Gov. Janet Mills wants to make a new department focused on the state’s energy needs and goals.
In her upcoming biennial budget proposal that is expected on Friday, Mills will outline her plan for the current Governor’s Energy Office to be elevated to a cabinet-level department. This would be a budget-neutral initiative that would allow for more comprehensive and consistent management of Maine’s energy system, according to a news release from the governor’s office Wednesday.
If the budget proposal is approved by the Maine Legislature, the Governor’s Energy Office would transition to the Maine Department of Energy Resources by the end of this year. It would be led by a commissioner, who would be appointed by the governor and subject to legislative confirmation.
In recent years, the Maine Legislature has significantly expanded the responsibilities of the Governor’s Energy Office. For example, the office has secured more than $200 million in federal funding to support grid resilience and innovation, energy efficiency and workforce development.
“By designating a cabinet seat focused solely on energy issues, Maine will be in a stronger position to deliver more affordable energy, advance our energy goals, and grow the state’s economy,” said Dan Burgess, director of the Governor’s Energy Office.
The new energy department would be the lead agency on energy resources, policies, planning, data, markets, energy security and program implementation; all of which currently fall to the Governor’s Energy Office.
Like those in other states, Maine’s new department would have additional authority to conduct competitive energy procurements to meet the state’s power demands and reliability needs. It would also continue to coordinate with the Maine Public Utilities Commission and other state, regional and federal partners.
State law requires Maine to transition to renewable energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions; however, it must be done while ensuring that Mainers will still have access to affordable, reliable and secure energy, said Maine Sen. Mark Lawrence (D-York) and state Rep. Melanie Sachs (D-Freeport), who serve as co-chairs of the Maine Legislature’s Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee, in a joint statement.
In 2022, Mills signed into law a state goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The next year, she set a new target of 100% clean electricity by 2040. She also established the Maine Climate Council, which is responsible for maintaining the state’s four-year roadmap to meeting those and other climate goals.
“Regular planning, evaluation, and education delivered by a dedicated agency will ensure the consistency needed to keep Maine on a path toward these goals,” Lawrence and Sachs said in the release. “There’s a reason why this concept has been proposed previously in bipartisan fashion.”
Maine also has a goal of creating three gigawatts of offshore wind in the Gulf of Maine — enough to power between 675,000 and 900,000 homes — installed by the end of 2040. While the state was awarded a lease for a research array with up to 12 floating turbines to help inform how floating offshore wind operates and interacts with ecosystems in the water, the future of the renewable energy source hangs in the balance with President-elect Donald Trump having said he would seek to halt all offshore wind projects.
In 2017, during the LePage administration, state Rep. Kenneth Fredette (R-Newport) introduced legislation to establish an energy seat in the cabinet that would be responsible for energy planning, data analysis and the implementation of an oil dependence reduction plan. The bill was supported by the Legislature’s energy committee at the time, but died upon adjournment.
The Maine State Chamber of Commerce said Wednesday it supports Mills’ proposal, noting that energy is one of the most pressing issues for the state’s economy.
“Addressing energy affordability and meeting our state’s climate targets will require careful planning and execution and the Chamber looks forward to working with the Administration on those efforts with a cabinet-level Energy Department leading that effort,” said President and CEO Patrick Woodcock in the release.
A long-running local government collaboration in southwestern Minnesota is helping to insulate the region from the kind of controversies and misinformation that have plagued rural clean energy projects in other states.
The Rural Minnesota Energy Board has its origins in a regional task force that was set up during the mid-1990s as the state’s first wind farms were being built. The task force was instrumental in persuading state legislators in 2002 to create a wind energy production tax, which today generates millions of dollars in annual revenue for counties and townships that host wind projects.
The group’s scope and membership has since gradually expanded to include 18 rural counties that pay monthly dues for support on energy policy and permitting. The board represents members at the state legislature and in Public Utilities Commission proceedings. At home, it facilitates community meetings with project developers, helps draft energy-related ordinances, and educates members and the public on the benefits of energy projects.
The result, say clean energy advocates and developers, has been a uniquely consistent approach to local energy policy and permitting that makes it easier for renewable companies to do business in the region.
“The rural energy board has been a critical, important body and one of the major reasons why renewable energy has been successful in southwestern Minnesota,” said Adam Sokolski, director of regulatory and legislative affairs at EDF Renewables North America. “Their policies have encouraged good decision-making over the years and led to a stable and productive region for energy development.”
EDF Renewables has worked with the board on at least nine projects in the region. Sokolski said he’s come to admire its approach to policy making, its support for transmission projects, and its efforts to educate members on clean energy.
“It’s positive to have county leaders talking to each other about energy projects, about how … they can approach those projects so they best benefit their constituents and the public,” he said.
Southwest Minnesota has the state’s densest concentration of wind turbines and is increasingly attracting solar developers, too. Wind turbines account for more than 4,500 megawatts, or around 22%, of the state’s generation capacity, making Minnesota a top 10 state for wind production.
‘It’s all economic development’
The board counts the wind production tax among its most significant accomplishments. Large wind farms pay $1.20 per megawatt-hour of generation. Counties receive 80% of the revenue, with the remainder going to townships. A similar fee also exists for large solar projects.
The fee delivers millions of dollars annually, allowing local governments to construct buildings and repair bridges and roads without raising their levies for years. According to American Clean Power, Minnesota municipalities receive $44 million annually in taxes, and private landowners receive nearly $41 million in lease payments from wind and solar companies.
That has enabled counties to stave off opposition by pointing out that turbines and solar are economic development, according to Jason Walker, community development director for the Southwest Regional Development Commission, which manages the board, said the local government revenue generated from wind and solar projects has helped reduce opposition to projects.
“It’s all economic development here,” Walker said.
When opposition does emerge, such as around a recent 160 megawatt solar project in Rock County in the state’s far southwest corner, the board works with commissioners to make sure local leaders have factual information as opposed to misinformation.
Peder Mewis, regional policy director for the Clean Grid Alliance, praised the board for creating an information-sharing culture among members that helps prepare them for clean energy development. He said many developers appreciate that the region’s ordinances are similar because of the board, and that they have maintained good relationships with members over the years.
“There are other parts of the state that are thinking, ‘Is there something here that we could replicate or duplicate?’” Mewis said.
Jay Trusty, executive director of the Southwest Regional Development Commission, said the board plays an essential role in lobbying for state policy to support clean energy development. In addition to the production taxes, the board regularly defends the local distribution of those funds when lawmakers consider other uses for the revenue. The board more recently lobbied for changes to the state transmission permitting process, which were approved this year, and it supported an expansion for Xcel Energy’s CapX 2020 high-voltage transmission project before state utility regulators.
Minnesota Public Utilities Commissioner John Tuma recalled the board’s support for the state’s 2008 renewable energy standard, which gave Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty important rural support for signing the legislation.
“They bring an economic voice to the table,” Tuma said, adding that the board continues to be active in conversations about regional grid policies.
Nobles County Commissioner Gene Metz has served on the board for 12 years. The region’s decades of experience and collaboration on wind energy has helped make residents more comfortable with clean energy projects, he said, leading to fewer controversies.
In counties outside the board’s territory, “they’re getting more pushback, especially on solar projects,” he said.
Gene’s cousin, Chad Metz, serves as a commissioner in Traverse County, which is not a member and has a mortarium on clean energy projects. Chad Metz sees clean energy as inevitable and wants the county to join the rural energy board to protect its economic interests. “The benefits outweigh the negatives, and it will just become part of life,” he said.
A planned 325-megawatt battery energy storage system at a key location on New England’s power grid could boost Connecticut’s access to carbon-free power — but only if it can overcome complicated legal and political barriers.
An Israeli firm, Sunflower Sustainable Investments, filed an application in October for the project with the Connecticut Siting Council, which has regulatory authority over the siting of power facilities.
The $200 million project, called Windham Energy Center, would be located on a largely undeveloped 63-acre site in Killingly, Connecticut, that was slated for construction of a fossil fuel power plant a few years ago. There is existing electric transmission infrastructure immediately adjacent to the site, and the project will connect to the grid via a 345-kilovolt transmission line.
A spokesman for Windham Energy, Jonathan Milley, said the location is ideal for a battery facility.
“If you look at the topology of the New England grid, this is at the intersection of the Millstone nuclear power plant and Brayton Point,” in Somerset, Massachusetts, where approved offshore wind projects will eventually be connected to the grid, Milley said. “This nodal location will at certain times of the day and under certain conditions have some of the lowest cost energy available to it on the grid.”
The project would consist of lithium-ion batteries installed in racks in prefabricated containers, and a switching station operated by Eversource to connect them to the transmission line. The equipment would be located within 20 acres of the total project site.
But the project is currently hung up by an administrative roadblock. That’s because in 2019, the siting council approved an application from NTE Energy to build a 650-megawatt natural gas plant on a portion of the same property.
That project, which ran into a storm of opposition from environmental advocates, was never built, and NTE Energy has since dissolved. But nevertheless, on Nov. 8, the siting council’s executive director, Melanie Bachman, notified Windham Energy that it is “premature” for the body to review their application because the Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need previously issued to NTE still exists.
The certificate has not been surrendered to the council, she said. And it will otherwise only be void if construction on the gas plant has not been completed by September 28, 2026.
Windham Energy has asked the council to declare the certificate no longer valid, noting that NTE Energy no longer exists nor holds an option to purchase the property, and that its energy supply agreement with regional grid operator ISO-New England was also revoked in 2022.
Milley said battery storage is needed to complement the state’s offshore wind goals; the batteries can store surplus energy from wind sources when production is high, and then dispatch it to the grid when it is needed. In 2021, state lawmakers set a goal of at least 1,000 megawatts of energy storage deployment by December 31, 2030.
“If there’s a developer willing to build what the state is looking for and not asking for anything else, it doesn’t seem like asking too much for the council to nullify an existing certificate for an entity that doesn’t exist,” Milley said.
For now, counsel for Windham Energy has sent a letter by certified mail to Stephanie Clarkson, who they say is the last known contact for NTE Energy, asking her to “advise whether the Certificate issued to NTE should be an impediment” to their proposed project.
Addressing safety concerns
The town of Killingly has requested party status in the hearings before the siting council.
In a letter to Windham Energy following a meeting with the developers, Town Council chair Jason Alexander and vice chair Tammy Wakefield raised concerns about the potential for fire at the facility, pointing to a recent fire at a battery storage facility in New York, and asked how they would prevent a similar event.
Three battery storage projects caught fire in New York in 2023, prompting Gov. Kathy Hochul to convene a working group to draft updates to the state’s fire code to improve safety and emergency preparedness in the planning of such projects.
Other towns in Connecticut have also raised concerns about fires for much smaller battery storage projects proposed by Key Capture Energy, of Albany, New York.
Milley says town officials are “right to ask these questions,” and he is focused on addressing their concerns. He noted that Windham plans to use lithium iron phosphate batteries, a type of lithium battery he says is much less prone to fire.
“The element in the battery is iron, which doesn’t burn,” he said.
However, he added, Windham fully intends to work with town and state fire authorities to develop a response plan “whether it’s a strict requirement or not.”
In the meantime, Windham Energy has filed a motion with the siting council to reopen the docket concerning NTE Energy so that it might modify its decision and revoke the earlier issued certificate.
The council is expected to take up that motion during its Feb. 6 meeting.
Environmental and community advocates in Massachusetts argue that making too much room for biofuels in a pending state plan to decarbonize heating systems would slow the transition from fossil fuels and cause more pollution than a plan that prioritizes electric heat pumps.
As the state works on the creation of a Clean Heat Standard, a report released last month by Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility raises questions about the effects using biodiesel in fuel-oil heating systems could have on air quality and public health, saying there is not enough information available about the pollutants released in the process.
Advocates say there is no such uncertainty about electric heat pumps, which create no direct emissions and should therefore be heavily favored in the new state policy.
“We absolutely think the thumb should be on the scale of electrification,” said Larry Chretien, executive director of the Green Energy Consumers Alliance. “If they give credit to biofuels, it ought to be conditional.”
Oil heating is much more prevalent in the Northeast than in the rest of the country. In Massachusetts, 22% of households are heated with oil, as compared to less than 5% nationwide. Moving homes and businesses off oil heat, therefore, is an important element of the state’s plan to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, which sets a target of reducing emissions from heating by 93% from 1990 levels in that timeframe.
The process of developing a Clean Heat Standard began when then-Gov. Charlie Baker convened the Commission on Clean Heat in 2021. In 2022, the board recommended the creation of the standard, which was also included in the state’s Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2050, released later that year. A stakeholder process began in 2023, and in the fall of that year the state released a draft framework for the standard that included the expectation of issuing credits for some biofuel use.
Open questions about public health
The program is expected to require gas utilities and importers of heating oil and propane to provide an increasing proportion of clean heating services like home heat pumps, networked geothermal, and other options, or buy credits from other parties that have implemented these solutions.
Whether the other options that qualify as clean heat will include biofuels — fuels derived from renewable, organic sources — has been a matter of contention since the idea for the system was first raised.
