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.”

Plan to expand airport for private jets runs into new Massachusetts climate law is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

A trailblazing regional greenhouse gas partnership on the East Coast is considering possible changes or expansion that would allow it to keep building on its success — and the stakes grew higher last month with the reelection of Donald Trump.

The 11-state Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, established in 2005, is the country’s first regional cap-and-invest system for reducing carbon emissions from power generation. Since 2021, administrators have been conducting a program review, analyzing its performance since the last review in 2017 and weighing potential adjustments to make sure it continues to deliver benefits to member states.

The role of such programs is more crucial as Trump’s pledges to roll back federal climate action leaves it up to cities, states, and the private sector to maintain the country’s momentum on clean energy over the next four years. In RGGI, as the regional initiative is known, states have a potential model for scaling their impact through collaboration. 

“RGGI has not only been an effective climate policy, it’s been an extraordinary example of how states can work together on common goals,” said Daniel Sosland, president of climate and energy nonprofit Acadia Center. “It is a major vehicle for climate policy now in the states, more than it might have seemed before the election.” 

How RGGI works

RGGI sets a cap for total power plant carbon emissions among member states. Individual generators must then buy allowances from the state, up to the total cap, for each ton of carbon dioxide they produce in a year. The cap lowers over time, forcing power plants to either reduce emissions or pay more to buy allowances from a shrinking pool.

States then reinvest the proceeds from these auctions into programs that further reduce emissions and help energy customers, including energy efficiency initiatives, direct bill assistance, and renewable energy projects. Since 2008, RGGI has generated $8.3 billion for participating states, and carbon dioxide emissions from power generation in the nine states that have consistently participated fell by about half between 2008 and 2021, a considerably faster rate than the rest of the country. 

“It has really thrived and been really effective across multiple administrations,” said Jackson Morris, state power sector director with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “RGGI is a winning model. It’s not theoretical — we’ve got numbers.”

Currently, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont are part of the program. Virginia joined RGGI in 2021, but in 2023 Gov. Glenn Youngkin repealed the state’s participation, a move immediately challenged in court; a judge ruled last month that the governor lacked the authority to withdraw the state from initiative, though a spokesman for the governor has declared the state’s intention to appeal. 

There is widespread agreement that RGGI will endure despite likely federal hostility to climate measures. There was no attempt to take direct action against it during Trump’s first term, nor has there been any concerted industry opposition, said Conservation Law Foundation president Bradley Campbell, who was involved in the founding of RGGI when he was commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.

Supporters also note that the program has historically had broad bipartisan support: Participating states have been led through the years by both Republican and Democratic governors and legislatures. 

Politics has had some influence over the years, though only at the margins. New Jersey, a founding member of RGGI, left in 2011 when Chris Christie was governor, but returned in 2020 following an executive order from his successor. Pennsylvania joined in 2022 through an executive order from the governor, but its participation is now being challenged in court. 

Still, RGGI’s foundations are solid and will remain so, experts said. 

“The basic infrastructure has weathered the political winds over the decades,” Campbell said.

Looking forward

Nonetheless, RGGI will need to make some carefully thought-out program design decisions during its current review to make an impact in the face of falling federal support for decarbonization. 

One question under consideration is whether to maintain the existing trajectory for the overall emissions cap for the program — a reduction of 30% between 2020 and 2030, then holding steady thereafter — or to continue lowering the limit after 2030. 

The RGGI states are also contemplating a possible change to the compliance schedule that would require power generators to acquire allowances worth 100% of their carbon emissions each year, and certify compliance annually. The current system calls for certification every three years, and only mandates allowances equivalent to half of carbon emissions for the first two years of each period.

The program is looking for ways to appeal to potential new participant states that have less aggressive decarbonization goals than current member states without watering down the program’s overall impact on decarbonization, said Acadia Center policy analyst Paola Tamayo. Acadia suggested possible program mechanisms such as giving proportionately more allowances to states with more stringent emissions targets to incentivize tighter limits.

“At this point it is critical for states to maintain a high level of ambition when it comes to programs like RGGI,” Tamayo said. “There are different mechanisms that they can implement to accommodate other states.”

The program review is expected to yield a model rule some time over the winter, though updates may be made into the spring as the RGGI states receive and consider feedback on how to accommodate potential new participants.  

States will also need to maintain and strengthen their own climate policies to magnify the impact of RGGI, Campbell said. He pointed to Massachusetts, where Gov. Maura Healey needs to show “bolder leadership,” he said, and Maine and Vermont, where the Conservation Law Foundation has filed lawsuits in an attempt to compel the states to meet their own carbon reduction deadlines. 

“It’s especially important that the states that have strong emissions reduction mandates speed up the implementation of their climate laws,” he said. “State leadership on these issues is going to be more important than ever.”

As climate focus shifts to states, East Coast partnership offers model for multi-state collaboration is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

A Massachusetts university is developing technology that aims to use lasers to drastically cut emissions and energy use from Maine’s paper and pulp industry. 

Worcester Polytechnic Institute recently received a $2.75 million U.S. Department of Energy grant to help ready the industrial drying technology for commercial use.

“We are all excited about this — this is potentially a groundbreaking technology,” said Jamal Yagoobi, founding director of the institute’s Center for Advanced Research in Drying.

In Maine, the paper and pulp business generates about 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year, roughly half of the state’s industrial emissions. Much of these emissions come from the process of drying mashed, pressed, and rolled wood pulp to yield paper products. The emissions come mainly from three major operations across the state; three additional facilities contribute smaller amounts.

These plants’ emissions will need to be addressed if Maine is to reach its goal of going carbon neutral by 2045. Furthermore, each of these plants is located in an area with an above-average population of low-income residents, according to data assembled by Industrious Labs, an environmental organization focused on the impact of industry. And two are located in areas with a higher-than-average risk of cancer from air toxins, suggesting a correlation between their operations and the incidence of cancer in the area. 

At the same, the paper and pulp industry remains economically important to Maine, said Matt Cannon, state conservation and energy director for the Maine chapter of the Sierra Club. 

“It’s got real union jobs — the paper industry is still very important to our community,” he said. 

Worcester Polytechnic’s drying research center has been working on ways to dry paper, pulp, and other materials using the concentrated energy found in lasers. The lasers Yagoobi’s team is using are not the lasers of the public imagination, like a red beam zapping at alien enemies. Though the lasers are quite strong — they can melt metal, Yagoobi says — they are dispersed over a larger area, spreading out the energy to evenly and gently dry the target material. 

Testing on food products has shown that the technology can work. Now, researchers need to learn more about how the laser energy affects different materials to make sure the product quality is not compromised during the drying process. 

“For paper, it’s important to make sure the tensile strength is not degrading,” Yagoobi said. “For food products, you want to make sure the color and sensory qualities do not degrade.”

Therefore, before the system is ready for a commercial pilot, the team has to gather a lot more data about how much laser energy is incident on different parts of the surface and how deeply the energy penetrates different materials. Once gathered, this data will be used to determine what system sizes and operating conditions are best for different materials, and to design laser modules for each intended use. 

Once these details are worked out, the laser technology can be installed in new commercial-scale drying equipment or existing systems. “This particular technology will be easy to retrofit,” Yagoobi said. 

Industrial sources were responsible for about 1.3 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States in 2023, about 28% of the country’s overall emissions, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Heating processes, often powered by natural gas or other fossil fuels, are responsible for about half of those emissions, said Evan Gillespie, one of the co-founders of Industrious Labs. Many industrial drying processes require high temperatures that have traditionally been hard to reach without fossil fuels, giving the sector a reputation as hard to decarbonize, Gillespie said.

