Latest news with #ChipCampsen
Yahoo
05-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
SC consumer, environmental groups decry cuts to sweeping energy legislation
GOP Sens. Chip Campsen, Majority Leader Shane Massey and Stephen Goldfinch chat in the Senate chamber during the first week of the 2024 session Thursday, Jan. 11, 2024, in Columbia, S.C. (File photo by Mary Ann Chastain/Special to the SC Daily Gazette) COLUMBIA — This week will decide the fate of a massive energy package in South Carolina, after the House removed measures meant to safeguard consumers and landowners in the push to meet power needs of the state's rapidly growing industry and population. To produce enough energy to keep the lights on in the Palmetto State, utility executives told legislators, they needed guarantees that state regulators would review power-related permits in a timely manner and prevent years-long delays of new pipelines and power plants in the court system. In exchange, senators told the utility sector it must ensure residential customers weren't bearing the brunt of industry-driven power needs, particularly those of energy-intensive data centers. They also said utilities must give landowners earlier notice when construction of power plants, power lines and pipelines impact their property and that more effort was needed to help customers conserve energy and lower their power bills. 'Cutting-edge' supercomputing facility, a $2.8B investment, planned for Spartanburg County But last week, state House members quietly pulled those give-and-take protections for power customers and landowners, potentially putting passage at risk with just three days left in the legislative session. With a vote of 88-13 last Thursday, the House stripped out everything the Senate added related to data centers. Under the House version, center developers don't have to bear their share of costs for new power plants built to power them or disclose how much water they plan to use. And they can still earn sales tax credits for computer equipment bought for the centers. Rep. Gil Gatch, R-Summerville, told his colleagues the amendment was the result of a compromise between House and Senate negotiators. Little else was said beyond Rep. Robert Reese asking what the amendment did about data centers, and Gatch pledging those concerns will be addressed in separate legislation next year. Reese, of rural Hopkins, was among the 13 Democrats who rejected the changes. Other items struck by the amendment received no mention at all on the floor: Gone are additional notice requirements for landowners impacted by eminent domain, which is the taking of private property for public use. It also scaled back energy efficiency efforts. Gatch, joined at the podium by other members of the House committee that has shepherded the bill, told the chamber it was the committee's understanding the negotiated changes would pass in the Senate, allowing a bill two years in the making to head to Gov. Henry McMaster's desk this week. But the Senate leaders who authored the provisions removed by the House told the SC Daily Gazette they were not part of negotiations. And they highly doubt the Legislature will revisit anything on data centers next year if the altered bill becomes law. The amended bill could come up for a vote in the Senate as soon as Tuesday. A final decision must be made by 5 p.m. Thursday — the end of the session, as per state law — or negotiations will carry over until next year. Power company executives have said passage this year is essential to future projects. At the heart of the bill, sponsored by GOP House Speaker Murrell Smith of Sumter, is permission for Dominion Energy and state-owned utility company Santee Cooper to partner on a possible 2,000-megawatt natural gas plant on the site of a former coal-fired power plant along the Edisto River in Colleton County. In its original form, the legislation saw significant pushback on its sweeping regulatory changes and rollback of consumer protections passed in the wake of South Carolina's failed nuclear expansion. Both bodies ultimately left those existing protections alone. Here's how much SC power customers are still paying for a failed nuclear project The reason the House removed most provisions added by the Senate during its floor debate, according to Rep. Bill Herbkersman, was contract deadlines faced by Dominion and Santee Cooper. The deadlines involve an interstate natural gas pipeline needed to supply the proposed Lowcountry gas plant and other supplies related to the project. The House felt 'under the gun' to pass something, and the new restrictions were 'not really part of what we were trying to do,' in the energy bill aimed at speeding up the regulatory process for utilities as they make updates to the state's power grid, Herberksman said, adding they hadn't been vetted by the House committee he chairs. 'You wouldn't half bake a cake,' said the Bluffton Republican. One change made in the Senate, however, did survive: The House kept a Senate-added section that would make it easier for utilities to raise power bills on an annual basis. The changes approved by the House last Thursday renewed criticism of the bill from environmental and consumer groups who say all that's left is a 'utility wish list.' 'What is in this bill to protect customers?' asked Kate Mixson, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. 'What's left is just a list of things that make it easier for utilities and far fewer things to keep power companies from overbuilding and passing the cost on to consumers.' 