Climate advocates have tended to oppose the inclusion of much, if any, biofuel in the standard. Though biodiesel creates lower lifetime greenhouse gas emissions than its conventional counterpart, the recent Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility report contends that there are many unanswered questions about how burning biodiesel impacts public health.
“Given the sheer amount of doubt, there’s more research that should clearly be done before these fuels are subsidized by the state government,” said report author Carrie Katan, who also works as a Massachusetts policy advocate for the Green Energy Consumers Alliance, but compiled the report as an independent contractor for the physicians group.
The physicians’ report notes a study by Trinity Consulting Group that found significant health benefits to switching from fossil diesel to biodiesel for building heating. The physicians’ report, however, questions the methodology used in that study, claiming it cherrypicks data and fails to cite sources.
Katan’s report also notes that the health impacts of biofuels can vary widely depending on the organic matter used to create them, and points out that most of the research on burning biofuels is focused on the transportation sector.
Climate advocates also argue that embracing biofuels in a Clean Heat Standard would unnecessarily prolong the transition to electric heat pumps while encouraging the continued burning of fossil heating oil. Typically, a heating oil customer using biodiesel receives a blend that is no more than 20% biofuel. Providing credit for that fraction of biofuel would therefore improve the economics of the entire heating oil system, contrary to the overall emissions reduction goals of the policy, Chretien said.
“We’re trying to create a system that is rewarding steps towards greenhouse gas reduction,” he said.
Making the case for biofuel
Advocates of biofuels, however, say they are confident that existing science makes a solid case for the health and environmental benefits of biodiesel.
“There’s a decades-long body of work showing the overall benefits to public health of biofuels, specifically biodiesel,” said Floyd Vergara, a consultant for Clean Fuels Alliance America, a national trade association representing the biodiesel, renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel industries.
Vergara, who was involved in the Trinity Consulting study, called out in the physicians’ report, also defended the methodologies and sourcing of that paper.
Further, he said, though biodiesel is typically limited to 20% in current blends, it is quite possible to run a heating system entirely on biofuel, with just a few tweaks to the equipment. These conversions could yield immediate reductions in emissions, he said, rather than waiting for the slower process of replacing thousands of heating oil systems with electric heat pumps.
The difference could be particularly acute in low-income or other traditionally disadvantaged neighborhoods, where many residents can not afford to make the switch to heat pumps, he said.
“You’re getting those benefits immediately, and you’re getting them while the states are pursuing zero-emissions technologies,” he said.
State environmental regulators expect to release a full draft of the clean heat standard for public comment sometime this winter.
The last time President Donald Trump took office, Illinois had just passed the Future Energy Jobs Act (FEJA), creating an ambitious renewable electricity mandate, solar incentive programs, green job training and equity provisions to propel the state’s clean energy economy.
That progress is offering both a blueprint and a source of hope for Illinois clean energy and environmental justice advocates as they try to keep the state’s clean energy transition on track during a second Trump presidency.
“The state policy is designed to be responsive to a lack of federal climate leadership, to the need for Illinois to step up into a position of climate leadership,” said Vote Solar deputy Midwest program director John Delurey, who added that since the 2024 election “I’m at the point where I can channel my existential dread into state-based action.”
Illinois lawmakers expanded on FEJA with the Climate & Equitable Jobs Act (CEJA) in 2021, and advocates expect another state energy bill in 2025 to prioritize energy storage and otherwise further clean energy goals, including planning for the mandatory closing of almost all fossil fuel generation by 2035.
“With CEJA we’ve mapped out an ambitious climate plan, and we’re in a strong position to further those goals even under a Trump administration,” said Madeline Semanisin, Midwest equitable building decarbonization advocate for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This is not the first Trump administration. States and cities are more prepared this time to accelerate initiatives at the state and city level.”
That’s not to say the state won’t be affected by a president who is hostile toward clean energy policy. Several federal tax credits and grants that have helped accelerate progress in Illinois could be at risk under Trump, and a rollback of federal environmental regulations or enforcement could prolong pollution from coal ash, power plants and other sources.
James Gignac, Union of Concerned Scientists lead Midwest senior policy manager for the Climate & Energy program, said he thinks of the state’s clean energy outlook in terms of headwinds and tailwinds, which will continue to shift based on economic and political factors beyond the state’s control.
“States for many years have not been able to rely on the federal government for climate action, whether due to politics or the Supreme Court,” Gignac said. “The election results will make it harder to achieve the goals that Illinois has established. It doesn’t fundamentally change the energy policy path that the state is on, it just makes it even more urgent that state legislators pass additional policies.”
Tax credits and grants
Federal funds from the Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and other federal programs have helped Illinois and individual cities and counties carry out their clean energy goals. Illinois was awarded more than $430 million in a Climate Pollution Reduction Grant for implementation of the state’s goals on industrial decarbonization, clean energy, clean transportation and freight, climate-smart agriculture, and building energy efficiency.
Illinois was also awarded $156 million in federal Solar for All funds to bolster solar and equity goals including workforce training, residential solar deployment, and community engagement.
Illinois advocates and experts said they expect federal funds that have already been awarded to be paid out, and they don’t expect the Trump administration and Republican-dominated Congress to make major changes to the IRA or infrastructure law, especially given the financial impact those laws have had in Republican-dominated areas.
“We have seen hundreds of thousands of dollars for small businesses and farmers” paid out through the federal Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), not to mention federal IRA funds, that “overall are benefitting Republican districts” during the Biden administration, noted Angela Xu, Illinois Environmental Council municipal engagement manager.
Even if new federal funding windfalls are not available in the future, advocates say the funds awarded during the Biden administration will have lasting impact, combined with state-level programs and funding sources that will continue, and market forces that are making clean energy increasingly competitive.
“President-elect Trump has indicated his intention to roll back IRA programs, but keep in mind that when President Trump was elected last time, he and the Republican-led Senate and House were hellbent publicly on rolling back Obamacare, and that didn’t happen,” said Environmental Law & Policy Center executive director Howard Learner.
“The IRA has supported smart, sensible renewable energy development in red states and blue and purple states,” he added. “There’s no question if President Trump tries to cut back and constrain the IRA, it will have some impact on the pace of renewable energy development and other climate change solutions. On the other hand, it’s very hard to keep better technology from growing. When new technologies come to the market and they are better and cleaner and economically sensible, they tend to accelerate and capture more market share.”
Illinois Shines, the program creating lucrative Renewable Energy Credits for distributed solar, is funded through ratepayer payments — so it is not dependent on federal funding. That doesn’t mean it is immune from federal action, since the federal Investment Tax Credit and the global solar market influence the viability of projects in Illinois.
“There are levers they can pull, through an act of Congress they can change the ITC, which is an important part of the value stack for renewables,” said Delurey, of Trump and his allies in Congress. “And they could deploy tariffs which make the landscape a lot more complicated. The U.S., thanks to the IRA, is making its way towards onshoring and bringing a lot of manufacturing back stateside, but we’re not quite there yet.”
If the tax credit is reduced or solar panels get more expensive because of tariffs, Illinois’s incentives “would probably have to be adjusted accordingly,” Delurey said, with bigger incentives for each project.
“It would just mean fewer megawatts and kilowatts in Illinois. We’d still be deploying solar, but it is sensitive to the price of clean energy.”
Environmental justice
Advocates agree that the Biden administration’s Justice 40 mandate, that 40% of the benefits of many federal climate and other programs go to disadvantaged communities, is likely to be ended or ignored by the Trump administration.
Lower-income and marginalized communities could also be affected by understaffing, delays or rollbacks in federal programs like LIHEAP, which provides energy bill assistance, and energy efficiency rebates for low-income households.
“We can put things in state legislation that supports these communities,” including in the Illinois energy bill being drafted for introduction in 2025, Semanisin said. “Justice 40 is a framework we can incorporate in state legislation as well, to prioritize people who have been historically underserved.”
During his first administration, Trump made significant rollbacks to coal plant wastewater protections, and to the 2015 federal rules governing the storage and cleanup of coal ash. Both are big issues in Illinois, where eight coal plants are still operating, and coal ash is stored in 76 ponds, landfills and other sites, according to an Earthjustice analysis.
Earthjustice senior attorney Jenny Cassel said experts anticipate Trump will again try to weaken the Clean Water Act and coal ash protections. Meanwhile it’s likely the EPA under his administration will do little to enforce the coal ash regulations, which was largely the case before the Biden administration made coal ash a priority.
Illinois passed its own state coal ash rules in 2019, after lobbying by activists who wanted to make sure the rules were at least as strong as federal rules and covered legacy ponds not included in federal rules at the time. In 2024, the federal rules were expanded to cover legacy ponds as well as historic ash and coal ash landfills, but that provision is being challenged in federal court. The state rules do not cover ash historically dumped or scattered around, and they also do not cover inactive coal ash landfills.
Meanwhile the implementation of the Illinois coal ash law has been extremely slow. The law requires each site to get an operating permit with pollution limits that can then be enforced, but so far only two permits at one coal plant site have been issued, Cassel said.
“We keep hearing excuse after excuse” from the Illinois EPA that issues the permits, Cassel said. “‘We don’t have enough people, they’re tied up in administrative hearings, conditions are changing,’ every dog-ate-my-homework excuse in the book.”
“At the federal level, there’s any number of potential ways they could attempt to roll back the [coal ash] rules, or weaken areas that haven’t been fully defined,” she added. “That’s certainly what they did in round one. Illinois will really have to step up into the vacuum of protectiveness we expect at the federal level.”
Local action
Chicago — site of the 2024 Democratic National Convention — has long been a target of Trump’s ire, and Chicago officials during his last administration and today are outspoken about countering Trump’s agenda.
Chief Sustainability Officer Angela Tovar said the city will continue its work on solar, electric vehicles and building decarbonization, as well as centering environmental justice in planning, zoning and enforcement decisions.
“So much of everyone’s local regulations hinge on things like the Clean Air Act and federal standards; there is going to be this question of federal preemption, what home-rule authority do we have?” Tovar said. “Those are still outstanding questions. Every rollback will present its own set of challenges for cities and states. What I am at least grateful for in being in the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago is we do have such robust climate leadership at the state and local level.”
The city’s environmental justice ordinance requires a holistic look at pollution — from traffic and other sources — when industrial development is proposed. That could help protect communities even if federal pollution limits are relaxed. The city has also launched an interdepartmental environmental justice working group, involving “every department that touches air, land and water,” as Tovar said.
The city program Green Homes Chicago funds energy efficiency upgrades for qualifying single- and multi-family homes, which could help fill the gap if federal home rebates are reduced, Tovar noted. Chicago Recovery Plan funding from federal pandemic relief and city bond issuances could help compensate for any funding that might be lost if IRA is undermined, she added.
“The role of cities and states becomes even increasingly more important right now,” Tovar said. “We have an ability to really demonstrate leadership in this moment. For cities like Chicago that have already made some progress, it’s up to us to ensure we’re sharing best practices and working together to really create those safeguards and fortify basic environmental and health protections at a local level. We’re certainly going to maintain our commitment, make sure we are rolling out our programs, and unwavering in our pursuit of environmental justice.”
Ohio environmental advocates are questioning the intent of a pending state law that would add nuclear power to the state’s legal definition of “green” energy.
House Bill 308’s sponsors say the legislation is meant to signal that Ohio is open for business when it comes to nuclear power research and development, but critics warn the language could have broader implications in the future.
“Legislators don’t just put something into the code unless it has meaning and purpose and value,” said Megan Hunter, an attorney with Earthjustice, one of several environmental groups challenging a similar 2022 state law that classified natural gas as a “green” energy source. “Why would you do this if it has no impact or meaning or effect?”
Critics fear the language could be used to greenwash power plants or divert public funding from renewable energy projects, though the bill’s sponsors deny that motive.
“It doesn’t promise any incentives or anything beyond simply placing nuclear under the category of green energy in the Ohio Revised Code,” said state Rep. Sean Brennan, a Democrat from Parma who co-sponsored the nuclear legislation with Republican state Rep. Dick Stein of Norwalk.
The General Assembly passed the nuclear legislation on Dec. 11. As of Thursday it was awaiting Gov. Mike DeWine’s signature.
Brennan said the question of why the language should be in a law instead of just a resolution didn’t come up in discussions with Stein, who initially asked him to cosponsor the bill.
Stein said the legislation is “about sending a signal to the market that Ohio wants to be a partner and won’t be an impediment,” in contrast to other states that don’t want nuclear energy. He said he hopes it will help attract jobs and federal funding, building on last year’s creation of a state nuclear development authority.
Stein would not speculate on follow-up steps lawmakers might take, saying his term in the House of Representatives ends this month.
What the law could do
Ohio does not currently have state incentives or policy preferences for “green” energy. The state’s renewable energy standard essentially ended in 2019 as a result of House Bill 6, the coal and nuclear bailout law at the heart of the state’s ongoing corruption scandal. Opponents testifying against the current legislation, though, said they worry the definition will be used to water down future clean energy policies.