“The key challenge here is: How do you remove natural gas as a heating source inside industrial facilities?” said Richard Hart, industry director at the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. “The scale of what is happening in industry is enormous, and the potential for change is very powerful.”

To make the new technology effective, industry leaders and policymakers will need to commit to reinvesting in old facilities, Gillespie noted. And doing so will be well worth it by strengthening an economically important industry, keeping jobs in place, and creating important environmental benefits, he added.

“There’s often this old story of tensions between climate and jobs,” Gillespie said. “But what we’re trying to do is modernize these facilities and stabilize them so they’ll be around for decades to come.”

Paper and pulp mills produce half of Maine’s industrial CO2 emissions. Could lasers help slash their climate impact?    is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Nearly a year after Massachusetts regulators laid out a vision for the state’s evolution from natural gas distribution to clean energy use, lawmakers are coalescing around legislation that would start converting principles into policy. 

The wide-ranging climate bill includes several provisions that would allow utilities to explore alternatives to gas and empower regulators to place more limits on the expansion and continuation of natural gas infrastructure, changes that supporters say are critical to a successful transition away from fossil fuels. 

“This bill is a major first step in empowering [regulators] to do something rather than just rubber stamping the utilities’ plans,” said Lisa Cunningham, co-founder of ZeroCarbonMA.

Natural gas is currently the primary heating source for half the homes in Massachusetts, a number that needs to drop if the state is going to meet its ambitious climate goal of net-zero emissions by 2050, advocates and state leaders say. In 2020, the state department of public utilities opened an investigation into the role natural gas utilities would play in the transition to cleaner energy. In December 2023, the department issued a lengthy order concluding that the state must move “beyond gas” and outlining a broad framework for making the shift. 

Lawmakers attempted to start turning these general ideas into binding law earlier this year, but the legislative session closed at the end of July before the Senate and House reconciled the differences between their versions of a climate bill. Legislators returned to work this fall and hammered out an agreement, and the Senate passed the resulting bill last month. The House speaker has said the body will vote when it returns to formal session later this year. The bill is generally expected to pass and be signed into law. 

“A lot of people were skeptical we’d get a bill at all, but I’m happy with where this bill ended up,” said Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director for climate nonprofit Acadia Center. “It shows a step toward that needed urgency.”

At the heart of the bill’s energy transition provisions is a change to the definition of a natural gas utility that allows the companies to also provide geothermal power. Networked geothermal — systems that draw heat from the earth and deliver it to a group of buildings — is widely seen as a promising alternative to natural gas, and both National Grid and Eversource have pilot projects in the works. However, current law prevents the utilities from pursuing such projects without specific authorization from regulators. The climate bill would remove this barrier, making it easier for gas companies to explore new approaches to business.

“The gas utilities deeply need a new business model that can help them step into the future,” said Audrey Schulman, founder of climate solutions incubator HEETlabs. “That allows them to potentially evolve.”

This definition change supports other provisions aimed at slowing the expansion of natural gas use in the state. The bill would end the requirement that natural gas utilities provide service to any customer in their service area who requests it, with few exceptions. Under the new law, utilities could decline these requests when other alternatives are available. 

The bill would also allow regulators to consider the impact of emissions when deciding whether to approve requests to expand natural gas service into new communities. In 2023, the state approved a request to bring gas service to the central Massachusetts town of Douglas. Regulators at the time noted that the decision works against the state’s goal of phasing out natural gas, but said the law gave them no choice but to approve the plan. Provisions in the climate bill would untie regulators’ hands in such cases in the future.

“The [Department of Public Utilities] can consider the public interest, including climate, it doesn’t have to say yes to more gas service,” said Amy Boyd Rabin, vice president of policy at the Environmental League of Massachusetts. And the inclusion of geothermal in gas utilities’ definition means “now there’s also something else to offer the customers.” 

Another major element of the bill would reform the state’s Gas System Enhancement Plans program, which encourages utilities to repair or replace pipes in the state’s aging and leak-prone natural gas distribution system. Clean energy advocates have often argued that these plans are problematic, investing billions of ratepayer dollars into shoring up a system that is increasingly obsolete. The climate bill would allow utilities to choose to retire segments of pipe rather than fixing them. 

“For the first time ever they are able to look at a pipe and say, ‘You know what, this is not worth the cost,’” Murray said. “We don’t want ratepayers shouldering the burden for a lot of stuff that’s not going to be useful in five to 10 years.”

Environmental advocates praised the bill’s gas provisions, and are already focusing on what more there is to be done. Several would have liked to see a more aggressive phasing out of Gas System Enhancement Plans, with a specific end date. Others champion an expansion of a pilot program that allows cities and towns to ban fossil fuel use in new construction and major renovations. 

“There is no reason why communities that want to enact this via home rule petition should be restricted from enacting the will of their constituents,” Cunningham said. 

In the meantime, advocates are ready to see the climate bill turning into reality. 

“There’s a lot of good stuff in there that will do a lot of good for the commonwealth,” Boyd Rabin says.

Massachusetts legislation looks to remove barriers to the state’s shift from natural gas is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

More than seven years after New Hampshire regulators first approved the idea of using community solar to create savings for low-income households, electric bill discounts are finally on the horizon for the first batch of participants.

“There has been this rhetoric that we want solar to benefit low-income people, but whenever we try to propose programs that will make that happen, they’ve been immensely slow to roll out,” said Sam Evans-Brown, executive director of the nonprofit Clean Energy New Hampshire. “But despite being frustrated, I am really glad this is finally happening.”

The state energy department is reviewing seven proposals for community solar arrays that will allocate a portion of the credits they receive for sending power onto the grid to low-income households in the form of credits on their monthly bills. The projects selected will work with the utilities to identify customers receiving discounted rates, who will be automatically enrolled in the program.

Community solar is widely considered an important strategy for extending the benefits of renewable energy to people unable to take advantage of rooftop solar. Nationally, some two-thirds of households can’t install solar panels, generally because they don’t own their home, don’t have a suitable roof, or can’t afford the cost of the array, said Kate Daniel, Northeast regional director for the Coalition for Community Solar Access. Those obstacles are particularly challenging for low-income households, which are more likely to rent, need costly roof repairs, or lack the cash or credit scores needed to pay for panels, she added.

Community solar, on the other hand, allows these households to buy renewable energy, supporting climate action and saving money. Recent research from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that community solar users have, on average, 23% lower incomes than rooftop solar adopters and are six times more likely to live in multifamily homes, suggesting community solar helps increase adoption of solar among these populations. 

Why New Hampshire is important

Many states — including New Hampshire’s northeastern neighbors like Massachusetts and New York — have created programs to encourage the development of community solar projects that provide financial benefits to low-income households. But New Hampshire is falling behind: A recent report by the National Renewable Energy Laboratories, a federally funded research center, identifies New Hampshire as the state with the smallest share of its solar production going to disadvantaged households. 

“We really have to ask ourselves why that is,” Evans-Brown said. 

The first mandate for utilities to develop a program using community solar to benefit low-income households came as part of the order establishing the state’s current net metering system in 2017. Before a program could get off the ground, the state legislature passed a 2019 bill boosting the net metering rate for community solar projects serving low-income households, and the state suspended the earlier requirement until 2021, declaring it could be redundant given the new bill. 

In 2021, the state asked for — and received — an additional suspension until July 2022, arguing that it had only finalized the eligibility rules for the net metering adder in September 2020, and therefore the utilities should not have to develop their own programs until the adder had a full two years to potentially spark development. 

Then, in July 2022, the legislature passed a bill requiring the creation of a new community solar program including projects totalling up to six megawatts of capacity each year, each providing at least 25% of the credits it generates to low- or moderate-income customers. Customers will be automatically enrolled, but given ten days to opt out.