'With these changes, this legislation is basically like an open bar tab for utility company spending that the public will pay for on their electric bills,' added Eddy Moore of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. Herbkersman called that characterization a 'misnomer,' arguing the gas plant at Canadys would allow Santee Cooper to replace parts of its coal-fired fleet with natural gas that emits fewer greenhouse gases. It would also guarantee the state has the energy it needs as it continues to grow. SC's state-owned utility enacts higher rates for data centers, large users Senators who don't like the so-called compromise — and weren't involved in closed-door negotiations — include the chamber's GOP leader. 'The data center language was one of the few things I liked about the bill, and it was not very aggressive,' said Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey, who authored the data center provisions. The Edgefield Republican vowed to make his displeasure known when senators take up the bill on the floor. 'South Carolinians are going to pay more for energy generation, and citizens are going to pay more than they should for data centers … which to me is completely unacceptable,' Massey said. Frank Knapp, president of the SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce, encouraged senators to 'stick to their guns' when it comes to the power-gobbling centers. While the Senate passed its version overwhelmingly last month, 'it will not go easy this time, even if the votes are there,' Massey said. Everything added on the Senate floor was important to the members who voted for it, said Sen. Tom Davis. For the Beaufort Republican, it was requiring public utility companies to do more to help customers make their homes energy efficient. As part of these programs, power companies send inspectors to people's homes to check for gaps in windows, leaking ducts and outdated air conditioning systems that might contribute to higher energy usage. The companies offer rebates and discounts to customers who make home improvements, and in some cases, power companies cover the costs for low-income families. The savings rate the Senate was asking for is far below levels set across much of the country, Davis said. Duke Energy is already meeting what the Senate version would require, but Dominion Energy would have to step up its effort. SC nuclear reboot sees interest from big tech, large utilities The House, however, left it up to energy regulators to decide on an appropriate savings level. What it approved Thursday also took away penalties. Under a provision authored by Sen. Shane Martin of Spartanburg County, developers would need to contact all landowners in the path of a pipeline, power line or power plant two months before filing for any state-level permits. The companies also would have to inform landowners about their neighbors who were impacted and whether there were alternative routes considered. It's unclear if the measure would have applied to the pipeline feeding Canadys, which crosses state lines, so it's federally regulated. 'The fact the House would remove this says to me they don't want these affected landowners to know,' Mixson said. 'My question is why. If these projects are really necessary — if they're not going to be dangerous — then why not notify these communities and landowners.' Davis said senators must now weigh the House changes against the importance of getting a bill across the finish line. Both he and Massey said taking up these provisions in standalone legislation next year will be hard to do. 'I have very little confidence that that will happen next year,' Massey said.
Yahoo
03-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
House vote could keep public in the dark about SC pipeline projects
South Carolina residents don't always learn about new pipelines that would cut through their communities until well after utilities have launched plans for them. It's a sore spot in places where people have tangled with power companies, and that's why some legislators have backed efforts to require better public notice for folks who might be affected by big energy projects. Now, those efforts are in jeopardy. The House of Representatives has quietly dropped a requirement for improved public notice as part of a major energy bill that's up for a final vote in the Senate next week. The extensive and complicated legislation, H. 3309, includes other major changes that are sparking complaints from senators who say they were left out of the loop and from environmentalists who say the changes make the bill friendlier to utilities at the expense of the public and South Carolina's landscape. 'I wasn't engaged in any of that, and many others weren't,'' Sen. Chip Campsen, R-Charleston, said of the House bill. 'Almost nobody was.'' Thursday's 88-13 vote by the House for substantial changes in the bill potentially jeopardizes passage of a plan that has been on the table for the past two legislative sessions as a way to expand energy supplies in South Carolina. A cornerstone of the bill is allowing state-owned utility Santee Cooper to work with Dominion Energy on a large, more than $1 billion natural gas plant in Colleton County. The measure also limits some legal challenges that could slow down energy projects. It allows utilities to raise rates in smaller amounts, more frequently, as a way to reduce one-time impacts on customers. And it encourages development of nuclear energy. Many legislators agree that the plant needs to be built and fewer government restraints on energy expansion is a worthwhile part of the bill. Utilities say they badly need new sources of power as the state grows. But the energy legislation is full of other measures that utility boosters and public interest groups have had difficulty agreeing on. The bill appeared to be on the way to passage after the Senate addressed a range of