U.S. EPA rules that require coal- and new natural gas-burning power plants to capture 90% of carbon emissions. (Kentucky Lantern)
COMMENTARY: West Virginia should embrace wind, solar and electric vehicle industries to add clean energy-related jobs and attract new residents, writes a conservationist. (State Journal)
OIL & GAS: A think tank’s report documents how the top U.S. gas lobbying groups and two European counterparts have used the same arguments for more than 50 years to promote the continued use of fossil fuels. (OpenSecrets)
ALSO:
ELECTRIC VEHICLES:
NUCLEAR: The success of a newly signed law boosting small nuclear will depend on the makeup of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which hinges on the next president, industry experts say. (E&E News)
HYDROGEN: U.S. Senate Democrats call on the Treasury secretary to relax rules for federal hydrogen industry subsidies, which require the use of only clean energy generated at the same time as the hydrogen fuel. (The Hill)
CLEAN ENERGY:
GRID:
CLIMATE: A Baltimore City Circuit Court judge throws out the city’s climate accountability lawsuit against several major oil companies, saying the case sought to go “beyond the limits of Maryland state law.” (Reuters; E&E News, subscription)
HYDROPOWER: An Oregon university begins construction of the nation’s first utility-scale wave power testing site along the state’s central coast. (KOIN)
COAL: Coal-fired power plants are becoming increasingly unreliable because of deferred maintenance, increased cycling and other factors, according to the North American Electric Reliability Corp. (Utility Dive)
CLIMATE:
OIL & GAS: In New Mexico, oil and gas giants partnered with environmentalists and politicians to develop an abandoned well cleanup bill, but turned against the final product and claimed it would “destroy” the state. (ProPublica)
ELECTRIFICATION:
SOLAR: A Wyoming economic development official proposes installing solar arrays on reclaimed Powder River Basin mines to replace lost coal tax revenue and jobs but runs into opposition from residents loyal to fossil fuels. (Inside Climate News)
GRID:
EFFICIENCY: Honeywell debuts a plug-level energy monitor that could help offices realize the energy savings of unplugging devices when they’re not being used. (Utility Dive)
WIND:
ELECTRIC VEHICLES: An organization representing gas station chains calls on Florida officials to begin taking applications for funding to build electric vehicle charging stations. (Tampa Bay Times)
POLITICS: Observers expect West Virginia’s longstanding influence on federal energy policy to fade this fall as Sen. Joe Manchin steps down and is likely replaced by a pro-fossil fuel Republican. (Inside Climate News)
TRANSPORTATION: Illinois health and environmental groups call on the state’s pollution control agency to phase out sales of most gas- and diesel-powered vehicles by 2035. (Chicago Sun-Times)
CLEAN ENERGY:
AIR POLLUTION: The U.S. Supreme Court sides with Ohio and Indiana by pausing enforcement of the Biden administration’s “good neighbor” rule aimed at preventing downwind air pollution crossing state borders. (Associated Press)
SOLAR: A Chicago-based nonprofit offers 10- to 13-week courses that equip disadvantaged workers with job skills for the state’s growing solar industry. (Chicago Sun-Times)
RENEWABLES: Americans’ support for renewable energy and electric vehicles is declining with older Republicans driving the drop in support since 2020, according to a new Pew survey. (Bloomberg)
NUCLEAR:
COAL: Coal plants in Ohio and Indiana have lost hundreds of millions of dollars so far this year as the costs to operate plants grow compared to cheaper alternatives. (Checks & Balances Project)
GRID: New research suggests utility customers could see bill savings of up to 40% when rooftop solar, battery storage and other demand-reducing technologies are deployed. (Inside Climate News)
ELECTRIFICATION: A $2.2 billion hospital under development in Detroit will include a $235 million electric heating and cooling system that would make it just the second all-electric hospital in the country. (Crain’s Detroit, subscription)
COMMENTARY: The head of a biogas advocacy group says capturing methane from landfills, agricultural waste and other sources to produce electricity could help meet growing power demand. (Utility Dive)
The operators of the decades-old energy systems that heat and cool buildings in downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul have ambitious plans underway to reduce emissions.