“HB 308 will enable the manipulation of public funds into private, corporate hands,” said Pat Marida, a coordinator for the Ohio Nuclear-Free Network, in her December 13 testimony. Also, she said, “there is nothing ‘green’ about nuclear power,” referring to radioactive waste, which continues to be stored at power plant sites.
Future state programs might offer funding or other advantages for projects that meet the state’s definition of “green” energy, for example. And even if the definition doesn’t open doors to new government funding, it could provide cover to private companies that want to count gas and nuclear energy toward their climate or clean energy targets, another advocate warned.
“Insidiously, it does potentially become important,” said Nathan Alley, conservation manager for the Sierra Club of Ohio. Many companies have adopted clean energy goals, he noted. “This might telegraph to them that they could invest in nuclear energy and achieve the same climate and/or energy goals as if they invest in solar or wind.”
Ohio lawmakers aren’t the only ones who want to define natural gas and nuclear power as “green energy.” Model legislation finalized by the American Legislative Exchange Council this fall does the same thing. ALEC is a Koch-linked group that has long opposed renewable energy and actions to address climate change.
ALEC’s model bill would have its definition “apply to all programs in the state that fund any ‘green energy’ or ‘clean energy’ initiatives.” Another model ALEC bill would define nuclear energy as “clean energy” and put it on a par with renewable energy.
A coalition of environmental groups is currently challenging House Bill 507, Ohio’s 2022 law that labeled natural gas as “green energy,” arguing in court that the way in which it was passed violated the state constitution. The groups say last-minute amendments violated provisions that require bills to deal with a single subject – the initial two-page bill dealt with chickens – and call for at least three hearings in each house of the General Assembly where lawmakers can hear testimony from supporters and opponents.
That lawsuit has been briefed and is currently awaiting a decision from Judge Kimberly Cocroft at the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. HB 308 should not affect that case, said Hunter and Alley.
As with HB 507, though, lawmakers added last-minute amendments to HB 308. One of those would extend lease terms for drilling under state park and wildlife areas from three years to five years. That was unacceptable to Brennan, who voted against the Senate amendments when it came back to the Ohio House.
Still, he supports what he views as the main purpose of the legislation: attracting more nuclear power to Ohio. In his view, solar and wind won’t be enough to meet growing energy demands while shifting away from fossil fuels in order to address climate change. “I believe nuclear is going to be hugely important for our energy independence, and hopefully Ohio will become an exporter of electricity in the future.”
Hunter wasn’t surprised that lawmakers made last-minute amendments to the bill. For her, it shows the importance of the ongoing litigation over HB 507.
“Those constitutional protections are there for a reason,” she said. “And seeing the General Assembly have blatant disregard for them again and again harms Ohioans. It deprives them of these constitutional rights.”
Two community-based geothermal pilot projects, each led by equity-focused nonprofits, have advanced to the second phase of funding through a U.S. Department of Energy program.
Blacks in Green, a community organization based in Chicago, and Home Energy Efficiency Team, a Boston-based nonprofit dedicated to promoting an equitable transition to clean energy, were included last week in a set of five projects across the country that have been awarded a total of more than $35 million from the DOE’s Geothermal Technologies Office to implement geothermal installations.
The five project teams advancing to the next phase of the DOE project were among a cohort of 11 projects participating in the initial phase of the program, where coalitions selected project sites, assessed geothermal resource and permitting needs, conducted feasibility analysis and local engagement, and identified workforce and training needs. The selected projects’ range of sizes, technologies, and innovations will provide potential templates for other communities considering implementing geothermal systems.
Three of the five projects are located in urban or suburban areas; two are in rural communities. The other three recipients are the city of Ann Arbor, Michigan; the University of Oklahoma, for a project in the town of Shawnee; and GTI Energy, for a project in Hinesburg, Vermont.
Tapping into Chicago’s alleys
Blacks in Green, located in West Woodlawn, a predominantly Black community on Chicago’s South Side, serves as the lead for a coalition which was awarded $9.9 million for its Sustainable Chicago Geothermal pilot. Other coalition partners are the City of Chicago, University of Illinois, The Accelerate Group, Citizens Utility Board, Climate Jobs Illinois, dbHMS, GeoExchange, and Illinois AFL-CIO.
The pilot, also located in West Woodlawn, utilizes alleys to circumvent the need for vast open plots for subterranean loop fields that form the heart of a geothermal array. Locating the bulk of geothermal loop lines in alleyways also sidesteps the underground congestion of existing utility infrastructure typically located underneath city streets.
It’s among an assortment of elements in the Sustainable Square Mile approach that advances BIG’s vision for energy justice through clean energy and microgrid/VPP systems owned and managed by the community, said Naomi Davis, BIG’s founder and CEO.
“BIG launched in 2007 with a goal of increasing household income and community resilience against the harms of climate crisis at neighborhood scale using the new green economy — so we’re grateful for this chance to make it manifest,” Davis said in a news release.
Along with installation of the needed infrastructure within the multiblock footprint, year two of the West Woodlawn project will focus on community outreach and job programs. Once construction is complete, the geothermal system will provide heating and cooling, not to mention lower utility bills, for potentially more than 200 households.
“The Sustainable Chicago Geothermal project will be a transformational investment in the West Woodlawn community. The effort to eliminate harmful emissions from homes and businesses, while lowering energy burden, has proven to be a community-wide challenge, and requires a community-wide solution,” said Andrew Barbeau, president of The Accelerate Group and principal investigator of the Blacks in Green project, in a news release.
The need to reconstruct the alleyways after installation of the geothermal array also presents the opportunity to replace asphalt or concrete with permeable pavers. This would work to promote climate resiliency through mitigation of urban flooding, a persistent occurrence in many of Chicago’s South and West Side communities, said Nuri Madina, the director of Sustainable Square Mile, who serves as point person for the pilot.
“All of our programs are designed to create multiple benefits,” Madina told the Energy News Network in September.
A first-of-its kind project in suburban Boston
Home Energy Efficiency Team, commonly referred to by the acronym HEET, in partnership with Eversource Energy; the city of Framingham, Massachusetts; and engineering consultant Salas O’Brien; was awarded $7.8 million toward construction of a utility-based,community-scale geothermal system.
“We are honored to receive this funding from the DOE’s Geothermal Technologies Office as part of the Community Geothermal Heating and Cooling initiative, and to show how geothermal energy networks can be interconnected to increase efficiency, build resilience, and decarbonize at the scale and speed we need to achieve our climate goals,” said Zeyneb Magavi, executive director for HEET, in a news release.
The proposed plans by HEET and its partners would connect to the first Framingham geothermal network, which was commissioned earlier this year. Once approved by the state Department of Public Utilities and upon completion, it would represent the first utility-owned community geothermal network to connect to an adjacent operational loop, establishing guidelines for the interconnection and growth of geothermal networks.
“This innovative project not only showcases Framingham’s commitment to sustainable energy solutions but also sets a precedent for other communities across the nation. By harnessing the natural heat from the earth, we are taking a significant step towards reducing our carbon footprint and promoting renewable energy sources. Our collaboration with HEET and Eversource exemplifies the power of partnerships in driving forward clean energy initiatives,” said Framingham Mayor Charlie Sisitsky in a news release.
“So instead of feeding natural gas into these buildings, we could feed geothermal water,” Magavi said. “And then we could meter that and sell that. It’s no different than when you pay your water bill.”
When a solar energy developer approached Halifax County, North Carolina, in the early 2010s about renting its former airfield in Roanoke Rapids, community leaders had a condition.
“If they were willing to lease this land for the very first solar project in the area, the county needed to get something back in return,” said Mozine Lowe from her office, which overlooks the 20 megawatt solar farm now atop the old airport. “What they got was this building.”
Of course, it’s more than a building. It’s the headquarters for the Center for Energy Education, the nonprofit Lowe has run since 2016 that works to maximize the benefits of large solar farms in rural America — one community, one school child, and one worker at a time.
Lowe, who grew up about five miles from where she now works, had graduated from Greensboro’s North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University but worked across the country, from California to Washington, D.C.
When she returned to this rural county of less than 50,000 near the Virginia border, formerly a hub of farming and textiles, she said she didn’t see a lot of change.
“The jobs were the same,” she said. “I didn’t see people making the connection between solar energy and what’s happening with the climate and the impact on rural communities, and I just wanted to try and help from that angle.”
The Center conducts educational programs for children of all ages, who come in by the busload from surrounding schools both public and private. It holds a Solar Fest every year to celebrate clean energy with community leaders, drawing hundreds.
Through collaborations with local educational institutions like community colleges, the center has also helped to train a new workforce in jobs that pay roughly twice what workers are earning at the fast-food chains off Interstate 95.
“We have trained more people than most other people around here to become solar installers,” Lowe said. “We want them to be first in line for our jobs.”
And there’s outreach to solar companies themselves in North Carolina as well as Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana, where the Center also has offices. The goal is to help them become better community partners.
The Center for Energy Education staff. Credit: Elizabeth Ouzts
Only a few ‘good players’
Geenex, the Charlotte-based developer who built the solar farm at the airport and over a dozen others in the vicinity, is still involved in the Center, and the company’s chairman also chairs the nonprofit’s board.
But Lowe and other staff at the organization say not every solar developer is committed — at least at first — to working with community leaders in Eastern North Carolina.
“Geenex is a very good partner,” said Reginald Bynum, the Center’s community outreach manager. “They’re a good player. But there are only a few of them. Other companies will say, ‘This is your ordinance? Great. This is all I have to do.’”
Some county ordinances, like that in Halifax, need to be updated, Bynum said. Many still call for a 75-foot buffer between the rows of solar panels and neighboring properties. That figure is “so 2018,” said Bynum. It should be doubled, he said.
Most solar farms are also built on private land — often bits of farmland that can help cotton growers and other farmers guarantee income. But developers usually obtain the leases first, before airing the project in public.
“That’s the backwards process of solar,” Bynum said. “They’re talking to landowners and securing that land, and then they’re coming to commissioners.”
What’s more, simply following ordinances isn’t enough, Bynum says. What’s needed is for solar developers to work with local residents to develop community benefits agreements — documents that memorialize pluses to the area, from minimizing construction impacts to providing jobs.
“It’s a 30-year commitment to the community,” he said, “because your farm’s going to be here 30 years. They’re asking for that, and they deserve that.”
Critically, say Bynum and other advocates, solar developers need to work with community leaders to provide benefits beyond tax revenue — an undeniable good, but one that isn’t “seen” by anyone except county bookkeepers.
And though a recent study from the North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association shows that solar farms today take up a fraction of a percent of the state’s farmland, the figure is a full 1% in Halifax County, and on pace to triple in the coming years, according to the Center’s research.
“From rural citizens’ standpoint, that’s a lot,” Bynum said. “You have to really understand what they’re seeing.”
A solar array amid trees and a cotton field in Halifax County, North Carolina. Credit: Elizabeth Ouzts
‘Projects have gotten bigger’
Part of what they’re seeing is the result of a simple fact: solar farms aren’t just growing more abundant in parts of rural America. They’re also much larger.
In North Carolina up until 2016, the average utility-scale solar development was 5.8 megawatts covering 35 acres of land, per the Sustainable Energy Association. After a 2017 state law made larger solar farms easier to build, the average system size increased to 13.6 megawatts and covered 115 acres of land.
“Projects have gotten bigger,” said Carson Harkrader, the CEO of Durham-based Carolina Solar Energy, who appeared on a recent clean energy panel with Bynum. “As they’ve gotten bigger, people freak out a little bit.”
And while many folks’ worries about the visual impact of solar panels can be mollified — with tree buffers, setbacks, and information about the safety of the structures — some are easy targets for opponents.
“The opposition has become much, much, more organized. There are national groups, funded by the oil and gas industry,” Harkrader said. “With this opposition that is more organized and has more resources, it’s much harder.”
In some cases, opponents may fill a vacuum left by solar companies who lined up projects before the pandemic and have only recently begun to start construction.
That’s what happens, said Bynum, “when you miss steps in keeping citizens updated with the project — particularly when you started talking about it five years before. Commissioners change, a lot of tribal knowledge evaporates.”
More success stories?
And sometimes, it only takes one or two community members to force the issue with local politicians. Both neighboring Northampton and Halifax counties have passed moratoriums on new solar farms recently. Halifax acted after just a few people appeared at their meeting, concerned about the loss of trees.
Having talked with county commissioners, staff at the Center are hopeful the moratorium will end quickly as planned, after the county has updated its ordinance. But the “pause” on solar farms is an example of the constant game of whack-a-mole solar developers and their advocates must play.
Lowe says that’s why the Center is so vital.
“What makes us unique is that our work is mainly community engagement,” she said. “Our stance is to be neutral, and to provide factual information. I think we need to tell more success stories.”
Massachusetts environmental advocates hope a provision in the state’s new climate law could be a final blow to a proposed expansion of private jet facilities at a suburban airport.