concerns in early April. Senators approved the measure and sent it back to the House for consideration. It now must be considered again by the Senate with just three days left in the 2025 legislative session. In addition to dropping greater requirements for public notice -- a decision that environmentalists say could make it easier to build a new gas pipeline to serve the proposed Colleton plant -- the House on Thursday also abandoned part of the bill that put some controls on data centers. These are huge energy users that many say are driving the state's need for more power, which exposes the general public to rate increases when energy plants are expanded. Energy efficiency measures, intended to reduce demand for power, also were watered down, a change conservation groups blasted. House leaders did not explain in detail what concerns they had about public notice, data centers and energy efficiency sections of the bill, but environmentalists said they suspect utilities, which have influence in the legislature, didn't like those parts of the legislation. While House leaders said they negotiated with senators and think the upper chamber will sign off on their version of the bill next week, some senators were hesitant Friday to endorse what the House did. Substantial debate could come up again Tuesday as the legislative session winds down. The legislative session ends Thursday, May 8. Both Campsen and Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey, R-Edgefield, expressed concern about dropping the public notice requirements and rules for data centers, which provide power for internet searches and artificial intelligence.. In approving the energy bill April 2, the Senate put limits on economic support from the state for data centers. Massey and Campsen said the state doesn't need to provide extensive incentives for data centers because they are coming to South Carolina anyway. The state already has at least 14 of them, he said. 'That is going to be a problem,'' Massey said of removing data center rules, which he said were basic and not as restrictive as in other states. 'I have not been involved in the negotiations. I don't know what was agreed to. But there will be a fight about that in the Senate.'' Rep. Gil Gatch, however, said he believes the latest House version of the bill will get through the Senate. He had spoken with enough senators about the House changes that he was optimistic about passage. 'We worked diligently with the Senate and this is the compromise that we got, to get this over the finish line so that we can get energy to South Carolinians,'' the Summerville Republican told reporters after Thursday afternoon's vote. 'As you know, we have an energy crisis, so any delay would probably be detrimental.'' On the House floor, Gatch said data center oversight could be addressed in the future as its own bill. He later said the data center language was dropped because it had not been vetted fully. No public hearing had been held since the data center section of the bill had been added by the Senate as an amendment, he said. 'That process sort of got skipped a little bit,'' he told reporters. Santee Cooper said it is working to oversee data centers that need power from the state-owned utility. The agency's board recently approved an experimental rate for large energy users, including data centers. The measure is intended to ensure those facilities pay for utility system upgrades, which will 'protect other customers,'' spokeswoman Mollie Gore said in an email. Dominion spokeswoman Rhonda O'Banion said the Virginia-headquartered company was committed to being open with customers about the Colleton County project, located at the site of an old coal fired power plant in the Canadys community. 'We will continue to welcome input from stakeholders and comply with all legal and regulatory requirements,'' she said. 'The proposed Canadys project is no exception. Just as any project of this kind, it would undergo a rigorous regulatory process with the Public Service Commission of South Carolina and other oversight agencies, which includes siting and environmental permitting.'' One of the biggest concerns expressed by environmental groups is the removal of additional public notice requirements. The section of the bill the House struck says utilities planning to build energy projects must provide written notice, via the mail, to any property owner whose land may be acquired or condemned for such projects. The notice, provided two months before the utility applies for any government permit, must explain the need for the energy project and if any alternatives are available. It also must provide a way to contact the utility and the state Office of Regulatory Staff about the project. A public hearing would also have to be held. Officials with the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, the Southern Environmental Law Center and the Coastal Conservation League said the public notice section is important – particularly now because Dominion and Santee Cooper plan a large natural gas pipeline to serve the Colleton County gas plant. The line would run from the Savannah area to South Carolina. Some environmental groups say they are worried the pipeline will cover new territory and run through the ACE Basin, an internationally recognized nature preserve between Columbia and the coast south of Charleston. Pipelines can not only affect individual property owners whose land is used, but they can also disrupt natural areas, environmentalists say. Kinder Morgan, a national pipeline company active in South Carolina and Georgia, reported April 17 that it plans to expand a pipeline known as Elba Express into South Carolina, according to Marcellus Drilling News. The $431 million project would cover 71 miles and would include 'greenfield'' areas, meaning it might need to acquire land or condemn land for the new pipeline, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy said. Utilities have previously said they would try to use existing rights of way, or areas where power lines or pipes already exist, for a pipeline to Canadys, rather than greenfield sites. There are some federal notice requirements, but environmentalist said that isn't enough. 