This program opened for proposals in December 2023, with a deadline of February 29, 2024. The state is now reviewing the seven proposals it received. If the applications total more than the six-megawatt cap, priority will be given to projects proposing greater benefits for low-income households.

“We are hammering out some of the final details with the utilities before we make the official designations,” said Joshua Elliott, director of policy and programs for the New Hampshire energy department. “Once we get the details of the processes finalized, we expect this process to move far more quickly in the future.”

‘To be determined’

There are elements of the program to like, advocates said. 

Traditionally, it has been difficult for solar developers to cost-effectively find and recruit low-income customers for community solar. New Hampshire’s strategy of working with utilities to automatically enroll households that have already been identified streamlines the process. The state’s plan to review the program each year is also a strength, said Kirt Mayland, a visiting professor at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law and Graduate School. 

Uncertainties remain, however. Enrolling customers from the utilities’ electric assistance programs may be more efficient for developers, but it runs the risk of missing a lot of low-income households that are eligible for the discounted rate but not signed up. To reach the largest possible number of potential subscribers, a program should also accept households enrolled in other means-tested programs, like Medicaid or SNAP, or even simply allow customers to self-attest their qualifying income. 

“The evidence on states with self-attestation has found there is very little fraud — it really does get over the barriers,” said Daniel, who is not very familiar with the New Hampshire program but has worked extensively with community solar in best practices. 

The small size of the program could mean small savings for each participating household, Mayland said.

“There’s a concern about how much money is actually getting placed on the low-income customer’s bill — sometimes it doesn’t blow you away,” he said. “It’s to be determined whether it’s an effective program to help out the low-income community in New Hampshire.”

New Hampshire’s low-income community solar program is finally nearing the starting line  is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Environmental advocates are hailing a decision by Massachusetts regulators that will give more than 1.3 million households access to lower winter electricity prices if they use a heat pump in their home.

Public utilities regulators on Monday ordered National Grid, the state’s second-largest electric company, to develop a lower, seasonal rate for houses with heat pumps. The decision comes three months after the state approved a similar rate plan by Unitil, an electric utility that serves 108,500 Massachusetts households.

“They hit the nail on the head here,” said Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director for climate and energy nonprofit Acadia Center. 

Heat pumps are a major element of Massachusetts’ strategy for going carbon neutral by 2050. However, high electricity prices and historically low natural gas prices make switching to a heat pump financially difficult for many people. Unitil’s pricing plan is an attempt to bridge that affordability gap and make heat pumps more accessible, said spokesman Alec O’Meara. 

National Grid had proposed a technology-neutral “electrification rate” that would have offered a discounted rate to high-volume electric consumers, whether the power demand was coming from an efficient heat pump, inefficient electric resistance heat, or even a pool heater. Environmental activists, advocates for low-income households, a solar industry group, the state energy department, and the state attorney general all filed comments objecting to this approach and pushing for a heat pump-specific rate like Unitil’s. 

“The proposal that National Grid had filed wasn’t going to do anything to ensure that customers who opted into their electrification rate were actually participating in our decarbonization efforts,” said Priya Gandbhir, a senior attorney with the Conservation Law Foundation, one of the groups that pushed for a heat pump specific rate. 

In their order, regulators sided with the objectors. They concluded that National Grid’s proposal did not meet the state’s legal mandates to consider the impact of rate design changes on greenhouse gas emissions and energy efficiency, as opposed to Unitil’s approach, which removes a barrier to lower emissions and greater efficiency. 

“The heat pump rate will reduce kilowatt hour electricity rates for these customers during winter when heat pumps replace fossil fuel heating equipment, furthering the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions,” said Alanna Kelly, spokesperson for the state department of public utilities. 

The order also encouraged National Grid to create the rate quickly so it could be in effect before the coming winter heating season.

More good news for heat pumps in Massachusetts, as regulators order National Grid to develop special rate is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Residents with heat pumps in four Massachusetts towns will soon pay hundreds of dollars less for their electricity over the winter, thanks to a new pricing approach advocates hope will become a model for utilities across the state. 

State regulators in June approved a plan by utility Unitil to lower the distribution portion of the electric rate from November to April for customers who use heat pumps, the first time this pricing structure will be used in the state. It’s a shift the company hopes will make it more financially feasible for residents of its service area to choose the higher-efficiency, lower-emissions heat source. 

“We asked, is there a way we can structure the rates that would be fair and help customers adopt a heat pump?” said Unitil spokesman Alec O‘Meara. “We recognize that energy affordability is very important to our customers.”

A balancing act

Electric heat pumps are a major part of Massachusetts’ strategy for reaching its goal of going carbon-neutral by 2050. Today, nearly 80% of homes in the state use natural gas, oil, or another fossil fuel for space heating. Looking to upend that ratio, the state has set a target of having heat pumps in 500,000 homes by 2030. 

One of the major obstacles to this goal is cost. To address part of this barrier, Massachusetts offers rebates of up to $16,000 for income-qualified homeowners and $10,000 for higher-income residents for heat pump equipment. 

The cost of powering these systems though, can be its own problem. Natural gas prices have been trending precipitously downward for the past two years and Massachusetts has long had some of the highest electricity prices in the country. This disparity can be particularly stark in the winter, when consumers using natural gas for heating get priority, requiring the grid to lean more heavily on dirtier, more expensive oil- and coal-fueled power plants, said Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director for climate and energy nonprofit Acadia Center.

So switching from natural gas to an electric heat source — even a more efficient one like a heat pump — doesn’t always mean savings for a consumer, especially those with lower incomes. 

“Electric rates are disproportionately higher than gas rates in the region,” Murray said. 

Unitil’s new winter pricing structure is an attempt to rebalance that equation. In New England, electric load on the grid is generally much lower in the winter, when people turn off their air conditioners and switch over to gas or oil heating. That means that the grid, built to accommodate summer’s peak demand, has plenty of capacity for the added load of new heat pumps coming online — no new infrastructure needs to be built to handle this demand (for now, at least). 

“The marginal cost of adding demand is lower,” said Mark Kresowik, senior policy director at American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, which supports heat pump-specific rates. 

Unitil, which provides electricity to 108,500 households, decided to let customers share in that lower marginal cost. The company estimates customers will save about six cents per kilowatt-hour, which would work out to a monthly savings of more than $100 for a home using about 2,000 kilowatt-hours per month. The new rate should go into effect in early 2025, O’Meara said. 

Statewide solutions?

As Unitil is preparing to deploy its heat pump rate, environmental advocates and other stakeholders are pushing for adoption of this strategy beyond Unitil’s relatively limited territory.

Public utilities regulators are in the middle of considering a rate case filed by National Grid, which serves some 1.3 million customers in Massachusetts. National Grid has proposed what it calls a technology-neutral “electrification rate,” which would provide discounts to certain high-volume energy users, which would include heat pump users. 

However, several advocates for low-income households and clean energy — including Acadia Center, Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, Low-Income Energy Affordability Network — as well as the state energy department and Attorney General Andrea Campbell argue that this approach is inadequate. They’ve submitted comments urging regulators to require National Grid to offer a heat pump rate similar to Unitil’s plan, but modified to work within National Grid’s pricing model. 

“Every intervenor in the docket who commented on the electrification proposal in any capacity was negative on it,” Murray said. “And the [department of public utilities] in its questioning seemed fairly skeptical as well.”

National Grid declined to comment on the pending rate case. 