Opponents say adding 500,000 square feet of hangar space at Hanscom Field, a general aviation airport that serves private and corporate aircraft in a town 20 miles outside of Boston, will inevitably mean more flights — mostly private jet travel to luxury locations — which will increase climate pollution with minimal public benefit.
“This is an industry that is highly polluting and yet serves only a very narrow slice of the public,” said Alex Chatfield, a local social worker and an activist fighting the project.
The expansion plans have been in the works since 2021, but progress slowed in June after state regulators rejected the planners’ first environmental impact report. Since then, state lawmakers passed a new law requiring state agencies and boards, including the state port authority, to consider the impact of greenhouse gas emissions in their decisions.
The measure does not directly prohibit the Massachusetts Port Authority from proceeding with projects such as the Hanscom plan, but it does leave the agency vulnerable to legal action should it forge ahead without being able to show it weighed the likely greenhouse gas emissions against the benefits of the plan.
Much-needed hangars
The expansion plan started with Massport, which oversees operations at Hanscom as well as Boston’s Logan International Airport and Worcester Regional Airport. In 2021, the agency released a request for proposals to develop “much-needed hangars” at the airport, said Massport spokesperson Jennifer Mehigan. A plan submitted by North Airfield Ventures and Runway Realty Ventures won the bid.
The proposed facilities would be built on 47 acres of land, some of which is already owned by the developers and some of which would be leased to them by Massport. The project comprises 17 new hangars, the rehabilitation of a historic Navy hangar on the site, and fuel storage facilities.
Planners argue the development would be environmentally beneficial, because the structures would be designed for net-zero energy use and built to LEED Gold standards, and buildings and equipment would be electrified whenever possible. They also claim the additional capacity would help cut down on emissions from so-called “ferry flights,” in which a plane hangared elsewhere flies to Hanscom to pick up passengers and then returns to its home airport at the end of the trip.
Opponents, however, argue that more hangars will inevitably mean more flights. These flights, they say, are likely to be private jet travel to luxury locations, generating emissions for the benefit of just a privileged few. One report, by Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Policy Studies, found that 31,600 private flights departed Hanscom during an 18-month period in 2022 and 2023, and that roughly half of those were bound for high-end vacation destinations like the Bahamas, Palm Beach, and Nantucket.
“It’s very well known that private jets are the most polluting form of transportation per passenger ever devised,” Chatfield said. “It is on a scale that is really hard to imagine.”
State environmental regulators are also skeptical. The state response to the developers’ first environmental impact report, referred to the “fanciful nature of the proponents’ ‘ferry flight theory,’” pointing to a study that found only 132 ferry flights actually occurred at Hanscom rather than the 3,500 developers claimed. Regulators also suggested new hangars at Hanscom were unlikely to attract planes to relocate, and therefore would not reduce what ferry flights do occur.
The developers can resubmit their environmental impact report, addressing the state’s concerns. One of the founders of North Airfield Ventures said the company declines to comment on its plans at this time.
Factoring in climate impacts
In the months since the state’s order was released, legislators created another obstacle for the project.
As Massachusetts attempts to reach its goal of net-zero carbon emissions, an ongoing mundane-yet-important challenge has been the fact that some crucial state agencies and boards have lacked the authority to factor climate impacts in their decisions. These bodies were founded well before the climate crisis became such a pressing public policy question, and thus their rules never required or authorized them to consider greenhouse gas emissions or other climate impacts in their decision-making.
In recent years, attempts have been made to integrate climate change mitigation into more statewide policies and processes. A climate law enacted in 2021 requires the administration to set greenhouse gas reduction goals to be realized by the state’s three-year energy efficiency plans, which were initially intended only to reduce the cost and quantity of electricity, gas, and oil used. The same bill instructed public utilities regulators to consider greenhouse gas impact as part of their decisions.
“The department up to that point had just focused on reliability and affordability,” said state Sen. Michael Barrett, chair of the legislature’s committee on telecommunications, utilities, and energy, and one of the main authors of both the 2021 and 2024 climate bills. “I have wanted to reorient state agencies that don’t seem to have gotten the memo about climate change being an existential crisis.”
The latest bill included more such provisions, authorizing the Board of Building Regulations and Standards to give preference to building materials that boost emissions reductions, and requiring Massport to consider the greenhouse gas impacts of its decisions.
“I hope that Massport appreciates that what is done today on climate is inadequate, and I hope it also appreciates that the policies have changed,” said Barrett. “I don’t pretend to be able to predict particular outcomes on particular projects, but I do know that Massport needs to take this seriously.”
The following commentary was written by Jesse Velazquez, Climate Justice Manager at the Ohio Environmental Council. See our commentary guidelines for more information.
In his victory speech, President-elect Donald Trump promised to further boost “liquid gold,” also known as oil and gas. Today, oil and gas production is at record highs and continues to grow. As the industry expands, so do concerns about methane pollution.
The primary component of natural gas is methane, a potent greenhouse gas that warms the planet more than 80 times as much as carbon dioxide over 20 years. It’s also a significant contributor to smog and public health issues like asthma and respiratory disease, disproportionately affecting vulnerable communities. Yet, efforts to reduce methane emissions present a rare win-win opportunity: they not only curb pollution but also create jobs and foster innovation.
Take Pennsylvania, one of the largest natural gas producers, for example. By adopting innovative methane mitigation strategies, the state is reducing harmful emissions from oil and gas operations while creating jobs and fostering a cleaner, more sustainable energy future. This balanced approach showcases how economic growth and environmental responsibility can go hand in hand, offering a model that Ohio should replicate.
According to the 2024 State of the Methane Mitigation Industry Report, developing and implementing technologies to cut methane pollution would create jobs ranging from manufacturing leak-detection equipment to technicians skilled in repairing faulty infrastructure. Pennsylvania saw a 22.2% growth in methane mitigation companies over the last three years. Since 2014, the industry has expanded by 65% with the state now hosting 33 methane mitigation companies. In fact, Pennsylvania is now home to 8.5% of the total employee locations in this sector nationwide.
These good-paying, family-sustaining jobs bolster local economies while addressing critical environmental challenges. And the opportunity for Ohio is immense.
The benefits extend far beyond jobs. Reducing methane emissions means less wasted energy. Nationally, oil and gas companies emit enough methane waste annually that could be utilized to meet the energy needs of millions of homes. Capturing the lost gases would translate directly into increased efficiency and cost savings. For a state like Ohio, with its large-scale oil and gas operations, this represents a tangible economic benefit.
This isn’t just about economic gains. Methane mitigation is also a crucial climate strategy. The U.S. EPA’s Section 111 Methane Rule, finalized a year ago, set robust federal standards to limit methane emissions from oil and gas operations. While essential, this rule relies heavily on state-level implementation to achieve its full potential. States like Ohio have a chance to lead by adopting and building on these standards, aligning economic growth with environmental stewardship.
And we know clean air and economic growth are priorities that transcend party lines, as evidenced by the broad coalition of businesses, environmental advocates, and community leaders rallying behind these initiatives.
Ohio is at a crossroads. We can continue business as usual, or we can follow Pennsylvania’s lead, investing in proven technologies and practices that cut emissions, prevent waste, protect public health, and drive economic growth.
By prioritizing methane mitigation, the state can chart a path that aligns with both the nation’s energy ambitions and the pressing need for climate action. This is not just a moral imperative but an economic one that promises cleaner air, healthier communities, and a thriving workforce for generations to come.
Three Ohio companies are investing in hydrogen fuel cell passenger vehicles even as the U.S. market for electric vehicles continues to grow. Each has an innovative approach to the chicken-and-egg problem of having fuel available when and where drivers need it.
The Ohio companies’ focus on fuel cell passenger vehicles is unique nationwide, especially for a state that doesn’t yet have any public hydrogen fueling stations. California, where almost all of the country’s hydrogen fuel cell cars are registered, still has fewer than 60 public stations.
“When we see hydrogen transportation deployment projects, it’s really more on the medium- and heavy-duty side,” said Mark Henning, a researcher at Cleveland State University’s Energy Policy Center at the Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs.
A hydrogen car is essentially an electric vehicle with an onboard fuel cell providing electricity alongside a battery. General Motors first displayed a prototype for a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle back in the 1960s, but hydrogen cars weren’t available to U.S. consumers until leases for the 2015 Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell began, with sales of the Toyota Mirai starting that fall.
Hydrogen car sales have been essentially limited to California, where state policy and public funding supported the development of some public fueling stations. Since then, only about 18,000 fuel cell cars have been sold in the U.S.
Yet Ohio companies have been working on hydrogen energy for more than two decades. The state trade association, the Ohio Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Coalition, traces its history back to 2003.
If successful, the current efforts could eventually provide another option for switching away from gasoline-powered cars. While electric vehicles are comparable in price, hydrogen cars can be refueled quickly — assuming the infrastructure is available — and offer more consistent range in cold weather. But much could hinge on how quickly hydrogen infrastructure develops, as well as how quickly and effectively plug-in electric vehicle makers deal with their own range and charging challenges.
One example of the desire for hydrogen vehicle alternatives comes from DLZ, an engineering, architectural and project management company headquartered in Columbus with offices across the United States as well as in India and Costa Rica. The company has a fleet of about 250 vehicles across the Midwest, including electric vehicles. In 2022, it added six Hyundai hydrogen fuel cell cars for use by professionals from its Columbus office.
“The hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have a lot more consistent performance in range and durability,” especially in cold weather, said Ram Rajadhyaksha, DLZ’s executive vice president. The range for the cars is sufficient for round trips the office’s professionals make to site locations around the state, he explained at the Ohio Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Coalition symposium in North Canton last month.
Hydrogen fuel cell cars aren’t sold in Ohio yet, so DLZ had its six Hyundai vehicles shipped from California to Columbus. Except for the fuel cells, dealers in Ohio can provide any necessary service the vehicles may need, Rajakhyasksha said.
The cars also need a regular source of hydrogen, so DLZ added its own. Its station in Columbus can generate about 20 kilograms of hydrogen per day, using electricity from a solar array atop a large building on company property. A net metering agreement lets DLZ sell any excess electricity from the array to the grid.
Nonetheless, there were hurdles, including permitting, building codes, supply chain issues during the tail end of the pandemic, and even signage codes.
Made in Ohio
While California has been the country’s epicenter for fuel cell vehicles, Honda Motors is now producing the first American-made hybrid hydrogen vehicle at its Marysville plant in Ohio. Its 2025 CR-V e:FCEV model can go roughly 270 miles on a tank of hydrogen. There’s also a small electric battery which provides a driving range of about 30 miles. A 110-volt power outlet on the vehicle can run small home appliances or other equipment.
That range is about the same as Honda’s all-electric Prologue SUV, which also has a comparable list price. But the company believes there is room for both.
“It’s not one or the other,” said Dave Perzynski, assistant manager for hydrogen solutions business development at Honda, who also spoke at the Ohio Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Coalition symposium. “It’s using the right equipment at the right place at the right time.” The CR-V’s electric charging range is about right for his daily round-trip commute, he said, while the fuel cell offers flexibility for longer trips.
Honda’s goal is to achieve 100% decarbonization, Perzynski said. However, limits on local electric grids can make that difficult in some places. “If you can electrify it, if it works, then do that,” he said. “And once that stops working, then thank goodness we’ve been investing in hydrogen for the last 20 years, because there are places and times when you run out of power.”
As a practical matter, the Ohio-made cars’ initial market will be California. For other states, Honda is counting on others to build out the fueling infrastructure.
“The only way we can do that is through a coalition,” Perzynski said. “We can’t build infrastructure alone.”
Building a network
Millennium Reign Energy in Dayton has a membership model to develop hydrogen infrastructure along with the demand for it. Its Emerald H2 network will help customers buy used fuel cell vehicles, while also providing access to hydrogen fueling stations designed and built by the company.
As the number of customers in an area grows, Millennium Reign Energy would swap out the fueling station for one with larger capacity. The smaller station would then go to another location. Access to the stations would be for members only, although members traveling outside their local area could use stations elsewhere.
“Our mission is to build the first transcontinental hydrogen highway,” said CEO Chris McWhinney as he explained the model at the fuel cell program last month. The company’s fueling stations are already operating at places outside the United States, as well as three private facilities in Ohio. The company plans to add its first Emerald H2 network stations in the Dayton area early next year.
The stations use electricity and water to make hydrogen, so using one with a nearby source of solar, wind, hydropower or geothermal energy can provide green energy, versus just moving emissions from tailpipes up to power plants, McWhinney said. That can also bring the cost for the hydrogen fuel down below that of gasoline, he suggested, as renewable electricity continues to get cheaper.
Hurdles ahead
Whether hydrogen-powered passenger vehicles are the best use for renewable energy remains questionable. A study published in Joule last August found battery-electric vehicles were roughly three times more efficient in using renewable electricity than fuel-cell vehicles.
“The battery-electric case is much more efficient than the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle,” said Greg Keoleian, co-director of the University of Michigan’s MI Hydrogen initiative, and one of the co-authors of the Joule study. Ideally, renewable energy will be used efficiently, given the limited amount on the grid now and the urgent need to decarbonize because of climate change, he said.
