iStock.com/R-J-Seymour

Clean Energy Leadership: Next Steps for Massachusetts

, senior energy analyst, Clean Energy | January 29, 2018, 9:41 am EDT
Bookmark and Share

In 2016, the Massachusetts legislature laid the groundwork for important progress on clean energy with the passing of the Energy Diversity Act. But now it’s 2018, and there’s a lot more work to be done. And the legislative session is nearing its end.

Fortunately, the path is clear: We need to fix our renewable energy targets, make solar work for everybody, and send clear signals about where we need to head on clean energy and climate.

Increase the renewable portfolio standard to 50×30

Staying on top: Smart, strong policies can keep driving renewable energy in and for Massachusetts (Credit: UCS).

The 2016 law included a requirement that Massachusetts utilities contract for 1,600 megawatts of offshore wind energy over the next decade—an unprecedented and inspiring target (which New York has indeed since been inspired to top, and which New Jersey seems to be inclined to more than double). The energy diversity law also required utilities to sign long-term contracts for large amounts of clean energy, to help drive renewable energy and get low, stable prices for Massachusetts electricity customers.

What the 2016 law didn’t include was a strengthening of the state’s renewable portfolio standard (RPS) to make room for all those new renewables. The RPS specifies how much of the electricity mix of each of Massachusetts’s electric utilities needs to come from renewable energy.

Under the clean energy procurement requirement, the state has just announced that it’s going all hydro, all the time, and large hydro doesn’t count toward the RPS. But if something happens to nix that option (it’s a controversial choice for many), and one of the many proposals with RPS-eligible technologies included gets picked instead, that’ll be more flowing into the RPS.

Just the offshore wind piece, though, is more than enough to eat up all the RPS demand growth between now and 2030. And that offshore wind piece is moving forward.

The new frontier for renewable energy for Massachusetts: offshore wind (Credit: M. Jacobs)

A 2017 study showed the results of the mismatch between the push of the new requirements and the pull of the RPS. A full RPS can’t drive any additional renewables beyond those contracts, and we know we need more.

The solution is a much stronger RPS, and a requirement of 50% renewable energy by 2030 standard fits the bill. That same 2017 study showed that a stronger RPS along those lines would bring more renewables on line, reduce our risks from natural gas overreliance, and mean a lot of extra clean energy jobs in the state.

Upping the requirement is not complicated, particularly for a trailblazer/pioneer like Massachusetts, and other states are already sprinting down the path to targets at least that strong, including California, Hawaii, and New York.

With bills like S.1880 (plus S.1841, S.1876, H.2700, and H.1747), upping Massachusetts’s renewable energy game is an easy thing to check off the legislative to-do list.

Make solar work—for everybody

Another thing on the energy list? Getting solar back on track, and moving forward, not backward, on making it accessible.

Massachusetts has been a solar star, but the policy environment has been cloudy lately—particularly for low-income households. The state’s solar progress has meant that it has kept bumping up against its (self-imposed) caps on how much solar gets to get installed. A “fix” in early 2016, though, actually made solar a worse deal for a lot of people.

The new solar law slashed how much people could use shared or community solar to offset their electricity bills—by a full 40%. Shared solar is the option for the many people who can’t put solar on their own roofs: people with shaded roofs, no southern exposure, or roofs in bad condition; people in multi-family buildings; and renters. Most low-income households fall into one or more of those categories.

So 40% cut for shared solar meant that people who can put solar on their roofs get 100% of the value of their solar electrons, while people who don’t or can’t get 60%.

There’s something seriously wrong with those equations.

There’s more to the Massachusetts solar picture, including continuing problems with caps on how much solar we get to do, uncertainty from a change in state incentives, a bad decision just out of Gov. Charlie Baker’s public utility commission, and Pres. Trump’s decision last week to tax solar panel imports, making solar more expensive.

Here again, the legislature already has a range of bills to address the equity issue, and others. Those include H.3396 and S.1831, which would restore full credit for community solar for low-income households, and others to strengthen solar and solar equity (including S.1824, S.1848, H.2712, and H.3403).