The electrification rate, opponents argue, would lower costs not just for households with heat pumps, but also for those with inefficient electric resistance heating and even heated pools, effectively running counter to the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

“The ‘electrification’ proposal would apply to all electricity consumption, whether or not consistent with the Commonwealth’s climate policy of reducing greenhouse gases,” said Jerrold Oppenheim, a lawyer for the Low-Income Weatherization and Fuel Assistance Program Network and the Low-Income Energy Affordability Network. 

It would also do nothing to encourage heat pump adoption among low- and moderate-income households, they say: Some 48% of low-income customers interested in switching to a heat pump would actually see bill increases of up to 33%, according to a brief filed by Oppenheim for the network.

Beyond the National Grid rate case, other stakeholders are also pushing for seasonal heat pump rates. The state has convened an Interagency Rates Working Group to study and make recommendations on the challenges of changing how electric rates are designed to encourage electrification of home heating and adoption of electric vehicles. In August the group released an analysis that found seasonal rates created significant savings for homes with heat pumps. 

“They came to the same conclusion, that this is the right approach,” Kresowik said.

Eventually, the introduction of advanced metering technology will simplify the process of applying lower rates to desired uses, like heat pumps and electric vehicles. But the full deployment of these systems is still several years in the future, and action to ease adoption of heat pumps must be taken much sooner, advocates argue. 

In the meantime, many have expressed some optimism that regulators will require National Grid to make its electrification proposal more responsive to the state’s climate and equity priorities. 

“I would be surprised if the electrification pricing proposal exists as is in the final [regulatory] order,” Murray said.

Advocates hope utility’s winter heat pump rate discount becomes model for Massachusetts utilities is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Solar customers and clean energy advocates are waiting to see if New Hampshire will continue its system for compensating customers who share excess power on the grid. 

State regulators at a recent hearing seemed unconvinced about the policy’s benefits, despite support from utilities, customers, and hundreds of residents who submitted public comments on a proposed extension. 

“This commission is highly skeptical of anything involving energy efficiency or clean energy, and focused almost solely on cost,” said Nick Krakoff, senior attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation in New Hampshire. 

These compensation plans, generally referred to as net metering, are widely considered one of the most effective policies for encouraging more solar adoption. Recently, however, several states have changed or considered changing their programs, as utilities object that the policies are too costly and some politicians and policymakers push for more purely market-based approaches. 

New Hampshire’s net metering rules haven’t been modified since they were established in 2017. The state’s public utilities commission opened a case to consider the question of whether and how to adjust the rules in September 2022. A year into the proceedings, the state’s major electric utilities — Eversource, Liberty Utilities, and Unitil — came out in support of continuing the existing system of net metering, despite the tendency of utilities nationwide to consistently push for lower net metering rates. The move was a welcome surprise for environmental advocates. 

“If you don’t have a compensation rate that’s high enough, you’re not going to have customers that are going to want to invest in solar panels or other renewable energy,” Krakoff said.

Striking an agreement

In early August, a diverse coalition including the utilities, the Conservation Law Foundation, Clean Energy New Hampshire, Granite State Hydropower Association, Standard Power of America, and Walmart reached a settlement agreement about the future of the policy. 

The agreement calls for the state to keep the current net metering structure in place for two years; at the end of two years, utilities would propose time-of-use rates for net metering, so the compensation rate more closely matches the real-time value of the power being sent into the grid. Also, any projects that join the net metering program during those two years will receive the same compensation for 20 years before transitioning into whatever new system is created by then (currently the compensation ends in 2040). 

An influx of public comments has also reflected wide support for the tenets of the agreement. Nearly 450 comments were submitted since the beginning of the year, more than Sam Evans-Brown, executive director of Clean Energy New Hampshire, has ever seen in a public utilities case, he said. The vast majority urge the commission to maintain the current net metering system. 

Peterborough resident Brian Stiefel was among those who filed comments. He and his wife installed 37 solar panels on their home in 2021, at a cost of $51,000. Though the solar doesn’t fully cover their electric bills, it provides $2,000 to $3,000 in savings per year, in large part due to net metering. 

“A big part of the decision to do this was the fact that the state would approve us for net metering,” Stiefel said in an interview. “If that’s going to change it could have a significant financial impact on everybody who has panels and is set up with net metering.”

An uncertain path forward

However, clean energy advocates say they have seen some signs in recent months that the commission might not be paying much attention to the benefits the system creates, while seeking out evidence that net metering creates a cost burden for consumers who aren’t part of the program. 

“The concern is that the chair is looking for a cost shift and is going to do whatever it takes to find one,” Evans-Brown said. 

Last spring, the commissioner requested a series of records in the case, several focused on gathering information about other states’ net metering programs — information that did not seem relevant to the decisions needed in New Hampshire, Evans-Brown said. The commission also requested, in a different docket, information about stranded cost recovery, which it then placed into the record on the net metering case as well, a move energy advocates interpreted as an attempt to focus on costs to the exclusion of benefits.

Then, in hearings on August 20 and 22, the commissioners asked questions that seemed focused on finding costs being passed on to consumers, even though there is simply no such evidence on the record, Krakoff said.

Advocates’ concerns are magnified by the commission’s history: In 2021, the commission drastically reduced funding for the state’s energy efficiency rebate and incentives. Though the utilities, consumer advocates, and environmental groups had come to an agreement to raise funding for the programs, the commission claimed that the program would burden consumers and that the state should focus on promoting market-based energy efficiency services. 

Current commission chair Daniel Goldner was one of the commissioners who signed the energy efficiency decision. During his confirmation hearing earlier that year, Goldner expressed skepticism about climate science, and advocates raised concerns about his lack of experience in the energy field.

“They expressed strong skepticism of energy efficiency and actually gutted the program,” Krakoff said, comparing that case to the present-day net metering proceedings. “It’s very concerning.”

Now advocates, homeowners, and other stakeholders can only wait to see what the commission decides and when they decide it. An order could come by the end of the year, said Evans-Brown, or the commissioners could decide to push the matter well into the new year — there are no deadlines set on the process. 

Should the commission in some way reject the settlement, there is still hope the legislature would take action to protect net metering. As part of the proceeding, state Sens. Kevin Avard, Howard Pearl, and David Watters submitted a letter explaining their belief that reducing net metering compensation would be against the goals of the legislature. 

“It is the intent of the legislature to preserve a viable net metering program in the state of New Hampshire, and we will take action to do so if necessary,” they wrote.

Resolving the question through legislative action, however, would leave the matter open and undecided for even longer, making it harder to encourage solar development in the state, advocates noted. 

“We were expecting this to be a challenging docket when this was first announced,” Evans-Brown said. “It’s frustrating, but not surprising.”

In net metering case, New Hampshire regulators focus on costs while ignoring benefits, advocates say is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

A year and a half since Massachusetts introduced an optional new building code aimed at lowering fossil fuel use, climate activists are heartened by how quickly cities and towns are adopting the new guidelines. 

The new code, known as the specialized stretch code, became law in 2023. Since then, 45 municipalities representing about 30% of the state’s population have voted to adopt its guidelines. The code is already active in 33 of these communities and scheduled to take effect over the next year in another 12.

“That is just an astounding statistic to me,” said climate advocate Lisa Cunningham, one of the founders of decarbonization nonprofit ZeroCarbonMA. “The rollout has been, quite frankly, amazing.”

Massachusetts has long been a leader in using opt-in building codes to push for decarbonization of the built environment. In 2009, the state introduced the country’s first stretch code, an alternative version of the building code that includes more stringent energy efficiency requirements. Municipalities must vote to adopt the stretch code, and the vast majority have done so: As of June, just 8.5% of residents lived in the 50 towns and cities without a stretch code. 