The mostly hidden networks of insulated pipes connected to centralized heating and cooling equipment are known as district energy systems. They’ve long been championed as an energy efficient way to heat and cool campuses or downtowns, especially in cooler climates.
Many, though, are connected to fossil fuel facilities, and the systems’ high efficiency alone won’t be enough to help schools, cities, and companies meet their goals of eliminating greenhouse gas emissions by midcentury or sooner. Climate pledges by these institutional customers are now driving efforts to repower district energy systems with clean energy.
University district energy systems began initiatives to reduce emissions years ago and “now in the last five years we’re seeing a lot of emphasis on this from cities and towns,” said Rob Thornton, president and CEO of the International District Energy Association.
In Minneapolis, Cordia Energy, the private company that operates the largest downtown district energy system, is replacing natural gas boilers with electric models. And in downtown St. Paul, officials are seeking federal funding for a project to recover heat from a wastewater treatment plant and reduce energy use for a system currently powered by electricity and biomass.
“We’re doing decarbonization at the rate that our customer base is asking for and we can economically withstand,” said Jacob Graff, Cordia Energy’s north region president. Customers connected to its downtown Minneapolis system range from stadiums and high rises to apartments and medical facilities.
The concept of district heating has been around for centuries, with its roots in the networks of hot water pipes built in ancient Rome. Some of the first modern steam-based systems were built in New York in the 1880s. Today, the United States has more than 700 district energy systems heating and cooling buildings in downtowns, universities, medical campuses, towns and communities.
Cordia Energy’s Minneapolis system opened in 1972 to serve the 57-story IDS Center, still the tallest building in Minneapolis. Today, the steam and chilled water system manages seven plants that heat and cool the IDS and more than 100 other buildings, including U.S. Bank Stadium, Target Center, and the convention center.
Hennepin County owns and operates a much smaller district energy system, connected to a downtown trash incinerator, that primarily serves county buildings and Minneapolis City Hall.
District Energy St. Paul began in the early 1980s after then-Mayor George Latimer hired Swedish engineer Hans Nyman to replace the aging steam system with a hot-water central heating system. Latimer wanted to create a national model of district energy and he largely succeeded. District Energy St. Paul has the largest hot water system in the country, with more than 200 buildings.
Together, the two systems serve some of the state’s biggest buildings, which have emerged as the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in both cities. In Minneapolis, 65% of the emissions are from commercial, multifamily and industrial buildings. St. Paul’s data is similar.
Cordia plans to reduce emissions from its Minneapolis system by 30% by 2030 before reaching net zero by 2050. Xcel Energy’s green tariff program will offset around half the electricity Cordia uses this year, and it wants to buy more credits if they become available.
The company is replacing older engine-driven chillers with electric models at the former Dayton’s department store, where it has operations. Chillers modulate the temperature inside buildings and can be powered by electricity or natural gas. Geothermal is another potential solution being studied.
A potential geothermal project “hasn’t cleared the economic hurdles yet,” Graff said. “I think we’ll eventually get there.”
Minneapolis customers are not alone in seeking to reduce emissions from district energy systems, Graff said. San Francisco will be Cordia’s first system to decarbonize using hydropower from a dam the company owns in Yosemite National Park.
Downtown St. Paul’s district heating system is owned and operated by a company called District Energy, which recently worked with the city and the regional planning agency on a $152 million U.S. EPA grant application to tap heat from a regional wastewater plant for the city’s system. It would include a project with Xcel Energy to pay for an electric boiler and hot water storage.
District Energy president and CEO Ken Smith said half the system already has been decarbonized through biomass, solar thermal and renewable energy credits. An analysis showed that recovering heat from the Metro Wastewater Treatment Plant, which manages 170 million gallons of water daily, could produce 60 megawatts of thermal energy, and heat pumps could lift the temperature up to the system average.