'There is not a good, clear, consistent way for the public to find out about these things,'' said Kate Mixson, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. 'This was intended to be a protection.'' Frank Holleman, a former SELC lawyer who has worked extensively on environmental cases involving utilities, said that although there are some other types of public notice requirements for utilities seeking pipeline permits, they often kick in well after the projects have been mapped out. Disputes from the mountains in northwest South Carolina to the Pee Dee region in the state's eastern coastal plain have erupted in recent years over pipelines, and the public's complaints about being left in the dark have surfaced more than once, he said. Some Richland County residents were involved in a dispute with a Dominion subsidiary about 10 years ago, when they learned a natural gas pipeline would run across their land and through one of most scenic parts of the Columbia area. The company, at one point, had sought to condemn land for people who would not sell. As it stands, people often don't learn about a pipeline project until a utility land agent approaches them about selling their property for such a project , environmentalists said. And even then, the agents don't always provide the full breadth of the project utilities have on the drawing boards, Holleman and Mixson said. Public hearings and notice to landowners about the full extent of projects would be a substantial improvement, they said. 'At a minimum, you would think notice would be provided to people as a matter of just simple fairness,'' Holleman said. Overall, the S.C. Coastal Conservation League labeled the House approved changes bad for ratepayers and the environment. 'The changes that the House has removed would have protected electric utility customers from subsidizing big data centers, helped families and businesses save money through energy efficiency, and required landowners to be notified if a company might seize their property for a new fossil pipeline,'' the Coastal Conservation League said in a statement Friday. This story has been updated with more information from Rep. Gil Gatch about data centers. Staff Writer Joseph Bustos contributed to this story.
Yahoo
03-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Senate passes sweeping energy bill aimed at meeting SC's growing power needs
GOP Sens. Chip Campsen, Majority Leader Shane Massey and Stephen Goldfinch chat in the Senate chamber. The Senate passed legislation Thursday, April 3, 2025, clearing the path for a new power plant and addressing the future of energy in the rapidly growing state. (File/Mary Ann Chastain/SC Daily Gazette) COLUMBIA — The Senate passed a long-anticipated bill clearing the path for a new power plant in South Carolina and fulfilling its pledge to address future energy needs in the rapidly growing Palmetto State. The legislation, approved 41-3, saw major changes to the sweeping energy bill halted last session over criticism that proponents had fast-tracked it through the General Assembly. Backers say it strikes a balance, empowering utilities charged with meeting the state's energy needs but in a way that's more palatable to consumer and environmental advocates. The three Republicans voting 'no' included Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey. 'We still have concerns but it's nothing like what it would have been,' said Frank Knapp, president of the state's Small Business Chamber of Commerce, who advocates on behalf of small business owners in the state. The bill, sponsored by GOP House Speaker Murrell Smith of Sumter gives permission for Dominion Energy and state-owned utility company Santee Cooper to partner on a possible 2,000-megawatt natural gas plant on the site of a former coal-fired power plant along the Edisto River in Colleton County. Santee Cooper customers should expect a double cost hike in 2025 after years of frozen rates In its original form, the legislation saw significant pushback on its sweeping regulatory changes and rollback of consumer protections passed in the wake of South Carolina's failed nuclear expansion. Santee Cooper and Dominion's predecessor, South Carolina Electric & Gas, abandoned an expansion of the V.C. Summer nuclear plant in Fairfield County in 2017, but not before they'd already jointly spent $9 billion. The debacle left power customers on the hook for much of that cost on a power plant that never produced a single kilowatt. Angered by the failure, which was fraught with fraud and cost overruns, legislators cracked down. They fired and replaced the state's utility regulators, loosened the leash on the state's utility watchdog and put an extra set of eyes looking out for power customers in the state's consumer protection agency. As originally proposed, the House bill would have undone some of that work, consumer groups warned. In response to those concerns, new committee-level leadership in the House made its own changes: keeping the consumer advocate in place and doing away with a proposal that would have reduced the size of the panel regulating power companies in the state. Here's how much SC power customers are still paying for a failed nuclear project The Senate, in a debate that stretched nearly until midnight Wednesday, tweaked the House legislation further after leadership cautioned against changes that could swing the law too far in power companies' favor following the nuclear fiasco. 