The specialized stretch code takes this approach a step farther. The goal is to create a code that will help achieve target emissions reductions from 2025 to 2050, when the state aims to be carbon-neutral. In 2021, the legislature called on the state to create an additional opt-in code that would get close to requiring net-zero carbon emissions from new construction. 

“We want to work towards decarbonizing those buildings, right from the start, as we look to a future in 2050 while we are net-zero in greenhouse gas emissions,” said Elizabeth Mahony, commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources.

At the same time, electrified, energy-efficient homes will mean lower energy costs for residents over time, more comfortable and healthier indoor air, and more stable indoor temperatures when power outages occur, she said. 

The construction industry, meanwhile, has concerns about the measure’s impact on upfront costs. 

Getting to net-zero buildings

The resulting code doesn’t require buildings to achieve net-zero emissions right away, but attempts to ensure any new construction will be ready to go carbon-neutral before 2050.

There are a few pathways for compliance. A newly built home can use fossil fuels for space heating, water heating, cooking, or drying or be built fully electrified. If the new home uses any fossil fuels, however, it must be built to a higher energy efficiency standard, be wired to ready the house for future electrification, and include solar panels onsite where feasible. In all cases, homes must be wired for at least one electric vehicle charging station.

Larger, multifamily buildings must be built to Passive House standards, a certification that requires the dramatic reduction of energy use as compared to similar buildings of the same size and type. Single-family homes can also choose to pursue Passive House certification. 

Decarbonization advocates are pleased with the rollout so far. The state’s major cities, including Boston, Worcester, and Cambridge, were all quick to adopt the code. In most municipalities the vote to adopt the specialized code has been near-unanimous, said Cunningham.

And more communities are considering the specialized code.

“We’re talking to a lot of communities that are contemplating it for their town meetings this fall,” Mahony said. “We know there is a growing sense out there of wanting to do this.” 

 The key to convincing cities and towns that the code is a good idea is for municipal governments to understand and frame the code as a consumer protection measure, rather than an added burden, Cunningham said. The requirements of the specialized code along with state and federal incentives can save on construction costs upfront, and will ensure buildings cost less to operate during their lifetime, offering significant benefits to residents, she said. 

“At the point of construction this is an incremental expense – it’s barely even a blip,” she said. “Then it directly reduces your future electricity bills.”

A troublesome transition?

Many in the construction industry, however, disagree with Cunningham’s take. Emerson Clauss III, a director with the Home Builders and Remodelers Association of Massachusetts, has found the equipment needed to reach the high standards in the code is more expensive than its authors counted on, and supply chain issues are causing even higher prices.  

“It’s had quite a rough start to it,” Clauss said. “It’s adding considerable cost to new housing.” 

He also worries that the high cost of electricity now — Massachusetts electricity prices are the third highest in the country — spells near-term financial trouble for homeowners that feel forced to go all-electric. 

“The idea that it’s going to cost less 20 years from now — what does that do for people who need to get into a house now?” he asked.

Furthermore, the creation of a new optional code, he said, adds another variable for builders already jumping between the basic code and the previous stretch code, as well as learning the new rules in ten communities banning fossil fuels as part of a state pilot program. Even municipal building directors aren’t able to keep up, Clauss said, recalling a confused call with a suburban building inspector who needed 20 minutes to confirm it was OK to install a natural gas line in a new home. 

In Cambridge, one of the first cities to adopt the specialized code, Assistant Commissioner of Inspectional Services Jacob Lazzara noted there was some confusion at the outset, but time and proactive communication from the city helped ease the transition. The city has held trainings, created materials to hand out to builders and design professionals, and fine-tuned internal communications to make sure the staff is all well informed. 

“There was a little bit of shock for everyone at first, but I think we’re in a good place right now,” Lazzara said.

Massachusetts cities are quickly embracing new emission-slashing building code option is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Massachusetts has awarded $53 million — and announced plans for additional funding — to allow affordable housing operators to execute energy efficiency retrofits that are expected to reduce carbon emissions, cut energy bills, and create healthier, more comfortable homes for residents. 

The state in late July announced the second round of awards in the Affordable Housing Decarbonization Grant Program, allocating $26.1 million to five organizations to improve insulation, tighten building envelopes, and switch to heat pump heating and cooling systems. These grants come seven months after an initial round of $27.4 million was awarded to seven affordable housing operators statewide. 

“This has been a really critical funding stream for moving forward critical energy projects at some of our family public housing sites,” said Joel Wool, deputy administrator for sustainability and capital transformation at the Boston Housing Authority, which received grants in both rounds.

Along with the most recent round of awards, the state also announced it would invest another $40 million into the program in anticipation of giving out another set of grants in the fall.

The program was designed to address two major policy goals: decarbonization and addressing the state’s affordable housing crisis. 

Massachusetts has set the ambitious goal of going carbon-neutral by 2050. Buildings — which contribute 35% of the state’s carbon emissions — are a particularly important sector to target for decarbonization. This means finding ways to retrofit the state’s existing housing stock, much of which is drafty, heated by fossil fuels, and decades — or even centuries — old. 

At the same time, Massachusetts is experiencing an acute housing crisis. State officials estimate at least 200,000 new homes are needed to accommodate demand by 2030. Finding an affordable home is even more challenging for lower-income residents faced with soaring rents and home prices — and often, high energy bills. 

“We have such a housing crisis in Massachusetts that we want to do anything we can to create more housing, but also to make the housing we have now a better place to live,” said state Energy Department Commissioner Elizabeth Mahony. “These are investments in our infrastructure.”

Nonprofit Worcester Common Ground received an $820,000 grant in the latest round that it will use to complete deep energy retrofits on four buildings that were last updated some 30 years ago. The money will allow the renovations to include air sealing, more energy-efficient windows, and extra insulation. The grant will also allow the buildings to go fully electric, including with air source heat pumps that will provide lower-cost, more comfortable heating and cooling.

“Even though it’s a higher upfront cost, the hope is that maybe it reduces expenses going forward,” said Timothy Gilbert, project manager for Worcester Common Ground. “It might sound a little cheesy but we really do care about the well-being of the folks who live in our houses.”

In most cases, the grant money is being combined with other funding to allow more complete — and even downright ambitious — upgrades. In Worcester, other funding sources will pay for rooftop solar panels that will make the newly energy-efficient buildings even more cost-effective and environmentally friendly. The Boston Housing Authority is using its latest $5.8 million award as part of a larger project that aims to completely decarbonize the Franklin Fields housing development in the Dorchester neighborhood by combining energy efficiency upgrades and Boston’s first networked geothermal system. 

In the Boston neighborhood of Roxbury, the Madison Park Development Corporation is receiving $13.5 million from the Affordable Housing Decarbonization Grant Program to do work at its 331-unit Orchard Gardens development. But it is also seeking out other sources to meet the $20 million expected cost of the planned sustainability upgrades.

“It’s a big property and the heart of one of Boston’s oldest, most diverse, most underserved neighborhoods,” said Oren Richkin, senior project manager for the organization. “This grant money is pivotal for this project.”

Supporters of the program are expecting it to strengthen the state’s ability to respond to climate change in the future as well. Switching affordable housing units from fossil fuel heating to heat pump heating and cooling will allow residents to stay comfortable and safe in their own homes during increasingly hot summers, Wool said. 

The funding could also help nudge the ideas of deep energy retrofits and electrification more into the mainstream, Mahony said. 

“We are essentially socializing these programs — the more we do it, the more people will get used to the ideas,” she said. 

As the recipients of the first round of grants begin their projects, the state is starting to learn how to operate the program more effectively. The state has already, for example, started providing some technical assistance to organizations interested in applying for future rounds of funding. Continued conversations with building owners and nonprofits will be essential to creating an even stronger program moving forward, Mahony said.