Battery electric cars also have a much bigger charging network, with nearly 70,000 stations nationwide, Keoleian noted. Cost is also an issue, he added, noting that hydrogen fuel in California currently costs about five times as much as gasoline would to go the same distance.
Henning did note that one of Ohio’s public transit systems, SARTA, the Stark Area Regional Transit Authority, has had hydrogen buses as part of its fleet since 2016. Transit fleets also often need a handful of passenger vehicles, which might be able to use tbuses’ hydrogen fueling station while also qualifying for bulk discounts that may start with the acquisition of five or six vehicles, he said.
The Department of Energy’s recent push for hydrogen hubs might also play an indirect role, suggested Sergey Paltsev, deputy director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for Sustainability Science and Strategy. None of the hub projects so far focus on light-duty vehicles, but infrastructure developed for other purposes could make it easier to develop fueling stations. In that case, the Ohio companies could be angling for a competitive advantage.
Yet much remains unknown about whether the incoming Trump administration will continue incentives begun in the Biden administration, Henning said. The law’s tax credit can apply to fuel cell vehicles with final assembly in North America, which might apply to Honda’s hybrid car — if the Inflation Reduction Act continues.
“I do think there is an appetite and there is a customer base for fuel cell electric vehicles, and I can imagine different use cases where that makes more sense” than an all-electric car, said Grant Goodrich, executive director of the Great Lakes Energy Institute at Case Western Reserve University. Multiple people in Northeast Ohio have expressed reluctance to buy an electric vehicle now, especially given the challenges of harsh winter weather.
Yet the infrastructure for electric vehicles is much farther ahead, and electric vehicle makers continue to work to improve performance. “Will the technology of battery and electric vehicles improve enough to stay ahead of FCEV adoption so that is able to keep that challenge at bay?” Goodrich asked.
Early last month, he would have put money on the EV makers to stay ahead. After hearing the presentations from Honda, Millenium Reign Energy and DLZ, he’s not so sure.
“It’s not a done deal,” Goodrich said, noting that the hydrogen fueling experience also seems to be a more natural replacement for the habits customers have adopted as drivers of vehicles with internal combustion engines. “If it was to roll out faster, I think you could see some competition there.”
Editor’s note: This story was updated to clarify Greg Keoleian’s role.
Emissions from buildings make up about two-thirds of the greenhouse gas footprint of Indianapolis. So when the city committed to slash emissions, in its 2019 climate action plan and then as part of the Bloomberg American Cities Climate Challenge in 2020, leaders knew where they had to start.
A 2021 ordinance requires all buildings over 50,000 square feet and publicly-owned buildings over 25,000 square feet to do energy benchmarking and report results to the city, to be made publicly available by 2026.
The deadline to comply was July 1, 2024. But at year’s end, only about 20% of the 1,500 buildings covered had complied — even though the process can be done in a matter of hours using EPA’s ENERGYSTAR Portfolio manager software. The city also hosted workshops to help walk building managers through the process.
Now the city’s challenge is to boost benchmarking compliance. The penalties for failing to comply are low: fines of $100 the first year and $250 yearly after that. Chicago’s 2013 benchmarking ordinance, by comparison, includes fines of $100 for the first day of a violation and up to $25 each day thereafter, with a maximum fine of $9,200 per year — and the city has a much higher compliance rate.
Lindsay Trameri, community engagement manager for the Indianapolis Office of Sustainability, said the office is continuing outreach, including sending postcards to all relevant building managers and owners.
“We’re not assessing fines yet, but we’re making sure they’re aware this isn’t a city program that’s going away, it is indeed local law,” Trameri said. “And there are benefits to be gleaned from participating. It might cost hundreds of dollars not to participate, but you could save thousands if you participate and take it seriously.”
Trameri said 27 publicly-owned buildings in the consolidated city and county government must be benchmarked, and the city is planning to use about $800,000 worth of federal Department of Energy funding to hire an energy manager “who will be solely focused on looking at city-owned buildings and how to make them more energy efficient.”
In Indiana, reducing buildings’ electricity use is particularly urgent since the state got about 45% of its power from coal in 2023. The benchmarking mandate doesn’t require buildings to take any action based on their energy results, but benchmarking often motivates building owners and municipalities to invest in savings, experts say.
Cities participating in the Bloomberg program saw 3% to 8% energy reductions and millions in savings, with nearly 400 million square feet now covered by benchmarking policies and over 37,000 energy audits completed, according to Kelly Shultz, who leads Bloomberg Philanthropies” sustainable cities initiative.
Success stories
Though overall compliance is low, some major public and private entities have completed benchmarking in Indianapolis, including the airport, convention center, the Indianapolis Museum of Art, Target and JC Penney.
Phil Day, facilities director for the museum, noted that it’s crucial for museums to keep consistent levels of humidity and temperature. That means high energy use, and also vulnerability to blackouts or energy price spikes. Benchmarking has helped him develop plans for reducing natural gas and electricity use with smaller boilers and heat pumps distributed throughout the facilities, a possible geothermal chilling system, and better insulation. These innovations should save money and make the museum more resilient to energy disruptions.
“Museums aren’t typically known as an energy efficient facility, but it is always high on my priority list in everything we program or replace,” Day said.
The firm Cenergistic has done benchmarking since 2017 for Indianapolis Public Schools, and identified more than $1 million in wasteful energy costs that could be cut across 71 schools. Under Cenergistic’s contract, it is paid half of the energy savings it secures. Seventeen school buildings have obtained EPA Energy Star status based on their energy efficiency improvements, Cenergistic CEO Dennis Harris said.
“Benchmarking provided a clear starting point by identifying high-energy-consuming facilities and systems,” Harris said. “Cenergistic energy specialists track energy consumption at all campuses with the company’s software platform, identifying waste and driving conservation. By consistently reviewing this data, Cenergistic continues to work with IPS to make data-driven decisions, set measurable goals, and continually refine its strategy for maximum impact.”
Trameri said the schools’ success is “a great message to point to. If they can do it, we can do it. Of course, we want those millions to go back into classrooms and teachers and students versus out the door for utility costs.”
Learning by example
Trameri said in developing its benchmarking program and ordinance, Indianapolis has relied on guidance and lessons from other cities including Columbus, Ohio and Chicago, both fellow participants in the Bloomberg challenge.
In Chicago, about 85% of the 3,700 buildings covered by the ordinance are in compliance, said Amy Jewel, vice president of programs at Elevate, the organization that oversees Chicago’s program. She said nine out of 10 buildings complied even right after the ordinance took effect, thanks to years of organizing by city leaders and NGOs like the Natural Resources Defense Council.
“A large number of building owners recognized this was coming. They engaged in the process, and saw their fingerprints within the ordinance,” said Lindy Wordlaw, director of climate and environmental justice initiatives for the city of Chicago.
Chicago passed an additional ordinance creating an energy rating program, where buildings receive a score of 0 to 4 based on their energy benchmarking results. An 11-by-17-inch placard with the score and explanation must be publicly posted, “similar to a food safety rating for a restaurant,” Wordlaw said.
In 2021, Chicago reported that median energy use per square foot had dropped by 7% over the past three years, and greenhouse gas emissions had dropped 37% since 2016 in buildings subject to the ordinance. City public housing and buildings owned by the Archdiocese were among those to do early benchmarking and investments.
Along with Philadelphia, New York and Washington D.C., Chicago was among the nation’s first major cities to institute benchmarking. Jewel said they hope to keep sharing lessons learned.
For example, “it’s actually pretty hard to come up with the covered buildings list,” Jewel noted, since there is no central list of all buildings in a city but rather various records “all used for slightly different purposes — the property tax database, different sources tracking violations. It took a bit of time to get that list together, and it takes time to maintain it as buildings are constructed or demolished.”
In Indianapolis, Trameri said they are hopeful more buildings will get with the program as awareness grows about the requirement.
“There has always been evidence that you can’t manage what you don’t measure,” said Trameri. “It’s a market-based strategy. Truly once a facilities owner or manager is able to look at their energy usage over a month, 12 months, or multiple years and make evidence-based decisions based on that data, it will affect your bottom line, and those savings you can reinvest into whatever your organization’s mission is.”
Correction: An earlier version of this story misattributed performance information about Bloomberg Philanthropies’ sustainable cities initiative.
Amid a surge in utility shutoffs, and in the face of a groundbreaking study finding racial disparities in those outcomes, Minnesota’s largest utility is taking a closer look at the issue.
In a November agreement with consumer groups and the state’s Public Utilities Commission, Xcel Energy has outlined a series of steps to provide more information to customers and make it easier for them to restore service.
Xcel also agreed to hire an outside consultant to conduct a one-year study of disparity issues related to disconnections and outages and, separately, do its own analysis of outages. The move came in response to a University of Minnesota study released earlier this year that found that people of color were more likely than White households to have their service disconnected for falling behind on bills, even when controlling for income and home ownership status.
The agreement falls short of a demand from the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office for Xcel to institute a temporary moratorium on shutoffs until racial disparities are addressed, based on a recommendation from Fresh Energy and a coalition formed by Cooperative Energy Futures, Environmental Law & Policy Center, Sierra Club, and Vote Solar.
Erica McConnell, staff attorney for the Environmental Law & Policy Center, represented the clean energy organizations advocating for grid equity. She supported the agreement but believes it will do little to help reduce disparities in shutoffs.
“These are very important improvements that don’t really address — and the commission didn’t discuss — the disparate impacts and the racial disparity (of disconnections) and how to address that specifically,” she said.
A temporary moratorium on disconnections would have allowed for time to study disparities and find ways to address them.
“The commission didn’t talk about that,” McConnell said. “They didn’t address it at all, so that was disappointing. I understand it’s uncomfortable and it’s a tough issue, but it’s disappointing they shied away taking it head on.”
Shutoffs soaring
Beyond the challenge of disparities, Xcel’s number of service disconnections has skyrocketed. More than 45,000 Xcel customers saw their power shut off this year, a number that has grown significantly over the last two decades.
Xcel agreed to many proposals from the Citizens Utility Board of Minnesota, the Energy CENTS Coalition, clean energy organizations and the Public Utilities Commission to create more consumer protection against shutoffs.
Xcel Energy’s involuntary disconnection notices began rising significantly in 2023 before skyrocketing in 2024, when shutoffs doubled the prior year’s total for May through July. Despite Minnesota’s cold weather protection rules that limit disconnections during the winter through April 30, shutoffs even grew during the winter months.
This chart, based on Xcel Energy data and submitted by consumer and clean energy groups to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, shows a sharp increase in utility shutoffs in 2023 and 2024, which the groups attribute to the utility’s new ability to use smart meters to disconnect customers remotely. Credit: Minnesota PUC Docket E002/M-24-27
Clean energy and consumer organizations point to Xcel’s ability to remotely disconnect customers who have smart meters as a major reason for the shutoffs, along with inflation, escalating rate increases and challenging repayment requirements. Xcel had demanded customers pay 50% of what they owe to reconnect, which may have violated Minnesota law, according to the Citizens Utility Board.
Xcel’s pact with the Citizens Utility Board and Energy CENTS “is going to make payment agreements more affordable and hopefully help households that are behind on their bills avoid getting shut off and get caught back up,” said Annie Levenson-Falk, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board of Minnesota.
The utility board and Energy CENTS Coalition forged the agreement with Xcel under the purview of the Public Utilities Commission, which will issue a final order later. The agreement requires the following:
Customers will pay 10% of what they owe to have the power turned back on, instead of 50%.
The amount due will have to be at least $180 before Xcel can send a disconnect notice.
Xcel cannot shut off power until a customer reaches a $300 past due balance. Xcel’s data from this year showed disconnected customers were $441 in arrears on average in October and much higher in other months.
The utility must wait at least 10 days after a shutoff notice has been sent to disconnect, up from five days.
Xcel must post clear disconnection and payment policies on its website, along with information about customers’ right to develop an affordable repayment plan. Any changes Xcel makes to shutoff policies and repayments have to be reported to the commission, and it must collect data on repayments and customer agreements.
A variance allowing remote disconnections without field visits from Xcel remains, but the utility must contact customers via voicemail and use at least one other form of electronic communication.
Xcel spokesperson Kevin Coss said the utility believes “this agreement is a great step toward reducing disconnections for some of our customers who continue to struggle economically.”
Options for customers
George Shardlow, Energy CENTS executive director, said he thought a clearer explanation of the disconnection process on Xcel’s website brings a transparency that had been lacking.
“I don’t think the average person even knows that they have a right to negotiate when they’re struggling to pay their bills,” he said. “It’s all sort of opaque. We’re excited to see better documentation of people’s rights on Xcel’s website.”
Minnesota law says utility customers are “entitled” to a payment plan they can afford, Shardlow said. Customers who cannot afford the 10% down payment can still negotiate for a settlement that fits their budget, he added.
Shutoffs have been growing. This year Xcel sent disconnection notices to 51,000 customers in January and 71,000 in July. But not all notices result in shutoffs. The highest month for disconnections, May, saw more than 10,000 shutoffs. By August, slightly more than 8,400 customers had been disconnected.