If District Energy receives the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant, the system would go live in 2028 and allow District Energy to provide 92% of energy from carbon-free or carbon-neutral sources, far ahead of its goal of net zero by 2050.
“This certainly would be able to accelerate that by 30 years,” Smith said. “From everything we’ve seen, there’s nothing like this, certainly not in the United States, and I don’t believe there’s anything like it at this scale in Canada, either.”
St. Paul Resilience Officer Russ Stark said District Energy’s emissions represent a small portion of the total greenhouse gases in the city. Still, around 50,000 tons of carbon would be eliminated annually, and that’s “very impactful,” he said.
The wastewater project would allow District Energy St. Paul to expand to more buildings, decarbonizing them in the process, Stark said. Adding clients “is not a simple process but we’ve been talking a lot about that being an exciting part of the project,” he said. “I don’t know how many major city downtowns there are where there’s an opportunity to largely decarbonize most of the downtown in the way that we can.”
A one-size-fits-all solution for decarbonizing district energy systems doesn’t exist, as most are unique based on customers and geography. Not all can be inexpensively retrofitted for electricity, and the ongoing office and commercial real estate fallout from the Covid-19 pandemic adds risk to financing projects.
Thornton, of the district energy association, said electricity pricing can escalate quickly, especially in summer, creating uncertainty in the market. New technology may require more space, different controls and significant staff training. Federal policy remains unclear about what parts of a district energy system would qualify for tax incentives, he said.
Graff ticks off many challenges in decarbonizing Cordia’s Minneapolis operations. Geothermal works well on campuses and in low-slung neighborhoods where the problem of sending steam to the 50th floor of a skyscraper does not exist, Graff said.
There’s not a simple clean power source like natural gas that has the energy density to create and push steam through a network, he said. To illustrate the point during a tour of Cordia’s downtown plant, he pointed to a pipe with a modest circumference and said the natural gas flowing through it provided the heating for much of the system.
Electrification may be a goal of heating and cooling, but offsetting it with clean power is daunting. Cordia would have to install heat pumps capable of drawing more than 400 megawatts from a clean energy source, which would be no small feat, Graff said.
Hydrogen sounds promising but has no track record yet for supplying an entire downtown district energy system, Graff said. Biomass has potential, too, but sourcing enough it to service a sprawling district energy system reliably remains difficult.
Battery storage, microgrids and other technologies could all play a role, but each brings issues ranging from cost to a lack of testing in a district energy environment, at least at the size of the downtown Minneapolis system.
“We have the economy of Minneapolis in our hands, and regional economics depend on downtown Minneapolis,” Graff said “We need a reliable infrastructure that people can count on that can be delivered economically, and it’s our responsibility to do that.”
CLIMATE: Hawaii recognizes children’s constitutional right to a life-sustaining climate and steps up efforts to reach a goal of net-negative emissions by 2045 to settle a youths’ lawsuit targeting the state’s fossil fuel-friendly policies. (Associated Press)
HYDROPOWER: A rural Alaska community prepares to use federal funding to construct a run-of-the-river hydropower project aimed at reducing the village’s reliance on diesel generators. (KTOO)
ELECTRIFICATION: A study finds California utilities could save about $20 billion over the next two decades by electrifying clusters of buildings instead of replacing their aging natural gas pipelines. (Utility Dive)
STORAGE:
UTILITIES:
ELECTRIC VEHICLES:
OIL & GAS:
PUBLIC LANDS: A federal Bureau of Land Management plan to expand protections on some public lands in western Colorado while leaving 855,300 acres open to oil and gas leasing draws mixed reviews from advocates. (news release)
GRID: California’s grid operator begins shifting governance of its extended day-ahead power market to an independent entity. (RTO Insider, subscription)
BIOFUELS: Nevada researchers find prickly pear cactus fruit are a climate-resilient source of biomass for fuel production. (news release)
COAL: A Wyoming explosives maker says declining Powder River Basin coal production has driven down its sales by 19% this year. (Cowboy State Daily)
COMMENTARY: A California editorial board calls on state lawmakers to require cooling equipment in residential rental units to keep occupants safe during increasingly frequent climate change-exacerbated heat events. (Los Angeles Times)
Biogas projects at wastewater plants serving Columbus and Cincinnati will offset roughly 50,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas annually, according to city officials.
