Latest news with #H.3309
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
28-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
SC's energy future: A case for expanding nuclear power to meet demand
Nuclear reactor assemblies pictured Sept. 12, 2024, in storage at V.C. Summer nuclear site near Fairfield. (Provided by S.C. Nuclear Advisory Council) South Carolina has made considerable progress in strengthening its energy and transmission infrastructure, but much more remains to be done to secure a reliable, cost-effective and independent energy future. A critical piece of this effort lies in expanding nuclear power, which offers the unique combination of low-carbon emissions, sustainability, 24/7 reliability, and long-term affordability. This is why I fully support an 'all-of-the-above' approach to energy, including the revitalization of the unfinished reactors at the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, and commend the South Carolina's state and congressional lawmakers for taking decisive steps to advance nuclear energy in our state. Efforts to expand South Carolina's clean energy portfolio have already incentivized energy-efficient practices, expanding nuclear capabilities, and attracted private-sector investment in emerging renewable energy. Tax credits such as the Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit and the Advanced Energy Production Credit fuel business growth in the Palmetto State. However, more work remains as our state's energy demands are growing rapidly due to population increases and economic expansion. State leaders and utility officials have been increasingly focused on the growth in demand for energy. Our major utilities are already experiencing unprecedented load demand growth. South Carolina's population growth and accelerating economic development have caused utility planners to drastically increase their load growth forecasts, with electricity demand expected to surge over the next 15 years. This demand growth will require an 'all-of-the-above' increase in electricity generation capacity, including natural gas, renewables, and nuclear. It will also require a more streamlined approach to the planning and construction of new energy generation, regardless of the energy source. To meet these challenges, South Carolina's policymakers are now considering legislation that strengthens our energy sector, streamlines permitting and accelerates energy generation capacity. Last month, the South Carolina House of Representatives passed H.3309, the South Carolina Energy Security Act, a bill prioritizing nuclear expansion as an energy source, alongside natural gas, hydrogen and renewables. The state Senate will next debate this measure. The Senate can develop legislation that balances reasonable permitting reforms with environmental protections, ensures appropriate regulatory oversight of the utilities while accelerating new energy generation, and prioritizes an 'all-of-the-above' energy strategy that includes the expansion of nuclear energy. Reviving the V.C. Summer nuclear project represents one of the most promising opportunities to meet South Carolina's energy needs. Sen. Lindsey Graham recently affirmed his support for nuclear power, stating, 'We cannot give up on nuclear power … South Carolina needs as much power as we can get.' His leadership and advocacy for small modular reactors (SMRs) highlight the potential of modern nuclear technology to supplement traditional reactors and provide scalable, efficient energy solutions for our state. As Congress sets its legislative agenda, Graham and South Carolina's delegation can prioritize continued support for policies that modernize the state's energy infrastructure, revitalize manufacturing, and strengthen national security. Sen. Tim Scott has also championed efforts to ensure nuclear energy can be deployed more efficiently. His recently introduced Nuclear Permitting Reform bill takes a commonsense approach to cutting through the bureaucratic red tape that slows down nuclear project approvals. By reducing unnecessary delays and modernizing regulations, this bill would pave the way for projects like V.C. Summer's revival and the expansion of next-generation nuclear technology in South Carolina. Beyond state efforts, federal investments are playing a crucial role in advancing energy security. The Inflation Reduction Act, passed in 2022, has provided South Carolina homes and businesses with key tax credits and incentives that help increase energy efficiency, promote solar energy, clean hydrogen and nuclear power production, and support offshore wind development. Funding from that law has also fueled a resurgence in American manufacturing, leading to the announcement of 29 South Carolina projects promising to bring 16,500 jobs to the state. Leveraging these resources, alongside nuclear expansion, will ensure South Carolina remains a leader in clean energy innovation. Federal and state collaboration is crucial to ensuring South Carolina remains at the forefront of energy innovation. The leadership shown by our congressional delegation and proactive efforts from our state Legislature put us in a strong position to secure our energy future. However, the job is not yet done. The state needs energy legislation that includes strong provisions for nuclear expansion and balanced permitting reform.
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Turning the Public Service Commission into the Utility Service Commission
Frank Knapp with the S.C. Small Business Chamber of Commerce argues a House bill puts utility profits over consumers. (File photo by) Since 2002, the SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce has intervened in 12 electric rate cases at the SC Public Service Commission. We have had tremendous success over the years in fighting utility rate hikes to keep small businesses from unfair increases in their monthly bills. This successful track record will largely come to an end if one piece of legislation now in the Senate passes without changes. House Bill 3309 has two blatantly anti-consumer consumer provisions that will prioritize the profits of our two state public utilities (Dominion Energy and Duke Energy) and the recruiting of industry by the SC Department of Commerce in the electricity ratemaking process. First, the bill adds to the mission of the Office of Regulatory Staff. This is the state agency responsible for reviewing utility rate proposals and working with groups representing residential, small business and large energy users to arrive at a consensus alternative rate proposal fair to all classes of customers and the utilities. If this effort is successful, Office of Regulatory Staff submits the plan to the Public Service Commission for approval. If not, there is a rate hearing before the full commission on the utility's rate hike proposal. After the V.C. Summer nuclear debacle, the state Legislature took the correct move to change the mission of the Office of Regulatory Staff so that it would no longer be concerned about the financial health of the utilities. Today, the agency is not to favor any class of customer or the utility's financial health in its work. However, if H.3309 passes as is, it will turn the agency into a champion of the utilities and an arm of the Department of Commerce by adding to the Office of Regulatory Staff mission that its purpose includes economic development, job attraction and the preservation of the financial integrity of the state's public utilities. The agency's role to be fair to residential and small business ratepayers would be subservient to serving the financial health and growth of utilities to promote economic development. The second blatantly anti-consumer provision in H.3309 would create new economic development electricity rates to attract industry to the state. The Commerce website proudly points to a national development magazine which 'consistently ranks South Carolina as one of the top five states to do business in the nation.' We are continuously told that one of the reasons is that we have the lowest electricity rates in the Southeast. Our state's anticipated industrial growth is used to justify the need to build more power plants, which also leads to higher rates for consumers and more profit for the utilities. Clearly, we don't need new electricity incentives to attract industry, especially if those incentives will result in higher electricity costs for residential and small business ratepayers. Yet, that is exactly what H.3309 would do by specifically giving utilities and the Department of Commerce authority to propose discounted electricity rates not only for prospective industrial customers but also to the competitors of those industrial customers already located in our state. These incentive rates do not lower the cost of generating and delivering electricity. This provision would simply transfer an untold amount of those costs from industrial customers to residential and small business consumers guaranteeing them rate hikes. With its mission changed and these industrial incentive rates, the Office of Regulatory Staff would be legally obliged to favor the utilities and the Department of Commerce. No longer would the electricity ratemaking process at the Public Service Commission be a fair assessment of the utilization by customer classes to determine rates. Instead, it will be driven by Commerce's industrial recruitment decisions with the underlying premise that all residential and small business ratepayers should be willing to pay higher electricity bills so that the state can have a few more industrial jobs. The most egregious part of these industrial incentive rates is that some of the largest industrial prospects, referred to as 'transformational customers', could be offered rates lower than the cost of producing the electricity. Residential and small businesses would not only be paying more than their fair share but subsidizing the actual cost of producing and delivering electricity for some industrial customers. The concept of all classes of customers paying electricity rates based on their utilization is completely thrown out by these proposed industrial incentive rates in H.3309. For 23 years the SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce has fought to protect small businesses from unnecessary electric rate increases. This bill, H.3309 as written, would make our job almost impossible.