Coss said Xcel works with customers to avoid disconnection by starting a nine-week process of contacting them through multiple channels to “point them to available options for energy assistance — both through the federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program and our own affordability programs — and offer flexible payment plans tailored to their circumstances.”
Minnesota also has cold weather protections that greatly reduce utilities’ ability to disconnect customers in winter months. But people who fail to pay their bills in winter see their balances grow, leading to higher disconnections in summer when they fail to catch up.
Xcel agreed to monitor progress and collect more data on racial disparities involving customers involuntarily shut off. The utility has already hired a third party evaluator, as the agreement requires, to study its shutoff policies and hold stakeholder engagement meetings during the year-long process.
Coss said disparities result in inequities throughout society and Xcel has been doing its part to address them. The utility has worked with the study’s authors and advocacy groups to identify actions to reduce disparities, he said.
Earlier this year, the commission also approved a proposal by Xcel for a pilot program that will provide bill credits to select census tracts with high levels of disconnections. Coss said Xcel will provide $500 bill credits to customers in low-income census areas who have a greater than $2,000 past-due balance, using money available from a quality of service program.
Minnesota Public Utilities Commissioner Joe Sullivan said he believed the agreement negotiated among the nonprofits and utility would reduce the financial strain on households facing disconnections and assist Xcel in recovering debt.
“I thought that in that docket people came together and were constructive,” he said. “I feel like I’m hopeful that the order will make some progress.”
PUC Chair Katie Sieben said the commission is “always looking at affordability, and especially as it pertains to low-income customers, I think we have a great track record on working with stakeholders and with utilities to provide robust low-income assistance to customers.”
She mentioned the commission’s role in approving an Xcel pilot to decrease payments for low-income, low-usage customers and a September decision that used a penalty for the utility’s service quality underperformance to provide bill credits to around 1,000 customers with the oldest outstanding balances in low-income census tracts.
‘Still more work to do’
The agreement does not solve the problem of low-income customers struggling to pay utility bills. Shardlow said Energy CENTS and the Citizens Utility Board lobbied the state legislature to allow households to apply for energy assistance funding the entire year instead of the current policy of having a deadline of May 31. Only 20% of eligible Minnesota households participate in the program, he said.
Levenson-Falk wants Xcel to consider eliminating the 1.5% late fee it charges customers on their balance, or consider donating the money to affordability programs.
The Citizens Utility Board also wants Xcel to develop a plan to reconnect customers quickly on days of high heat or poor air quality. Coss said Xcel will evaluate reconnecting customers disconnected during days of air quality alerts.
Levenson-Falk said the agreement at least makes progress. “I think we resolved everything that we had discussed with Xcel but that’s not to say that we think this is going to solve the problem, because, of course, there are still going to be continuing shutoffs, and those are still very concerning,” she said. “There’s still more work to do.”
This story was updated to include a statement from Minnesota Public Utilities Commission Chair Katie Sieben.
Fresh Energy staff, board members and funders do not have access to or oversight of the Energy News Network’s editorial process. More about our relationship with Fresh Energy can be found in our code of ethics.
This story was originally published by Canary Media.
California has long led the way on electric vehicles, but another Western state is challenging the Golden State’s top spot.
Between July and September, nearly 25 percent of the vehicles registered in Colorado were electric or plug-in hybrids. In California, that figure was just over 24 percent. It’s not enough to crown Colorado the new undisputed leader in EVs, but it’s a notable milestone — no other state has ever surpassed California in terms of EV registrations, according to James Di Filippo, principal policy analyst at Atlas Public Policy.
It’s the culmination of a “pretty dramatic” trend line for Colorado’s EV adoption since the start of 2023, Di Filippo said. Coloradans bought just over 41,000 EVs last year, up from roughly 23,000 in 2022.
Governor Jared Polis, a Democrat, announced the accomplishment last week, touting it as a sign of the state’s commitment to reaching its climate goals and improving air quality. “This new data shows that demand for EVs continues to increase and especially with competitive state and federal rebates, drastically cutting the cost of an EV and saving people money,” Polis said in a press release.
Colorado has some of the most generous incentives for EV sales in the country, Di Filippo said. Its policies and incentives have helped make the cars more affordable, while the state’s investments in charging infrastructure have made owning an electric car more practical.
All Coloradans can receive a $5,000 state tax credit for purchasing or leasing a new EV or plug-in hybrid priced up to $80,000. That credit is available through the end of this year, then will decrease to $3,500 starting in 2025. EVs valued under $35,000 are eligible for an additional tax credit of $2,500 — for a total potential state credit of $7,500.
Through the Vehicle Exchange Colorado program, income-qualified residents can trade in old or highly polluting gas cars in exchange for a $6,000 rebate to put toward a new EV or plug-in hybrid purchase or lease, or $4,000 for a used one.
The state tax credits and the vehicle-exchange rebates can be combined with federal tax credits, which currently offer up to $7,500 for a new EV lease or purchase or $4,000 for a used EV.
The state has also worked over the past few years to install more public chargers. There are currently over 5,500 public charging ports across Colorado. This year, the state plans to install another 576 ports using $5 million in funding from the Colorado Energy Office.
In 2020, the U.S. Energy Information Administration projected that 580,000 zero-emission vehicles would be sold in the U.S. in 2023. But actual sales last year were almost two and a half times greater at 1.43 million. This year, Cox Automotive expects sales to climb even higher, despite gloomy forecasts issued by some analysts earlier in 2024.
According to estimates from Kelley Blue Book, EV sales made up 8.9 percent of all vehicle sales in the country in the third quarter of this year — the highest share ever recorded, and an increase from 7.8 percent in the same time period last year.
The Biden administration set a goal for EVs to make up half of all new vehicle sales by 2030. As of this February, sales were on track to meet that goal, though the picture is more uncertain heading into the second Trump administration. The president-elect reportedly plans to eliminate federal EV tax credits and roll back Environmental Protection Agency tailpipe emissions rules — against the wishes of the nation’s largest automakers, including Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis.
Transportation is the single largest category of carbon emissions in the country, at 28 percent, driven mainly by trucks, SUVs, and other road vehicles.
Colorado has an even more aggressive EV goal than the federal government, aiming for 82 percent of all car sales to be electric by 2032. Looking ahead, EV registrations and sales in the state likely won’t continue to outpace California, Di Filippo said, since “the trend line for California is still steeper overall.”
“This isn’t necessarily a story of Colorado just beating California out right,” he said. “This is really a story of EV success.”
The following commentary was written by Carrie Zalewski, former Chair of the Illinois Commerce Commission and currently vice president of markets and transmission at the American Clean Power Association; and Brent Bailey, former Mississippi Public Service Commissioner and current vice president of operations at Efficient Power & Light LLC. See our commentary guidelines for more information.
Building the power grid of the future requires deploying every available tool in the present.
When it comes to electricity generation, energy wonks often reference an “all-the-above” strategy, which includes all available power sources — fossil fuels, renewable energy, and storage technologies. But generation is just one part of the reliability and affordability equation.
The Midwestern transmission grid must also evolve and adopt an “all-the-above” mentality to withstand increasingly frequent extreme weather events and support rapidly growing power demand while ensuring reliable and low-cost electricity for consumers. This is no small task. As such, policymakers and grid operators must carefully consider all near-term and long-term solutions.
New high-voltage transmission lines are essential to ensure the grid of the future is prepared for surging load growth. But new transmission line development and construction can take many years. To address immediate needs, there are other solutions that can improve capacity in the near term. Enter: advanced grid technologies.
Significant technological advancements are available now that can come online in one to three years compared to the decade or so it takes to build new transmission lines. Such advancements include: grid-enhancing technologies (GETs) — hardware and/or software that can increase the capacity and efficiency of existing transmission lines most hours of the year — as well as high-performance conductors (HPCs) — which offer greater capacity and efficiency benefits compared to traditional conductors.
While these advanced grid technologies cannot provide enough capacity to meet long-term system needs, they are relatively inexpensive and drive enormous cost savings until we can bring regional backbone lines into service. Deploying GETs and HPCs in the near term to help meet projected demand growth while simultaneously planning and constructing new regional and interregional transmission lines is key to ensuring the delivery of reliable, low-cost power across the Midwest.
MISO, the central U.S. grid operator, is considering a second portfolio of transmission projects aimed at creating a regional backbone of long-distance lines that will enable power to flow across the Upper and Central Midwest. These transmission lines will build upon investments made in the first tranche of projects, approved by the grid operator in 2022, which began to lay the groundwork for an evolution of the system.
The second batch of potential projects aims to “reliably and efficiently enable MISO member goals and load growth,” delivering benefits that significantly outweigh costs. Across much of the current system, MISO found that at least 10% of facilities are overloaded and annual curtailments exceed 15%, meaning available generators are forced offline because there is not enough grid capacity to carry their power.
MISO will also soon consider transmission projects for the Southern region of MISO as well as measures to increase the flow of electricity between the MISO regions. A regional problem requires regional solutions, including well-vetted, long-distance transmission lines.
Additionally, there is a significant need for greater interregional transmission capacity between MISO and its neighbors. The U.S. Department of Energy identified especially high congestion between the Midwest and Plains states. This means there are bottlenecks in the system that hinder the ability to deliver electricity between these areas. As a result, more interregional transmission ties from MISO to the Plains would offer considerable consumer benefits in the form of increased reliability and decreased costs when affordable clean energy can be accessed and transmitted back to MISO members.
Building the grid of the future will require every technology at our disposal. It’s critical that grid operators and state regulators consider and implement all transmission technology tools when planning and building a system that will enhance national security, facilitate regional economic development, and withstand new and growing reliability threats for generations to come.
Living in a net-zero home is often a luxury for those who can afford solar panels, state-of-the-art HVAC and other innovations and renovations.
But lower-income people are those who could benefit most from energy cost savings, and those who suffer most from extreme climate. Milwaukee is trying to address this disconnect by building net-zero homes for low-income buyers in partnership with Habitat for Humanity, a marquee project of the city’s 2023 Climate and Equity Plan.
In September, the U.S. Department of Energy announced a $3.4 million grant that will go toward Milwaukee’s construction of 35 homes on vacant lots in disadvantaged neighborhoods and the opening of a factory to make wall panels for net-zero manufactured homes.
City leaders have found the undertaking more challenging than expected, especially on the factory front. But they hope overcoming roadblocks will help create a new local and regional market for energy-efficient, affordable prefabricated homes, while also training a new generation of architects in the sector through partnership with the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee School of Architecture and Urban Planning.
“It remains an ambitious project,” said Milwaukee environmental sustainability director Erick Shambarger. “We’re trying to support equity, climate, new technology, manufacturing. It takes some time, but we’re excited about it and looking forward to making it a success.”
Panelized, prefabricated homes can be built relatively cheaply, but making them highly energy efficient is a different story. A handful of small companies nationwide make the wall panels used in such construction to highly energy-efficient standards, but transporting the panels is expensive and creates greenhouse gas emissions.
The city sought a local manufacturer, but an initial request for proposals yielded no viable candidates. Now the city and UWM professors are working with the Rocky Mountain Institute to convince a qualified company to open a site in Milwaukee to make energy-efficient panelized home components at commercial scale, for both the city and private customers.
“It’s such a great fit for Milwaukee,” said Lucas Toffoli, a principal in RMI’s carbon-free buildings program. “It’s a city that has a very strong blue-collar tradition, so the idea of bringing back some manufacturing, and leveling up the home-building capacity of the city feels very congruent with the spirit of Milwaukee.”
And panelized homes could be a cornerstone of affordable, energy-efficient housing nationwide if the sector was better organized and incentivized, RMI argues — a goal that Milwaukee could help further.
“Local action always drives a message in a way that federal action doesn’t,” Toffoli said. “It will be even more important under the incoming presidential administration and Congress. Having this project getting started at the local level in an important Midwestern city is a way to help ensure that progress continues at some level, even if it’s less of a priority at the federal level.”
Panel problems
Habitat for Humanity builds its own panels in its Milwaukee warehouse, and is working on an energy-efficient panelized design that it hope will yield the first net-zero affordable homes in 2025. Milwaukee has yet to select a developer for the DOE-funded program, but Milwaukee Habitat was a partner in the DOE grant and CEO Brian Sonderman said the organization is hopeful it will be chosen during an RFP process.
Single-family homes are typically “stick built” from the ground up, with 2×4 or similar boards forming a skeleton and then, one by one, walls. Panelized homes involve walls transported intact to the site.
Milwaukee Habitat for Humanity often uses a hybrid method wherein walls are “stick built” laying on their side in the Habitat warehouse, and then brought to the site where volunteers help assemble the new house.
There are various other methods of making panels that don’t involve lumber, UWM Associate Professor Alexander Timmer explained, and making these models highly energy efficient is still an emerging and decentralized field.
“It’s the chicken-or-the-egg problem in some sense,” Timmer said, since component manufacturers don’t know if there’s a market for energy-efficient panelized homes, and developers don’t build the homes because few component suppliers exist.