The Columbus Department of Public Utilities estimates biogas cogeneration projects for its Southerly and Jackson Pike plants will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about 34,000 and 13,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents, respectively. That’s the equivalent of taking 10,100 passenger vehicles off the road, said Robert Priestas, administrator for the department’s division of sewers and drains.
The utilities also can get back millions under the Inflation Reduction Act if they meet conditions by the end of this year.
“Climate change is upon us, right? And so we have an opportunity to actually make a difference,” said Stacia Eckenwiler, who serves as assistant administrator for the division. She spoke at the Ohio State Bar Association’s Environmental Law Institute in April.
Columbus’s wastewater utility accounts for a significant chunk of the city’s greenhouse gas emissions, she noted. A 2019 inventory report shows water and wastewater accounted for about 9% of nearly 11 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents from community-wide emissions that year.
The Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati is also planning to use biogas to make electricity and provide heating for its Little Miami Wastewater Treatment Plant. The facility still needs to add equipment to generate and capture the biogas to shift some greenhouse gas emissions away from where wastes are now landfilled, and offset some fossil fuel emissions from energy otherwise used at the plant.
Sewage treatment plants remove solids and harmful pollutants from wastewater. Most often, the cleaned-up water goes into a river, lake or other water body near the treatment plant, generally pursuant to permits issued under the Clean Water Act. Leftover sludge containing biosolids has generally ended up in incinerators or at landfills.
Burning of biosolids releases carbon dioxide to the air, and landfilling biosolids likewise releases greenhouse gas emissions. Both options cost sewer plants money to dispose of the wastes.
Anaerobic digestion is another option. Basically, it composts the biosolids to speed up their chemical breakdown. Solids left at the end can generally be added to soil or used in other ways. The process also produces biogas, which is primarily a mix of flammable methane and carbon dioxide. Burning the methane can power an electric generator and also provide heat energy.
In contrast to methane from natural gas, which is a fossil fuel that contributes to human-caused climate change, the methane from wastewater sludge is generally considered clean energy when it’s used for electricity and heating.
The gas is generated anyway, explained Karine Rougé, CEO of Veolia North America’s Municipal Water services. So, using it works as “a perfect substitute” for fossil fuels, she said. Veolia is not involved in the Cincinnati or Columbus projects.
Beyond that offset, “the methane in natural gas is extracted from subsurface rock formations from a depleting source that cannot be replenished,” said Diana Christy, the director of the Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati. In contrast, biogas is renewable, “in the sense that humans always will produce waste.”
Columbus already has a composting program, which began several years ago after stricter regulations meant it could no longer use old incinerators. Now, “all of the biosolids that are produced by our facilities go back to the earth and get used again,” Eckenwiler said. Uses include compost and fertilizer for tree farms.
So far, however, the city has just burned the biogas with a flare. “It’s a wasted resource overall,” she says. That’s set to change.
Biogas projects at the Southerly and Jackson Pike wastewater treatment plants will provide “about half the energy that is necessary at each of our facilities, so it’s a pretty significant amount,” Eckenwiler said. “And that will take that reliance off the grid,” which can help at times of peak demand.
Besides advancing sustainability and the cities’ decarbonization goals, sewer utilities for Columbus and Cincinnati see the projects as a way to reduce costs and respond to shifts in regulatory requirements.
The technology for anaerobic digestion has been around for years, but it has improved recently, Christy said. “Most simply for us, the ‘why now’ is it was an economic decision and the changes in requirements for incineration that we were facing previously.”
Eckenwiler estimated Columbus’s biogas projects will save the city roughly $1 million for the two plants’ energy costs — about half of what they currently spend while biogas is otherwise vented to the air.