“We’re setting ourselves up for success in the future,” she said.

Massachusetts awards $53 million to help affordable housing operators cut emissions and make homes healthier is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Massachusetts officials, advocates, and businesses are hoping proposed changes to the state’s solar incentive program will help reinvigorate a flagging market and give more disadvantaged residents access to the benefits of renewable energy. 

“The program has been pretty set in stone since it first launched,” said Katie Moffitt, project development manager for solar investment firm Sunwealth. “I am very excited about making the program more responsive to the needs of the solar industry and allowing us to adapt with the times.”

The state’s energy department earlier this month unveiled an extensive set of proposed adjustments to the Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target, or SMART, program, the first major overhaul since the program launched in 2018. The suggested changes include strategies to ensure subsidy rates keep up with the solar market, incentives to encourage more installation of solar on buildings and previously developed land, and plans to make solar power more accessible to low- and moderate-income residents. 

The state is accepting feedback on the proposal until August 2, and expects to file final draft regulations in the fall. 

The proposal comes at a moment when the state has seen significant declines in new solar power coming online. In 2021, Massachusetts saw more than 600 megawatts of new solar installed, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association; in 2022 and 2023, less than 400 megawatts were installed each year. Yet the state’s climate plan calls for at least 27 gigawatts of solar to meet its goal of going carbon-neutral by 2050.

“We know, based on historical deployment rates, that we’re falling behind those goals,” said Samantha Meserve, director of the state’s renewable and alternative energy division. “We need to spur more development.”

Adaptable rates

Much of the slowdown in solar development is due to a mismatch between market conditions and state incentive rates, said those in the industry. SMART works by providing a fixed rate for every kilowatt-hour of power generated by a solar installation, with increased rates (called “adders”) available to projects that advance certain policy goals, like serving low-income populations. The set rates were intended to help encourage development with financial support and also create stability and predictability for developers.

The base rates were set when the program launched in 2018, and were designed to decline as more installations were built. The idea was that the solar market would gain steam and prices would continue falling, making state support less necessary over time. 

However, the market did not cooperate with this vision: Supply chain problems made equipment more expensive, inflation increased costs for materials and labor, and rising electricity rates canceled out much — and sometimes all — of the financial benefit the SMART payments provided. 

“That model theoretically would have worked fine in a noninflationary environment, but worked very poorly in the inflationary period,” said Isaac Baker, co-CEO of solar developer Resonant Energy. 

The proposal tackles this problem by instituting an annual system for setting rates. Each year, the state will undertake an analysis of the current market conditions and progress toward state solar targets, and use this information to determine the program’s rates and capacity for the following year. Developers will provide real cost details to ensure the accuracy of the process. 

“We achieved a lot of certainty in the last program, but we now need certainty with flexibility,” Meserve said. “We know we’re losing momentum to get to some of our goals because of that certainty.”

The proposal’s approach to deciding how much capacity to support each year, however, has some in the industry a bit wary. For the first two years, the capacity for projects larger than 25 kilowatts would be set at 300 megawatts; in subsequent years, the annual analysis would determine the capacity. 

This limit does not help encourage more development, said Lindsay Bourgoine, vice president for policy for the Solar Energy Business Association of New England. And the starting point of 300 megawatts a year does not come close to supporting the state’s goal of hitting 10 gigawatts of solar power by 2030, she said. 

“We remain pretty concerned about the use of caps,” Bourgoine said. 

Getting siting right

Additional changes to the program aim to encourage more solar installations on buildings, parking lots, and other already-developed land.

“We’re making it more attractive to site projects in the built environment,” Meserve said.

A 2023 study found the state has highly suitable sites for 54 gigawatts of rooftop and canopy solar potential. At the same time, some environmental groups have been raising concerns about large solar installations disturbing important wildlife habitats and forests that can pull carbon from the air.

“We can’t be doing that with state money,” said Michelle Manion, vice president of policy and advocacy for Mass Audubon. 

However, the economics of building large, ground-mounted arrays on previously undeveloped land have generally been more favorable. The new SMART proposal lays out several ideas to rebalance that equation. The proposal would lift the cap on subsidizing developments smaller than 25 kilowatts, a category that includes most residential projects and many installations for nonprofits, houses of worship, and small businesses. 

The proposal also increases adders connected to projects in the built environment. The adder for building-mounted projects would go from 2 cents to an estimated 3 cents, and the adder for building over a landfill would increase from 4 cents to 6 cents. 

Canopy-mounted systems would see both an increased adder — from 6 cents to 8 cents per kWh of energy produced — and a new definition. Whereas the current program awards a canopy adder only to projects over parking lots, pedestrian walkways, and canals, the revamped program would widen the criteria to include any array mounted on a structure high enough to maintain the function of the area beneath. This change opens the door for canopy projects shading everything from junkyards and gas stations to compost piles and picnic areas. 

“You’ll start to see a lot more interesting and creative applications like that,” said Ben Underwood, Baker’s co-CEO at Resonant Energy.

A new adder, likely starting out at 4 cents per kilowatt-hour, would also be created for raised racking on rooftops: mounting systems that raise solar panels up high enough that other equipment such as climate control systems can still operate and be accessed beneath them. This addition has the potential to unlock enormous amounts of roof space for development, Underwood said. On some of Resonant’s smaller projects, it could even triple the size of projects that could fit on a roof, he said. 

While the changes incentivize solar in the built environment, they also attempt to narrow the criteria for building in previously undeveloped greenfields to make sure only “cream of the crop” sites are developed, Meserve said. While the existing program decides whether land can be developed by looking at the entire parcel, the updated iteration would look more closely at the footprint of a proposed array to make sure it is not disturbing the most valuable green spaces and habitats.

The proposal also calls for an increased “subtractor” — a reduction in the base SMART rate — for greenfield developments. The rate would go down 6 cents plus an additional 0.4 cents per acre of land affected, a significant increase from the current subtractor which tops out at 0.1 cents. Developers can earn back the 6 cents through a community engagement adder by proving they’ve worked with the community to mitigate the impacts the project will have, an element Meserve said will help the state focus on only the best developments. 

Bourgoine, however, said many solar installers are worried that the hefty subtractor will slow down solar development too much at a time when the state needs to be accelerating its move to renewable energy. 

“There are situations where the subtractor could cause damage where it doesn’t need to,” she said. 

Sharing the benefits

New strategies could also make the benefits of solar energy more accessible to low-income households, which have so far made up only a very small fraction of the consumers using SMART-subsidized power. 

The proposal would expand the list of facilities that qualify for low-income adders to include deed-restricted affordable condominiums, homeless shelters, domestic violence shelters, and other affordable housing buildings not covered by the current definition. 

The new plan would also broaden the definition of a low-income customer. Under current guidelines, a low-income customer is someone who receives a discounted rate from the electric utility or who lives in a designated low-income area. The new definition would also include consumers enrolled in other needs-based programs to qualify as low-income, and those who self-attest that they fall under the set income caps. 

“This will make participating in low-income solar a much more accessible option,” Moffitt said. 

Furthermore, community solar developments will now be required to enroll a minimum of 40% low-income customers to receive the community solar adder of 7 cents. Though community solar is fairly widespread in Massachusetts, customers have generally been those with higher incomes and credit scores. The current program includes an adder for low-income community solar, but it is not often used because of the obstacles of locating customers — obstacles the new definitions would lower significantly.

“This new program will lead to there being a massive shift in value coming from stand-alone community solar,” Baker said. “A huge amount of that value is going to be directed to low-income tenants and ratepayers throughout the commonwealth, which is a really positive step.”