'Those who are Santee Cooper or Dominion customers, you are paying for V.C. Summer. You're going to be paying for V.C. Summer for the next 14 years even though you're not getting anything from it. And now the proposal is that we pay to build a new gas plant at Canadys,' said Massey, R-Edgefield. 'That is my biggest heartburn on this.' 'They're essentially going to be asking, if not forcing, customers to pay for two power plants when they only needed one,' he added. The companies will still need the OK of state regulators to begin construction, as well as state and federal permits to connect to an interstate natural gas line needed to fuel the plant. The other two Republicans voting 'no' were Sens. Shane Martin of Spartanburg County and Tom Corbin of Greenville County. Massey, who co-led a Senate investigation into the V.C. Summer debacle, voted against it over his continued disgust over the nuclear fallout, but not before pushing for major changes. Among those Senate changes are limitations on power-related incentives the state allows for data centers. Massey said the amendment mirrors efforts by utility regulators in Georgia to say the cost of providing electricity to these centers, full of power-gobbling computer servers that run technologies ranging from artificial intelligence and 5G streaming of videos on mobile devices to high-speed financial trades, is borne by those companies. Utility executives have testified that the largest of these centers can use upwards of 200 megawatts each and are a driving force, over and above residential and manufacturing growth, behind the state's need for more power. Sen. Chip Campsen, R-Isle of Palms, told the Senate that power usage by data centers in South Carolina is equivalent to 65% of demand from residential customers. Data centers gobble up energy. Should SC block them from getting special deals? At the same time, Dominion brokered a discount electricity deal for a $510 million Google data center proposed near Summerville. The deal, approved by utility regulators last year, allowed the Virginia-headquartered utility to grant Google a special 'economic development rider' rate — 6 cents for every kilowatt hour, compared to 14 cents that residential customers were paying at the time. Utilities have said, even if data centers don't come, South Carolina will need more power to meet federal regulations requiring them to eventually shut down coal-fired plants in favor of more carbon-friendly options. But if more of these center for come to the state after May 30, 2025, Massey said he wants them to pay an equivalent share of the costs for power plants built to serve them. Still, the bill contains some wins for utility companies, too. It starts by setting time limits on the environmental permitting process, as well as lawsuits that power executives testified are often used to drag out the building of new power plants and natural gas pipelines for decades, to the point that theconstruction projects are no longer financially feasible. The House took steps to limit the permitting timeline to six months. SC nuclear reboot sees interest from big tech, large utilities To appease environmental concerns, the Senate passed an amendment to say the clock doesn't start until regulators deem an environmental application is completely filled out. The change came after the Conservation Voters of South Carolina said it's not uncommon for companies to submit these applications while they're still missing all of the information needed to evaluate them. The Senate also added a provision urging South Carolina's court system to handle legal appeals of permitting decisions within a year's time. And the bill pulls the state Appeals Court from the series of courts that hear these cases. 'I do think that the appellate process has been abused and and that's why I think we ought to shorten that process,' Massey said. Finally, the Senate added a section to the bill that would make it easier for utilities to raise power bills on an annual basis. In their pitch, utility executives testified about comments from customers made during the company's recent rate hike. Dominion's South Carolina President Keller Kissam said customers asked why the utility didn't raise rates on a smaller but more frequent basis, making it easier for those on a fixed income to adjust. Kissam said the state uses a similar process for natural gas rates. Utilities would go before regulators annually for up to five years to seek permission to raise prices. Rate payers can still protest and regulators still have the final say so over whether expenses meet the necessary requirements for an increase. But the process is less in depth because it doesn't call into question a utility company's allowed profit margin. The process includes a cap. So, unlike the legislation that paved the way for the V.C. Summer debacle, it can't be used to pay for a major project, such as the proposed Canadys gas plant, while it's still under construction. Consumer advocates, environmental groups and businesses organizations, large and small, opposed the measure. They argued, while gradual annual increases might ease the burden for customers, power companies also would be less incentivized to hold down costs. The state would review the process after five years to determine if its working the way utilities claim. A 38-3 vote Thursday sent the roughly 70-page bill back to the House, which can choose to accept the Senate changes or vote to negotiate the matter further in conference committee.