She also noted the federal government’s efforts to reduce emissions from the oil and gas industry. “It’s only a matter of time before wastewater utilities are going to be part of that as well,” she said.
The Inflation Reduction Act provides an added economic incentive through its changes to the federal Investment Tax Credit. Previously the credit benefited only people and organizations that paid taxes. The changes now let government units and nonprofits get money back as a reimbursement when projects are finished.
The 2022 law also expanded the Investment Tax Credit to more types of energy projects, including biogas. To qualify, biogas projects must begin construction by the end of this year. The law also provides a “safe harbor” if there’s a commitment to buy at least 5% of the necessary equipment and it is in significant fabrication by or before December 31, Eckenwiler said.
The Jackson Pike project is already under construction and should finish up by sometime next year, Eckenwiler said. The Southerly project is on track to start construction this year and should be complete by 2028.
Cincinnati plans to start construction at the Little Miami plant this year under a design-build contract that lets construction begin while various details are finalized, Christy said. The district is also evaluating the safe harbor provision and considering a purchase of equipment for $11 million before the end of this year, with expected delivery before April of 2024.
The Jackson Pike project for Columbus is estimated to cost about $30 million, Eckenwiler said. “The project at Southerly is part of a much larger project, but the cogeneration portion is about $79 million.” The Investment Tax Credit could provide rebates up to 50%. That includes bonuses for paying prevailing wages and using domestic content, as well as a bonus for projects in or next to an “energy community.”
Parts of Cincinnati’s project that qualify for the Investment Tax Credit could provide up to $50 million in reimbursements, Christy said. Whatever the amount is, “the impact of a direct cash payment from the federal government will serve to reduce the cost burden on local ratepayers as the sewer district reinvests in infrastructure to maintain levels of service and to improve the sewer system in order to better serve the community and to comply with the Clean Water Act.”
Rougé sees a broader trend towards wastewater plants using biogas for energy. In Europe, a prolonged drought and the war in Ukraine have ramped up interest in local energy production, she said. And energy costs have been a major driver in the United States, she said. A desire to boost resilience also weighs in favor of adding biogas or other onsite generation, particularly in states where grid issues already present problems, she added.
Onsite biogas projects may not be cost-effective for some smaller sewer utilities. Yet the Inflation Reduction Act’s deadline is sparking lots of conversations with Veolia’s clients, Rougé said. And even if a wastewater authority doesn’t begin a project yet, other funding support could be available, such as state revolving funds under the Clean Water Act, she said.
Wastewater treatment plants are “complex and technical places,” Eckenwiler said. “They’re also very, very cool resource recovery facilities.”
Duke Energy is already under fire in North Carolina for its plan to blow off a state deadline to curb carbon pollution while also building a massive new fleet of fossil fuel plants.
Now, the company’s blueprint is locked on a collision course with fresh rules from the Biden administration, which target coal and new natural gas plants and take effect in eight years.
“Duke is going to have to go back to the drawing board,” said David Neal, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, “and come up with an alternative that is compliant with the rules.”
While much focus on the long-awaited Biden rules has centered on coal, their impact on natural gas is arguably more significant. Duke isn’t alone among American utilities in being forced to re-examine long-term generation plans as a result.
“We think it’s important for every utility and every commission to take a step back,” said Amanda Levin, director of policy analysis with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
But even as the federal regulations underscore a law unique to the state, it’s not clear if North Carolina regulators will take a beat – or even if there’s time for them to corral Duke and an array of stakeholders to rework, vet, and approve a new carbon reduction and long-range plan due by the end of the year. That’s why many advocates say debate over the utility’s immediate next steps will be crucial.
“It’s going to be important to adopt a near-term action plan that really is ‘least regrets,’” said Neal, who’s representing numerous clean energy groups in the proceeding on Duke’s generation plans. “The new rules just put further emphasis on what we already knew was true: we’re going to have to accelerate the adoption of clean resources.”