Wall panels can involve two sheets of plywood with insulation in between, or a steel interior surrounded by rigid insulation, among other models.
“With 2x4s, any small crew can build a home,” said Timmer. “With panelized, you need a factory, specialized tools, specialized knowledge. The hope is we are graduating architects into the market who know these technologies and techniques, and can design them to high energy efficiency standards. The city needs architects and builders who want to do these things and feel comfortable doing them.”
Toffoli touted the benefits of net-zero homes beyond the carbon emissions and utility bill savings.
“There’s less draftiness, greater comfort throughout the whole home,” said Toffoli. “In addition to making the heater run less to warm the air, there’s a big comfort benefit and acoustic benefit,” with little noise or pollutants filtering into the well-sealed home.
“In the middle of a severe Wisconsin winter storm, [if] power goes out for everyone, you have a home that can basically ride through harsh conditions passively much better,” Toffoli added.
Toffoli said examples in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts show panelized, highly energy-efficient homes can be built at costs not much greater than standard market panelized homes. A different design, including thinner studs and more insulation, means less heat or cold is transported from the outside in. Insulation and highly efficient windows cost more than market rate, but smaller appliances can be used because of the efficiency, helping to mitigate the cost increase.
He said mass production of net-zero panelized homes is much more efficient and cost-effective than stick-built energy-efficient homes.
“You don’t need to, every time, find a contractor who understands the proper sequence of control layers for a very high-performance wall,” Toffoli said. “It’s been done in part in a factory where they’re plugging and chugging on a design that’s been validated and repeated.”
The DOE grant includes $1 million for Milwaukee to incentivize construction of the panel factory, $40,000 each toward 25 homes, plus funds for administration and other costs. Shambarger said $40,000 per home will cover the construction cost difference between an affordable home that merely complies with building codes, and one that is net-zero – meeting federal standards with a highly efficient envelope, an electric heat pump and solar panels.
Shambarger noted that the city funding and business will not be enough to motivate a company to build a new factory in Milwaukee.
“Any company is going to have to have a customer base” beyond the city orders, Shambarger said. “We’ll have to make sure other housing developers like the product that companies have, that it’s cost effective. One of the things we learned the first time around is most of the developers really didn’t understand how to do net-zero energy. We want to make sure the product we select fits within Milwaukee neighborhoods, will work in our climate, has buy-in from the community.”
Local jobs would be created by the factory, which is slated to be in Century City, the neighborhood with the most vacant manufacturing space.
“Overall with the climate and equity plan, we are trying to create good-paying jobs that people want,” Shambarger said. “That often means the trades. One of the things attractive about building housing components in a factory is it offers steady year-round employment, rather than having to go on unemployment for the winter,” as many building tradespeople do.
Creating Habitat
Sonderman said that in the past, Milwaukee Habitat has put solar on some homes, but little else specifically to lower energy costs.
“Clearly if there was a really substantial market for developers who were interested and willing to do this work, the reality is Habitat wouldn’t be the first call,” he said. “It’s something new. One of the things we’re looking forward to is sharing with our Habitat network in the state and other developers and builders, so we build some confidence this can be done efficiently and cost-effectively.”
Net-zero homes are not only a way to fight climate change, but an environmental and economic justice issue in predominantly Black neighborhoods scarred by redlining and disinvestment, where the majority of residents are renters, Sonderman added.
“Even for the individuals who don’t live in that home but live in the neighborhood, it breathes hope, it says that our neighborhood is being invested in,” Sonderman said. “That matters deeply for the residents of Lindsay Heights, Harambee, Midtown and elsewhere. To take a project like this and see it come to fruition has tremendous ripple effect in a positive way.”
Several other Habitat chapters nationwide are building net-zero homes, including in Colorado, Illinois and Oregon.
Milwaukee Habitat is planning to build 34 homes in 2025 and up to 60 homes annually by 2028. Sonderman said they will make as many as possible net-zero.
“We’re not in a capacity to be the full-scale factory [Shambarger] was envisioning,” he said. “But we believe we’ll be able to supply the walls we need to build dozens and dozens of net-zero homes in the future.”
Massive data centers used for cloud computing and artificial intelligence are consuming enormous amounts of energy, and developers are eyeing South Dakota as a potential location, regulators say.
These “hyperscale data centers,” or “hyperscalers,” are designed to handle immense computing demands and are often operated by tech giants. The centers are characterized by their large size — often tens of thousands of square feet — and thousands of computer servers that require significant energy to operate.
Nick Phillips with Applied Digital in Texas, a developer of the centers, highlighted South Dakota’s appeal: a cold climate that cuts down on cooling a room full of hot servers, and abundant wind energy that’s considered one of the most cost-effective renewable energy sources, which can help keep operating costs down.
State regulators are not aware of any hyperscale data centers currently operating in South Dakota.
“There isn’t a requirement to report hyperscale data centers to the commission, so we don’t have a formal method to track that information,” said Leah Mohr with the Public Utilities Commission.
Commissioner Kristie Fiegen noted that the state’s largest proposed data center is a 50-megawatt facility in Leola.
“We don’t know what’s coming,” she said. “But the utilities are getting calls every week from people trying to see if they have the megawatts available.”
The commission recently hosted a meeting in Pierre with representatives from regional utilities, regional power grid associations and data centers. The goal was to understand the emerging demands and facilitate an information exchange.
Bob Sahr, a former public utilities commissioner and current CEO of East River Electric Cooperative in Madison, emphasized the scale of energy needed.
“We’re talking loads that eclipse some of the largest cities in South Dakota,” he said.
A single data center campus can require anywhere from 300 to 500 megawatts of electricity to operate. One megawatt can power hundreds of homes. By one estimate, there are over 1,000 hyperscalers worldwide, with the U.S. hosting just over half of them.
Ryan Long, president of Xcel Energy, headquartered in Minneapolis, illustrated the extreme nature of the demand.
“We now have, I would say, north of seven gigawatts of requests across the Xcel Energy footprint for data centers to locate in one of our eight states,” he said. “And I’ll be very frank that there’s no way that we’re going to be able to serve all of that in a reasonable amount of time.”
Protecting existing customers from potential costs or energy shortages is another shared concern. Utility representatives emphasized the need for coal and natural gas to maintain a reliable “base load” when renewable sources like wind and solar are unavailable. Arick Sears of Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy underscored the point, noting that costs for each data center should depend on how much energy it consumes.
“We need to ensure that large-scale energy users are paying their fair share,” he said.
Utilities also flagged the risk of “stranded costs,” referring to a data center ceasing operations, leaving a utility with added infrastructure to meet a demand that no longer exists. They said financial safeguards will need to be written into power agreements with hyperscalers.
Speed of deployment is another pressing issue. Representatives from Montana-Dakota Utilities, headquartered in North Dakota, and NorthWestern Energy, headquartered in Sioux Falls, noted that some facilities expect to be operational within months of making a deal, straining infrastructure, planning and resources.
Grid managers Brian Tulloh of Indiana-based Midcontinent Independent System Operator and Lanny Nickell of Arkansas-based Southwest Power Pool echoed those concerns. They warned that data center growth is outpacing the grid’s ability to meet demand and cautioned against decommissioning coal power plants too quickly. Setting aside how much it would cost to produce the required energy, Tulloh estimated that MISO needs $30 billion in electric transmission infrastructure to support the demand from hyperscalers.
“The grid wasn’t designed for that,” Public Utilities Commissioner Chris Nelson told South Dakota Searchlight after the meeting.
Nelson was glad to hear the data centers will include backup generators, similar to hospitals, for power outages or when homes need prioritization. He said some even aim to have huge batteries to power the plant until the generators get going. They would consume massive amounts of diesel and natural gas until the outage is over.
Nelson said all of this makes modern nuclear energy facilities more attractive. He said few alternative “base load” options remain, and the public has little appetite for ramping up coal power.
NorthWestern Energy is exploring the possibility of constructing a small nuclear power plant in South Dakota, with an estimated cost of $1.2 billion to $1.6 billion for a 320-megawatt facility. The plant would be the first in the state since a test facility near Sioux Falls in the 1960s.
The company is conducting a study, partially funded by the Department of Energy. Details about the study and potential plant sites remain confidential.
Additionally, South Dakota’s Legislature has shown interest in nuclear energy, passing a resolution for further study on the topic that led to the publication of an issue memorandum by the Legislative Research Council.
A new contract between Kalamazoo, Michigan, and utility Consumers Energy signals a change in direction for the city’s clean energy strategy as it seeks to become carbon neutral by 2040.
Solar was seen as a pillar of the city’s plans when it declared a climate emergency in 2019 and set a goal of zeroing out carbon emissions by 2040. After spending years exploring its options, though, the Michigan city is tempering a vision for rooftop solar in favor of large, more distant solar projects built and owned by the utility. It’s not alone either, with Grand Rapids, Milwaukee, Muskegon and other cities taking a similar approach.
“Folks want to see solar panels on parking lots and buildings, but there’s no way as a city we can accomplish our net-zero buildings just putting solar panels on a roof,” said Justin Gish, Kalamazoo’s sustainability planner. “Working with the utility seemed to make the most sense.”
Initially there was skepticism, Gish said — “environmentalists tend to not trust utilities and large corporate entities” — but the math just didn’t work out for going it alone with rooftop solar.
The city’s largest power user, the wastewater treatment station, has a pumping house with a roof of only 225 square feet. Kalamazoo’s largest city-owned roof, at the public service station, is 26,000 square feet. Spending an estimated $750,000 to cover that with solar would only provide 14% of the power that building uses annually — a financial “non-starter,” he said.
So the city decided to partner with Consumers Energy, joining a solar subscription program wherein Kalamazoo will tell Consumers how much solar energy it wants, starting in 2028, and the utility will use funds from its subscription fee to construct new solar farms, like a 250 MW project Consumers is building in Muskegon.
Under the 20-year contract, Kalamazoo will pay a set rate of 15.8 cents per kWh — 6.4 cents more than what it currently pays — for 43 million kWh of solar power per year. If electricity market rates rise, the city will save money, and Kalamazoo receives Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) to help meet its energy goals.
The subscription is expected to eliminate about 80% of Kalamazoo’s emissions from electricity, Gish said. The electricity used to power streetlights and traffic signals couldn’t be covered since it is not metered. As the city acquires more electric vehicles — it currently has two — electricity demand may increase, but city leaders hope to offset any increases by improving energy efficiency of city buildings.
Consumers Energy spokesperson Matt Johnson said the company relies “in part” on funds from customers specifically to build solar, and considers it a better deal for cities than building it themselves, “which would be more costly for them, and they have to do their own maintenance.”
“We can do it in a more cost-effective way, we maintain it, they’re helping us fund it and do it in the right way, and those benefits get passed on to arguably everybody,” Johnson said.
Grand Rapids, Michigan, joined the subscription program at the same time as Kalamazoo. Corporate customers including 7-Eleven, Walmart and General Motors are part of the same Consumers Energy solar subscription program, as is the state of Michigan.
Costs and benefits
“There’s a growing movement of cities trying to figure out solar — ‘Yes we want to do this, it could save us money over time, but the cost is prohibitive,’” said John Farrell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.
Until the Inflation Reduction Act, cities couldn’t directly access federal tax credits. The direct-pay incentives under the IRA have simplified financing, Farrell said, but cities still face other financial and logistical barriers, such as whether they have sufficient rooftop space.
Advocates acknowledge deals with utilities may be the most practical way for budget-strapped cities to move the needle on clean energy, but they emphasize that cities should also strive to develop their own solar, and question whether utilities should charge more for clean power that is increasingly a cheaper option than fossil fuels.
“Our position is rooftop and distributed generation is best — it’s best for the customers, in this case the cities; it’s best for the grid, because you’re putting those resources directly on the grid where it’s needed most; and it’s best for the planet because it can deploy a lot faster,” said John Delurey, Midwest deputy director of the advocacy group Vote Solar. “I believe customers in general and perhaps cities in particular should exhaust all resources and opportunities for distributed generation before they start to explore utility-scale resources. It’s the lowest hanging fruit and very likely to provide the most bang for their buck.”
Utility-scale solar is more cost-effective per kilowatt, but Delurey notes that when a public building is large enough for solar, “you are putting that generation directly on load, you’re consuming onsite. Anything that is concurrent consumption or paired with a battery, you are getting the full retail value of that energy. That is a feature you can’t really beat no matter how good the contract is with some utility-scale projects that are farther away.”
Delurey also noted that Michigan law mandates all energy be from clean sources by 2040; and 50% by 2030. That means Consumers needs to be building or buying renewable power, whether or not customers pay extra for it.
“So there are diminishing returns [to a subscription deal] at that point,” Delurey said. “You better be getting a price benefit, because the power on their grid would be clean anyways.”
“Some folks are asking ‘Why do anything now? Just wait until Consumers cleans up the grid,’” Gish acknowledged. “But our purchase shows we have skin in the game.”