Massachusetts aims to ‘adapt with the times’ with updates to solar incentive program is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

A recently signed New Hampshire law makes significant changes to the operations of the state’s Renewable Energy Fund, directing money to help towns and cities develop municipal solar projects and ending a residential solar rebate program that was generally viewed as deeply flawed. 

“The previously existing program had sort of run its course,” said Joshua Elliott, director of policy and programs in the state energy department.

The Renewable Energy Fund, created in 2007, is a pool of money the state uses to support renewable and thermal energy initiatives through grants and rebates. It is funded by annual compliance payments made by electric service providers that failed to buy the legally mandated proportion of their power from renewable sources in the previous year. 

The sum the fund collects can vary widely from year to year, ranging from as low as $1.3 million in 2009 to $19.1 million in 2011. More recently, revenue has hovered around $7 million. 

This money is then allocated across several programs including those supporting solar hot water heating, low-and-moderate income community solar, and wood pellet boilers and furnaces for residential, commercial, and industrial customers. 

Advancing municipal solar

The new funding for municipal solar projects represents the next step for an approach just getting underway in the state. 

Installing solar power can allow a municipality to both cut carbon emissions and realize significant savings on their energy bills. These savings can be used to cut property taxes or to provide additional support or services for residents. Until recently, however, there was little state or federal support for municipal solar. At the same time, getting a municipality to agree to the upfront costs has always been challenging. 

“There’s a variety of competing factors for property tax revenue,” Elliott said. “It can be hard to get a warrant article passed to invest the money to purchase a solar array for town buildings.”

The state began tackling the problem this year with the Municipal Solar Grant Program, which is using a $1.6 million federal grant, part of the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, to help cities and towns install solar arrays on municipal property. Lower-income communities that intend to retain complete ownership of their solar system will be eligible for grants up to $200,000; municipalities that don’t meet these criteria can request grants up to $120,000.

Though the program is just getting started — the application period is open until August 1 — the opportunity has already sparked wide interest from municipal governments. Community liaisons for the nonprofit Clean Energy New Hampshire have identified roughly 50 cities and towns likely to apply for a share of the limited funding. 

“There’s been a huge response,” said Sam Evans-Brown, executive director of Clean Energy New Hampshire. “That shows this is a good space to be spending the money in.”

The new legislation calls for funding to be allocated to a new municipal solar program this year, with the sum likely to be announced in late August or early September. Then, before the money can be offered to cities and towns, the state will have to design a new system. The new incentive will be inspired and informed by the program now launching, Elliott said. 

“We’re certainly going to take feedback, have stakeholder sessions,” he said. “And that will help refine what this program looks like.”

Replacing residential incentives

The bill also terminates the state’s rebate program for residential solar and wind installations, an incentive that was widely thought to be ineffective.

The program offered rebates of up to $1,000 to a limited number of households each year. In fiscal 2023, rebates totalling about $424,000 were issued. 

The program used a lottery system to determine what order rebate applications would be processed in each year; applicants closer to the end of the list might not end up receiving any rebate if the funds ran out before they made it to the top of the list. That uncertainty meant the program was doing little to spur additional solar development, Evans-Brown said. 

“It’s almost by definition not getting projects done: If you can’t know for sure if you’re getting rebate, it’s not factoring it into the purchasing decision,” he said. “When we asked residential solar installers if the rebate was helpful they said no.”

The program also accepted applications from any household with a solar array installed after 2012 that has not yet received a rebate, diminishing its impact on new solar development even further. 

“You’re not actually helping to develop the solar market at that point,” Elliott said. 

Though the recent law eliminates this rebate, lawmakers were clear during hearings on the bill that they want to see a replacement residential incentive developed. No plans are yet in the works for such a program, and it is unclear what the timeline would be for designing a new incentive from scratch, Elliott said. Furthermore, the law does not require a new program be enacted.

Elliott, however, has every intention of making sure a replacement program comes to be, he said.

“I made a commitment in public saying, ‘Yes, we are going to do this,’” he said, “and I certainly feel beholden to that.”

New Hampshire law provides new solar incentives for cities, drops ineffective consumer rebate program is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Massachusetts is in the process of tripling the size of its first-in-the-nation vehicle fleet electrification program following a recent influx of federal money.

“We are really looking at the barriers, the challenges, the things that we need to figure out to get decarbonization to happen at scale,” said Emily Reichert, CEO of the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center. 

A $5 million infusion from the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act will allow the Massachusetts Fleet Advisor program to serve as many as 200 small businesses, nonprofits, and cities and towns served by municipal electric utilities, up from the original target of 65. The money will also allow the program to run through 2026.

The fleet advisor concept pioneered in Massachusetts is getting traction elsewhere. California launched a similar program in June 2023, and New Jersey will soon be introducing its own version.

“A lot of other states are taking notice and building on this model,” said Jordan Stutt, Northeast region senior director for CALSTART, the clean transportation nonprofit running the program for the state.

Transportation is responsible for 37% of Massachusetts’ greenhouse emissions, making the move to electric vehicles a vital element of the state’s strategy for going carbon neutral by 2050. In pursuit of this goal, the state’s incentive program provides rebates of $3,500 for eligible electric car purchases (with additional money available for low-income buyers), $7,500 for medium-duty electric vehicles, and from $15,000 to $90,000 for larger electric trucks. 

Fleet vehicles, however, are a particularly important — and tricky — segment of the market. While personal vehicles generally spend most of the day parked, fleet cars and trucks tend to be driven for longer portions of the day, heightening their emissions impact. In Massachusetts, medium- and heavy-duty vehicles — which includes everything from a senior center’s mini-bus to a supermarket chain’s tractor-trailer — make up 3% of the vehicles on the road, yet produce 20% of the state’s transportation emissions. 

At the same time, switching to electric is a more complicated process for fleet managers than it is for individual consumers. Organizations must consider their long-term budgeting, which vehicles will need replacing when, what available vehicles would meet their needs, and whether their infrastructure is suitable for charging stations. In many cases, decisions must be discussed and approved by multiple stakeholders, like a nonprofit’s board of directors or all of the partners in a business. 

The numbers suggest fleets are making the conversion at a slower rate than personal owners. Since the state made electric fleet vehicles eligible for incentives in 2021 it has issued 227 rebates to light-duty fleet vehicles, 95 rebates for heavy-duty pickup trucks and similar vehicles, and seven rebates for larger trucks. During the same span, the incentive program issued nearly 28,000 rebates overall. 

“There is a lot of planning work that goes into getting a fleet owner to the point where they can really take advantage of electrifying the fleet,” Reichert said. 

Fixing the fleets

The Massachusetts Fleet Advisor program was conceived in 2021 as a way to overcome some of these challenges. With initial funding of $1 million, the program was designed to offer no-cost fleet electrification assessment reports and procurement assistance to organizations with interest in moving away from fossil fuels but without the resources to do all the legwork involved. 

“A small business owner that’s just worried about the day-to-day doesn’t have the time to look into all that,” said Jennifer Kritzler, CALSTART’s Northeast region deputy director. “Mass Fleet Advisor becomes a great resource to answer those questions.”

The process begins with a brief phone call in which an organization learns more about the program and whether it would be a good fit. To be eligible, an entity must have a fleet of at least three vehicles, at least one of which must be medium- or heavy-duty. Then, the organization answers questions about its current fleet, facilities, and goals. 

The program has earmarked half of its funds to work in environmental justice neighborhoods: those with high populations of color or lower average incomes, which have traditionally borne a disproportionate share of environmental burdens. Fleets that are based in or regularly drive through these areas will fall into this segment. 

“We’re really trying to include a focus not only on the emissions but on the benefits of reducing air pollution in communities that are highly affected by this,” Reichert said. 