Duke’s existing fleet of natural gas-fired plants aren’t affected by the new Biden rules. Nor are the smaller gas plants Duke proposes to occasionally satisfy peak demand and serve other limited roles on the electric grid.
But the company plans at least five large, combined-cycle plants in the Carolinas that are impacted by the rules. The four projected for North Carolina include a 1,360-megawatt plant in Roxboro, about an hour north of Durham, for which state regulators are now weighing a permit application.
Natural gas is a fossil fuel, but Duke deems the Roxboro plant and others like it essential to the zero-carbon electricity future that state law mandates by 2050. These baseload generators can back up sources like wind and solar to ensure reliability. At the point of combustion, they produce about half the carbon pollution of coal. And in theory, hydrogen molecules separated from chemical compounds could ultimately supplant gas as a fuel, bringing the plants’ carbon emissions down to almost nothing.
“Natural gas is available 24/7 — with fewer emissions than coal and at a lower cost than renewables alone,” Duke said on its website this year, around the time it asked regulators for permission to build the Roxboro plant. “The new [Roxboro] units would be designed to operate on carbon-free hydrogen in the future.”
But critics say this rationale is flawed in virtually every respect. The cost of natural gas is on the rise, and one recent study showed it was a major driver of recent Duke rate hikes in parts of North Carolina. In December 2022 during Winter Storm Elliott, gas plants failed when they were needed most — in the wee, frigid hours before the sun rose — helping to cause rolling blackouts that impacted half a million customers in the state. Drilling and transporting gas leaks methane, a greenhouse gas 80 times more powerful than carbon, nearly canceling out reduced carbon pollution from smokestacks.
As for hydrogen, experts believe it can serve a small role in a zero-carbon economy — but mostly not in the power sector. Even if it’s carbon-free when burned, hydrogen made from fossil fuels is hardly nonpolluting and also inefficient. Hydrogen fuel produced from renewables should be reserved for limited applications, they say, such as long-distance aviation fuel or to power the few gas plants still running in the middle of the century.
“In our modeling,” said Levin, “hydrogen in the power sector is used just for that last 5% of the decarbonization of the entire grid.”
Still, the power plant rules promulgated by Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency don’t wrestle with reliability, ratepayer impacts or even methane leakage. They cover carbon dioxide pollution alone, and they’re designed to reduce what’s emitted from the smokestack by 90% beginning in 2032.
That limit is based on carbon capture — in which carbon dioxide is sequestered underground rather than released into the atmosphere — a technology widely viewed as infeasible in North Carolina because of its geology. And while other techniques that would achieve the same pollution cuts are allowed under the federal rules, none are yet ripe.
One candidate is now being developed at utility scale in Texas but won’t be deployed until at least three years from now. As for hydrogen, it would have to fuel 96% of Duke’s new baseload gas plants beginning in 2032 to meet the emissions limit — an impossible feat according to the company’s own communications with regulators.
Duke’s current forecast shows its gas fleet running on about 3% hydrogen beginning in 2041, then “holding steady until significantly more hydrogen is required to meet carbon-neutral by 2050,” to comply with state law. And in a brief discussion of the impending federal power plant rules in its August draft of its long-term plan, Duke noted:
“Hydrogen is an important and potentially transformational fuel for the future of the resource portfolio, [but] the volumes necessary to utilize the hydrogen compliance pathway are not thought to be achievable on the timelines presented.”
Thus, if regulators allow Duke to build large new baseload gas plants, the company can only run them 40% of the time or less, beginning in 2032 and until technology becomes viable to slash their emissions.
The Roxboro plant, which Duke plans to put into service at the beginning of 2029, would operate at its planned capacity for just three years in that case. Afterwards, its vaunted ability to provide around-the-clock electricity would be severely curtailed.
Multiply the Roxboro conundrum by five, and the mismatch between the Biden rules and Duke’s gas ambitions becomes clear.