A complement to rooftop
In 2009, Milwaukee adopted a goal of powering 25% of city operations — excluding waterworks — with solar by 2025. The city’s Climate and Equity Plan adopted in 2023 also enshrined that goal.
For a decade, Milwaukee has been battling We Energies over the city’s plan to install rooftop solar on City Hall and other buildings through a third-party owner, Eagle Point Solar. The city sought the arrangement — common in many states — to tap federal tax incentives that a nonprofit public entity couldn’t reap. But We Energies argued that third party ownership would mean Eagle Point would be acting as a utility and infringing on We Energies’ territory. A lawsuit over Milwaukee’s plans with Eagle Point is still pending.
In 2018, We Energies launched a pilot solar program in Milwaukee known by critics as “rent a roof,” in which the utility leased rooftop space for its own solar arrays. Advocates and Milwaukee officials opposed the program, arguing that it encouraged the utility to suppress the private market or publicly-owned solar. In 2023, the state Public Service Commission denied the utility’s request to expand the program.
Wisconsin Citizens Utility Board opposed the rent-a-roof arrangement since it passed costs they viewed as unfair on to ratepayers. But Wisconsin CUB executive director Tom Content said the city’s current partnership with We Energies is different, since it is just the city, not ratepayers, footing the cost for solar that helps the city meet its goals.
Solar panels atop Milwaukee’s Central Library. Credit: City of Milwaukee
Milwaukee is paying about $84,000 extra per year for We Energies to build solar farms on a city landfill near the airport and outside the city limits in the town of Caledonia. The deal includes a requirement that We Energies hire underemployed or unemployed Milwaukee residents.
The Caledonia project is nearly complete, and will provide over 11 million kWh of energy annually, “enough to make 57 municipal police stations, fire stations, and health clinics 100% renewable electricity,” said Milwaukee Environmental Collaboration Office director Erick Shambarger.
The landfill project is slated to break ground in 2025. The two arrays will total 11 MW and provide enough power for 83 city buildings, including City Hall – where Milwaukee had hoped to do the rooftop array with Eagle Point.
Meanwhile Milwaukee is building its own rooftop solar on the Martin Luther King Jr. library and later other public buildings, and Shambarger said they will apply for direct pay tax credits made possible by the Inflation Reduction Act — basically eliminating the need for a third-party agreement.
“Utility-scale is the complement to rooftop,” said Shambarger. “They own it and maintain it, we get the RECs. It worked out pretty well. If you think about it from a big picture standpoint, to now have the utility offer a big customer like the city an option to source their power from renewable energy — that didn’t exist five years ago. If you were a big customer in Wisconsin five years ago, you really had no option except for buying RECs from who knows where. We worked hard with them to make sure we could see our renewable energy being built.”
We Energies already owns a smaller 2.25 MW solar farm on the same landfill, under a similar arrangement. Building solar on the landfill is less efficient than other types of land, since special mounting is needed to avoid puncturing the landfill’s clay cap, and the panels can’t turn to follow the sun. But Shambarger said the sacrifice is worth it to have solar within the city limits, on land useful for little else.
“We do think it’s important to have some of this where people can see it and understand it,” he said. “We also have the workforce requirements, it’s nice to have it close to home for our local workers.”
Madison is also pursuing a mix of city-owned distributed solar and utility-scale partnerships.
On Earth Day 2024, Madison announced it has installed 2 MW of solar on 38 city rooftops. But a utility-scale solar partnership with utility MGE is also crucial to the goal of 100% clean energy for city operations by 2030. Through MGE’s Renewable Energy Rider program, Madison helped pay for the 8 MW Hermsdorf Solar Fields on a city landfill, with 5 MW devoted to city operations and 3 MW devoted to the school district. The 53-acre project went online in 2022.
Farrell said such “all of the above” approaches are ideal.
“The lesson we’ve seen generally is the more any entity can directly own the solar project, the more financial benefit you’ll get,” he said. “Ownership comes with privileges, and with risks.
“Energy is in addition to a lot of other challenging issues that cities have to work on. The gold standard is solar on a couple public buildings with battery storage, so these are resiliency places if the grid goes down.”
Correction: Covering Kalamazoo’s public service station roof with solar panels would provide an estimated 14% of power used by that building. An earlier version of this story mischaracterized the number.
Community and environmental justice advocates say the Biden administration is failing to deliver promised transparency and public engagement around its $7 billion clean hydrogen hub initiative.
“Engagement isn’t merely leading people into a process that’s going to happen with or without them,” said Tom Torres, hydrogen program director for the Ohio River Valley Institute, a nonprofit serving one of the regions where federally funded partnerships are trying to lay the groundwork for new local hydrogen economies. “It means meaningfully involving people in the decisions about the project.”
The U.S. Department of Energy announced funding in October 2023 for seven regional clean hydrogen hubs — clusters of interconnected projects meant to kickstart production of the fuel with little or no greenhouse gas emissions. Since then, the department has held online briefings and virtual listening sessions for each hub, but advocates say they are not getting the kind of information necessary to assess who will be impacted by the projects and how.
Torres and others say they want more than just dots on a map. They want to know how hydrogen will be produced, how it will be used, and how it will get to end users. For projects that depend on carbon capture, they want to know how and where the carbon will be captured, transported and stored. And once the specifics are known, they want a chance to have meaningful input on the final projects.
Spokespeople for the Department of Energy and regional hubs said the answers to those questions are still being worked out and that more engagement is on the horizon. Advocates are increasingly frustrated and fear that community input will come too late to affect how the hubs are developed.
“It doesn’t make sense … on one hand to say there’s not enough on paper to tell the public about, but on the other hand there is enough to allocate almost $1 billion for these companies,” Torres said.
Are events just ‘checking a box’?
When burned as a fuel source, hydrogen does not emit carbon dioxide, but its production today almost always comes from fossil fuels. Some see a potential for hydrogen to replace natural gas in certain hard-to-electrify sectors such as industry or heavy duty transportation, but the benefits for addressing climate change hinge on whether it can be produced cleanly and at scale.
The Biden administration’s hydrogen hub program, part of the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, aims to ramp up production of hydrogen made with low-carbon energy, including renewables, nuclear power, and fossil fuels paired with carbon capture.
“It is literally like building the natural gas infrastructure that we have all over the place again for hydrogen,” said Shawn Bennett, energy and resilience manager for Battelle, the project manager for the Appalachian Regional Hydrogen Hub, ARCH2, which includes projects for Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania. A majority of its projects will use steam methane reforming to make hydrogen from natural gas, along with carbon capture and storage. Other projects in the hub plan to make hydrogen from waste gases or from electrolysis, which uses energy to split water molecules.
In May, dozens of groups urged the Department of Energy to suspend funding discussions for the ARCH2 project until the public receives detailed information beyond general maps and short project descriptions. On July 31 the Department of Energy formally committed the first $30 million of federal funding to ARCH2, with a total of up to $925 million to be spent over the next decade or so.
Last month, the Department of Energy committed up to $1 billion for the Midwest Alliance for Clean Hydrogen, MachH2, which spans Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Iowa and plans to produce hydrogen from a mix of nuclear power, wind energy and natural gas. The department will hold a December 9 briefing on MachH2.
In response to the Energy News Network’s questions about community groups’ complaints about a lack of outreach, a Department of Energy spokesperson provided a statement saying it “has been actively engaged with these communities in support of the economic playbook” of the Biden-Harris administration.
The ARCH2 project held a community outreach session in West Virginia in November, and additional meetings will be held in Ohio and Pennsylvania early next year, Bennett said. Some community group members protested outside at the West Virginia session but then came inside for a good discussion, he added.
Torres said there was no general presentation at the West Virginia meeting, and company representatives were present for only a handful of the hub’s projects. Even then, project information was still sparse.
“It wasn’t an opportunity for people’s voices to be heard,” he said. “What is the value of these events other than checking a box for these companies?”
Advocacy groups focusing on the MachH2 project said months went by without getting updates or details. Then last month, they got less than 24 hours’ notice for a briefing with general descriptions about the MachH2 hub projects.
During that session, representatives for the Department of Energy said a decision on the hub’s funding commitment would come soon, “probably next week sometime,” said Susan Thomas, the legislative and policy director and communications manager for Just Transition Northwest Indiana. Minutes after the November 20 session ended, the Department of Energy announced the MachH2 funding commitment.
“Our jaws were on the table,” Thomas said.
Details remain to be worked out
Groups have been trying to get answers from the Department of Energy for more than a year, said Chris Chyung, executive director of Indiana Conservation Voters. In his view, the agency’s approach “is just flouting the law.” According to the Department of Energy’s website, engagement with communities and labor is a key principle required in hubs’ community benefits plans, which are part of hubs’ contractual obligations for funding.
Community groups learned in the November 20 briefing that the MachH2 community engagement would not address concerns related to any pipelines associated with the hub. Instead, those would be handled by a separate office within the Department of Energy.
But a pipeline for northwestern Indiana “is absolutely part and parcel of [a] dirty hydrogen project that is part of MachH2,” and the community should get a say on it, said Lauren Piette, an attorney with Earthjustice, which does not consider hydrogen made with natural gas to be climate-friendly, even with carbon capture.
The Department of Energy spokesperson did not respond to the Energy News Network’s question about how community benefits for hub projects can fully be assessed if they don’t include consideration of issues and input related to necessary pipelines.
Representatives of the MachH2 and ARCH2 hubs who spoke at an Ohio Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Consortium program last month said they couldn’t practically engage in community outreach until funding commitments had been negotiated with the Department of Energy. Until then, it wasn’t certain whether each hub would move forward.
Also, as a practical matter, “there was no budget for these things,” Bennett said. Details for each hub’s projects are still being worked out, and ARCH2 is still trying to add additional project partners.
Even then, details for projects won’t be finalized until review under the National Environmental Policy Act, according to Neil Banwart, who is the chief integration officer for the MachH2 hub and also the managing director for hydrogen at Energy Systems Network.
“It’s not a certainty that all of the projects will get built in the locations that we shared on a map,” he said.
Chyung said he felt the comments about funding were “a complete dodge on behalf of these extremely wealthy national corporations that have said since 2023 they were eager to get started on community outreach.”
The following commentary was written by Daksh Arora, a project engineer at GameChange Solar, content director for the MIT Energy Conference 2025, and a fellow at the Clean Energy Leadership Institute. See our commentary guidelines for more information.
States like Massachusetts must take the lead in advancing the United States’ climate goals, especially under the incoming Trump administration. While the Biden Administration’s landmark Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 made significant strides, the U.S. is still on track to achieve only 66% of its greenhouse gas reduction targets by 2030.
With the potential for further setbacks, such as a possible second withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, states like Massachusetts must step up to drive the deployment of clean energy and climate solutions.
The “Direct Pay” provision in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is a game-changer for municipalities, state and local governments, and other tax-exempt entities to access federal clean energy tax credits. This provision allows entities such as nonprofits, schools, tribal governments, and municipal utilities to receive tax credits directly from the IRS, rather than relying on tax liability to claim them.
Before the IRA, only private entities could benefit from these credits, putting public entities at a disadvantage in developing clean energy projects. The Direct Pay provision has no cap on government spending through 2032, offering new opportunities for public sector investment in clean energy. Furthermore, IRA also increases the maximum available tax credit for certain clean energy projects, from 30% to 50%, with the potential for up to 70% or more for projects in energy or low-income communities, or those using American-made materials, helping overcome financial barriers that previously slowed public clean energy development.
To claim direct pay, eligible entities must complete their energy projects before receiving payment from the federal government, which will occur the following year. While the tax credits will lower overall project costs, upfront capital is still needed to finance projects before the refund arrives.
To help address this, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), a $27 billion program established by another IRA provision, provides increased green bank financing, supporting an equitable green financing ecosystem across the U.S. The IRS just finalized the direct pay rules and it would be really difficult for the next administration to repeal it.
City governments like in Somerville and Cambridge can use direct pay to supplement the costs of deploying renewable energy infrastructure such as solar panels and storage technologies on public lands and buildings; electrifying vehicle fleets; and building out electric vehicle charging infrastructure.
Direct Pay is also a significant shift that allows public power entities, like the New York Power Authority (NYPA), to directly own renewable energy projects instead of relying on complex public-private partnerships. This makes it easier for NYPA to scale up clean energy projects by bypassing the need for third-party ownership structures that were previously required.
Regardless of this question, investing in public capacity is a net win for the environment as direct pay not only levels the playing field between for-profit and tax-exempt entities but also shifts energy generation ownership from private to public and nonprofit sectors, enabling more consumer-focused management of energy assets. States like Massachusetts should ensure that benefits from the IRA reach low-income and marginalized communities.
Massachusetts just streamlined the process for building solar and wind farms, transmission lines, and other energy infrastructure to help meet its climate goals by 2050. The state can do more by working to help communities understand the types of investments eligible for direct pay and how to secure financing for clean energy projects, making access to this funding easier and more efficient. The state can also lead by setting an example by deploying climate solutions at scale and ensuring utilities maximize the federal clean energy tax credits by regulatory oversight.
Login