The initial communication is followed by a site visit. A recent site visit in the town of Ipswich involved touring town hall, the department of public works, and the Ipswich Electric Light Department. Consultants from program partner the Better Together Brain Trust talked to employees about how the town’s handful of electric vehicles are charged and deployed, what the current infrastructure is like, and what they are hoping or expecting to see as the town evolves toward greater use of electric vehicles.

The site visit helps reveal dynamics not captured by the questionnaire: In Ipswich, the assessors discovered that their initial thoughts about where chargers might work was complicated by the parking needs of the town’s council on aging. 

“We’re getting absolutely the best information from the local experts,” said Nicole Voudren, president of the Better Together Brain Trust.

When the assessment is complete, it will provide truly useful information to the town, said Rick Mitchell, Ipswich climate resiliency manager.

“The results, when we see those, will provide a platform for intelligent decision-making,” he said. “We’ll have objective, independent, third-party information on the options. This helps summarize what would be a very labor-intensive undertaking in one place.”

Mass Fleet Advisor does not provide any money toward buying electric vehicles, nor does it require participants to make any purchases. However, up to 75 participants that decide to implement some or all of their plans will also be able to receive assistance with the procurement process: The fleet advisor program will help these participants locate appropriate vehicles, connect with dealers, apply for incentives, train their workforces, and develop standard operating procedures for the new vehicles.

“We’re really excited for this not to be a one-time thing, then we walk away,” Kritzler said. “We want to be a resource for folks as they go through their journey.”

So far, 50 organizations — from dry cleaners and lumberyards to universities and municipalities — have signed on to participate, and 20 completed reports have been delivered. 

To make sure they are able to make full use of the new funds, the program partners are ramping up their marketing and recruitment efforts, reaching out to community organizations and chambers of commerce, and planning events that allow organizations to see and even drive electric trucks. 

“I’ve found when you get someone behind the wheel of a truck, it’s the best tool for converting people to believing that electric vehicles can work for them,” Kritzler said.

Massachusetts is expanding its pathbreaking vehicle fleet electrification program   is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Massachusetts environmental justice advocates say the $5 billion statewide energy efficiency plan that could take effect next year needs to do even more to reach low-income residents, renters, and other populations who have traditionally received fewer benefits.  

The plan, which will guide efficiency programming from 2025 through 2027, outlines wide-ranging initiatives that would support weatherization and heat pumps for homes and small businesses, improve the customer experience with more timely rebate processing and increased multilingual support, and expand the energy efficiency workforce. The proposed plan calls out equity as a major priority. 

“There have certainly been some changes in this latest draft we’re pleased to see, but there is definitely a lot more that needs to be done, especially in the realms of equity and affordability and justice,” said Priya Gandbhir, senior attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation. “The good news is we’re still working on this, so there’s some time for improvement.”

Massachusetts has long been considered a leader in energy efficiency, ranking at or near the top of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy’s annual State Energy Efficiency Scorecard for more than 10 years. The core of the state’s efficiency efforts is Mass Save, a partnership between gas and electric utilities, created in 2008, that provides education, energy audits, rebates on efficient appliances, low and no-cost weatherization services, and financing for efficiency projects.

Mass Save programming is guided by the three-year energy efficiency plans put forth by the major utilities in collaboration with the state Energy Efficiency Advisory Council, and approved by state public utilities regulators. Over the past several years, legislation has required that Mass Save prioritize reducing greenhouse gas emissions, rather than focusing only on using less energy. 

“Mass Save needs to be a tool not just for energy efficiency but also for decarbonization,” said Hessann Farooqi, executive director of the Boston Climate Action Network. 

Strides toward equity

In recent years, there has also been an effort to ensure the benefits of Mass Save programs are distributed equitably. A 2020 study by the utilities found that communities with lower incomes, higher proportions of residents of color, and more renters were far less likely to have used Mass Save services. 

Following this report, the three-year plan covering 2022 to 2024 included several provisions intended to address these disparities, including a 50% higher budget for income-eligible services, financial incentives for utilities to serve lower-income households, and grants to community organizations that can help connect residents to information about Mass Save benefits. 

The plan’s focus on equity was hailed by advocates. 

“We’ve seen a dramatic increase in production and service and savings because of the increased budget,” said Brian Beote, an Energy Efficiency Advisory Council member and director of energy efficiency operations for housing security nonprofit Action Inc. “We’ve been able to bring on more contractors and serve more households.”

This latest plan continues the focus on equity for underserved populations in several ways. The draft plan increases the budget for services to income-eligible households, defined as those with incomes below 80% of the area median, from roughly $600 million to nearly $1 billion, the highest number ever proposed. 

The draft plan also attempts to simplify the process of obtaining benefits for residents in areas that have been marginalized in the past. The plan identifies 21 “equity communities” – municipalities in which more than 35% of residents are renters and more than half of households qualify as low or moderate income. Residents in these communities would be eligible for no-cost weatherization and electrification, often without income verification, and rental properties would be able to receive low-cost weatherization and electrification services.

This approach might mean higher-income customers receive no-cost services they might otherwise have had to pay for, but supporters say the likely benefits outweigh this possibility. 

“On balance, we’re going to get more of those low- to moderate-income customers and that is really a key goal,” Farooqi said.

In addition, the proposed plan would expand the Community First Partnership program, which provides funding to nonprofits and municipalities to target outreach and education about Mass Save’s offerings, using their knowledge of their communities and populations. 

Missed opportunities

Still, the plan misses several opportunities to make even greater strides toward equity, advocates said. At the heart of their argument are funding levels: The budget for low- and moderate-income services is about 19% of the total budget, even as nearly half of the state’s households fall into that category. 

“We just need to be making sure that we are distributing the benefits of this program proportionally to where people are actually at in the population,” Farooqi said. 

The plan’s targets for heat pump installations are another point of contention. The plan calls for installing 115,000 heat pumps during the plan period, with 16,000 of these going to low- and moderate-income households. This target is not nearly high enough, advocates said.

“That’s a major failure,” said Mary Wambui-Ekop, an energy justice activist and co-chair of the Energy Efficiency Advisory Committee’s equity working group. “They definitely need to increase that target to 30,000, and even that is really low.”

Switching from gas heating to heat pumps at current high electricity rates could increase costs for customers, so it is also important that the push to electrify heating for lower-income residents focus on households currently using higher-emissions, higher-cost fuels like heating oil or propane, Wambui-Ekop said. 

In Massachusetts, some 800,000 households use heating oil and propane; more than 151,000 of these households fall within the plan’s designated equity communities. 

“If they switch to heat pumps, they will see their energy bills go down, their energy burdens will go down, they will have good indoor air quality, and the commonwealth will benefit because of the greenhouse gas reductions,” Wambui-Ekop said. 

Advocates are also waiting to see the details for the plans to expand the Community First Partnership program. At current levels, the funding can pay a part-time energy staffer at a modest rate, which can make it difficult to find and keep qualified employees, said Susan Olshuff, a town liaison with Ener-G-Save, a Community First Partner organization in western Massachusetts. She’s gone through six different staffers since the program began and is anxiously waiting to see the final funding that comes out of the new plan.

“I like to think it will be enough,” she said, “but I am nervous to see what numbers they come down on.”

The final plan will be submitted to the state in October. Public utilities regulators will then be able to approve the plan as a whole, or to suggest modifications. Advocates are hoping to see an even more equitable plan filed and approved. 

“The people who can afford to do it will do it on their own,” Gandbhir said. “We need to make sure that people who are renting or who aren’t able to afford the upfront costs are provided with the assistance that’s needed.”

Massachusetts advocates say proposed statewide energy efficiency plan falls short on equity is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.