In its August discussion of the expected Biden rules, Duke said it considered running its new combined-cycle baseload plants at 50%. Making up for the resulting difference between demand and supply, including building another large gas plant that would run at half-speed, would require an extra $3.6 billion, the company estimated.
Tyler Norris, a former vice president at Cypress Creek Renewables and a PhD candidate at Duke University, estimates that if the 6,800 megawatts of baseload gas plants Duke announced in January were planned to run at 75% and had to ratchet down to 40% operations, the difference would be greater still. Filling it only with solar could require 9,500 megawatts of capacity in a single year — nearly double what’s online in Duke’s territory today.
“That’s probably on the high end,” said Norris, but, “it’s a pretty huge gap. Something’s going to have to change in the plan.”
Then, there’s the question of whether it makes sense for ratepayers to pay to fill that gap, especially if they’re also shelling out full price for underutilized plants.
“We’re all paying for these plants that admittedly have to sit idle more than half of the time?” asked Dave Rogers, deputy director for the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign. “Should customers really be forced to pay for those?”
Adhering to the Biden rules on coal plants appears more straightforward.
Duke must shut down its entire coal fleet by the start of 2039, and any plants still running in 2032 must be fired partially with gas. The utility already plans to meet that deadline for eight of its 12 remaining coal smokestacks, covering six sites. Two outliers in Belews Creek, just outside Winston-Salem, can already be fueled with gas. That leaves two units in Roxboro, about an hour north of Durham, that the utility now plans to keep online until 2034.
“The logical thing is to retire that coal plant at least a couple of years earlier. Whatever replaces it will be lower cost,” said Rogers. “That’s the big thing in front of the commission as it pertains to the [coal plant] rules.”
Timing also looms large. State law requires Duke to curb carbon emissions 70% by 2030, with two years’ wiggle room. If regulators authorize a nuclear or wind project that causes logistical delays beyond Duke’s control, the postponement could be indefinite. The company now hopes to exploit the latter loophole, with its preferred path to net zero achieving the 70% benchmark by 2035 or even 2037.
With their deadline of 2032, however, the Biden rules help bolster the case for Duke to rein in its carbon emissions sooner. Doing so wouldn’t just make it easier for the utility to meet the ultimate goal of near-zero emissions by midcentury. It would also significantly reduce overall carbon levels in the atmosphere.
“The thing about climate is it’s not just about achieving net zero in one year and one year only,” said Levin. “Climate is a cumulative emissions problem. If you’re doing status quo until the year you’ve made a net zero commitment, you’re not consistent with a 1.5 or 2 degree warming trajectory.”
Still, while advocates have long pressed Duke to build more battery storage, solar, and wind in place of gas and coal, making the switch in the complex utility modeling tools is no simple task, with a host of variables involved — from transmission capacity to reliability to siting.
“Duke has already submitted its modeling twice now. I doubt that either North or South Carolina commissions will want to do another round of that at this point,” said Maggie Shober, research director for the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, on a recent webinar about the Biden rules. But, she added, “this will absolutely come up in the process before the [North Carolina Utilities] commission.”
For its part, Duke hasn’t indicated any plans to re-do its projections.
“While we are analyzing the final rules, our view is that [they do] not change our path forward in North Carolina as we continue retiring our coal plants and supporting the state’s unprecedented growth with an all-of-the-above approach that’s designed to deliver affordability and reliability for customers,” company spokesperson Bill Norton said in an email. “Natural gas remains an essential resource in this diverse mix that can be dispatched to meet demand 24/7.”
If that position holds, and state regulators don’t seek to change it, it raises the stakes considerably for the “near-term action plan” expected as part of the plan due by the end of the year, as well as the permit application pending right now for the Roxboro plant.
That short-term plan, said advocates, shouldn’t just account for the risk of new gas resources and the timing of coal retirements, but also allow for more renewables by removing the annual connection caps Duke proposes for both battery and solar.
“I think this is an excellent opportunity,” said Norris, “to revisit the potential to achieve a higher interconnection rate for zero-carbon resources.”
.svg)
