There is no question that the energy system in this region, and throughout the country, is in a time of transition. Over the last decade, Massachusetts has experienced that rapid shift in our electric market as older power generators have announced retirement with new sources being developed today.
Older, more expensive methods for generating electricity are being driven from the market by more cost-effective, cleaner and efficient power stations. When Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant and Mount Tom Power Station both closed in 2014, almost 800 megawatts of power generation went offline. In total, 4,200 megawatts of plants across New England have announced retirement.
But the lights are staying on. This is because by 2019, more than 4,700 megawatts of electricity capacity will have come online to replace the older facilities. These new investments include dramatic increases in solar generation capacity, now up to 1,000 megawatts in Massachusetts.
Many of our state’s older coal plants are also being converted to cleaner natural gas.
The overall effect is that between 1990 and 2013 carbon dioxide emissions from power plants dropped 51 percent according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Because of that, Massachusetts today has one of the cleanest, and lowest carbon-producing power generation systems in the nation. We’re on the right track.
It would likely surprise many that even through this transition, the last two years have seen the lowest electricity prices in over a decade. Consumers are seeing the benefits of a competitive marketplace for electricity put in place by policymakers more than 15 years ago.
Despite this track record, a plan is being pushed at the state legislature that puts these efforts and new energy investments at risk: outsource a third of our electricity market to government-owned Canadian utilities, entering into a decades-long, subsidized contract to buy hydropower.
Supporters like Hydro-Quebec and Eversource have argued that Massachusetts should embrace this plan. Unfortunately, it is too expensive, unreliable, and the wrong step for our energy future.
If these subsidized utility contracts are approved, energy bills are estimated to increase by up to $777 million each year for Massachusetts residents and businesses, according to a recent study by Dr. Sue Tierney, one of the most respected clean energy experts in the country. That’s more than $20 billion over the life of the contract.
These costs are primarily driven by two factors. First, Commonwealth ratepayers would be on the hook for the construction of expensive and controversial high voltage transmissions lines, currently proposed through places like the White Mountain National Forest. Siting of this project is enormously controversial in New Hampshire. Second, government-owned Hydro-Quebec, which has its own interests to consider, will not sell power to Massachusetts at a below market price.
Reliability is also a key concern. Four of the last six electricity shortage events occurring in New England have actually been caused by Canadian hydropower and transmission failures.
Delivering Canadian hydropower to Massachusetts will require hundreds of miles of new transmission lines crossing difficult terrain and facing extreme weather.
If Massachusetts is serious about meeting its long-term Global Warming Solutions Act mandates, picking winners and losers is not the answer. Since 1990, our cleaner power generating system has cut carbon emissions in half, helping drive a 22-percent emissions reduction economy-wide in Massachusetts.
At the same time, New England’s transportation industry has increased carbon emissions and now emits more than double that from power plants. Instead of spending $20 billion in ratepayer funds on expensive hydro, Massachusetts should be developing a comprehensive plan that addresses its largest carbon emissions source — transportation.
Just as concerning is that this hydro plan will enrich two utilities, without a clear analysis of how Massachusetts ratepayers stand to benefit. Eversource is partnering with Hydro-Quebec in the push to build the hundreds of miles of transmission lines, and the two are the strongest proponents of this subsidized hydro proposal. They stand to earn hundreds of millions of dollars in profits for building these lines — if they receive the subsidy from Massachusetts consumers.
The great progress made on electricity in Massachusetts should be allowed to continue, ensuring a strong energy future. Power plants are being retired and replaced without the need for the state to step in and subsidize expensive long-term contracts. Canadian hydro is already part of our system, competing with all other power generation sources to deliver the lowest price possible to consumers.
Massachusetts power generators welcome that competition with all resources pushing to provide the cleanest, most efficient and cost competitive electricity supplies possible.
Consumers deserve nothing less.
Dan Dolan is president of the New England Power Generators Association.