Keep solar climbing, for everybody (Credit: J. Rogers).

Tell us where we’re going on climate change

A third area for legislative action is on our climate goals. The state’s landmark 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act provided for 2020 and 2050 targets for reducing our global warming pollution. Having that 30-year gap between milestones potentially allows for “solutions” that look good in the near term, but won’t serve us well in the long term—with Exhibit A being natural gas (still a fossil fuel, people), which fuels two-thirds of in-state generation already and puts electricity consumers at risk.

What we need is clarity on the waypoints, what kind of reductions we want by 2030 and 2040. Those would be important signals on the road to 2050.

Wouldn’t you know it: There are bills ready to fix this, too: S.1880 and S.479, plus ones that would strengthen our overall carbon pollution policies (including, S.1821, S.1869, H.1726, and H.3473).

And more

When the Massachusetts legislature gets rolling on these issues, there’s a lot more for them to consider in what’s already in other bills, including around:

  • Strengthening environmental justice: 2913/S.426
  • Getting serious about driving energy storage (and Massachusetts’s piece of the jobs and industry): 1746, S.1874, H.2600
  • Empowering communities to drive renewable energy forward collectively: 1745, S.1834
  • Modernizing our electricity grid to lower costs, promote energy efficiency, and protect low-income households: 1725, S.1875

Time is short. Fortunately, however you slice it, the legislature has plenty of opportunities—and plenty of proposals already drafted—for taking the next important steps on climate and clean energy.

Mike Jacobs owner

Posted in: Energy Tags: , , ,

Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.

Show Comments


Comment Policy

UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, self-promotional, obscene, rude, or disruptive will be removed.

Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. UCS respects your privacy and will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.

  • K.

    Often left off the plate of discussion is the exorbitant energy use of the wireless cloud and Internet of Things. Limits are sorely needed.

    Another health and environmental aspect relates to the design of the electrical grid, which also includes wireless within numerous parts, whether meters to monitor alternative energy systems. The electrical grid is poorly designed to prevent electromagnetic emissions: some wires are too small, loads uneven, shielded wires minimal, ground current allowed. Wireless itself also poses a health, environmental, and climate risk. The reason is not because of ionic bonds breaking, but more subtle changes such as the movement of electrons and protons. As far as climate, impacts are not well understood or researched to my knowledge. However, there are a few examples of research indicating that the atmosphere, rain, and lightning can be impacted by man-made electromagnetic energy. Lightning increases, for one. Rain may become more acidic. The ionosphere may be altered as well.

    The biological impact on our body is also a concern.

    If in Massachusetts, please see patreon dot com backslash heal for information on legislation around this issue.

  • Jon

    The existing Massachusetts RPS standard already requires a 101% renewable energy by 2080. RPS qualified generation includes wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, digester gas, and waste energy.

    The Massachusetts Clean Energy Standard required 80% clean energy by 2050. CES qualified generation includes large scale hydro, nuclear, and generation that’s 50% cleaner that existing natural gas generation.

    On top of that the MassDEP’s CMR 7.74 mandates an 80% reduction of CO2 from all MA based generation by 2050.

    What more do you want? Want electricity rate is high enough for the Commonwealth’s ratepayers?

    We all want clean air and water, so let the existing regulations do their job before suggesting we are not doing enuugh.

    • ucsjrogers

      I’m with you on clean air and water, Jon. On electricity rates, it’s pretty clear that heavy reliance on natural gas is more of a problem than a solution.

      On the RPS: There are small, separate tiers that cover existing resources (2%, maybe) and waste-to-energy (3.5%), but the main piece of the RPS (“Class “I) is only 25% by 2030 (increasing 1% per year from the current 13%). That’s not nearly strong enough to get us where we need to. And waiting till 2050 isn’t an option, particularly given our need to electrify more of the economy — transportation and heating, for example — to get off dirtier fuels.

      Governance should be — has to be — a process of continuous improvement. If existing laws and regulations aren’t strong enough to get us where we need to go, we need stronger. And they aren’t, so we do.

      Thanks,

      John