North Carolina’s Big Clean Energy Plan An Example For Battleground States
Courtesy of RMI.
By Heather House & Shelby Kuenzli
On October 13, 2021, North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper signed into law the first major piece of climate legislation in the Tar Heel state in recent years. North Carolina House Bill 951 — Energy Solutions for North Carolina — was passed by both chambers of the North Carolina state legislature with bipartisan support. Being that North Carolina is a battleground or “moderate” state, this legislation speaks volumes about how climate solutions can become ground for both sides to advance priorities.
With the federal clean energy performance plan hanging in the balance, it’s more important than ever for states and local governments to step up and implement climate action plans. Sixteen states thus far have passed laws requiring greenhouse gas emissions reduction, yet the only other Southeastern state to have done so before October 13 was Virginia. Many typically progressive states have yet to pass similar legislation.
This breakthrough law allows North Carolina to transition from having a Clean Energy Plan and carbon reduction targets to having a concrete law with enforceable steps. The law, while not perfect, is an important step forward and a win for the climate. With this legislation in place, the imminent rulemakings of the North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) will be an important focus for stakeholders to shape the implementation of this new law.
Solar panels in North Carolina organic garden, by Cynthia Shahan/CleanTechnica.
What’s in the Law
The Energy Solutions for North Carolina Act is a breakthrough for advocates and stakeholders across the state who have been working for years to advance a clean energy agenda. The Act directs the NCUC to take all reasonable steps to reduce carbon emissions from the electric sector 70 percent by 2030 and 100 percent by 2050. To achieve this goal, the NCUC will have to implement a plan with the electric public utilities including input from stakeholders.
Here are some significant wins from the Act:
- Of all new solar implemented, 45 percent will have to go through competitive solicitations and must be third-party owned and operated; the other 55 percent will remain utility-owned. This is a win for third-party solar developers and customer rates.
- All coal retirement expenses shall be at least 50 percent securitized, a step that can reduce the costs to utility customers of accelerated plant retirements.
- Performance-based regulations were authorized by H951. While this has the potential to be a win, the details of how the implementation shakes out will determine its success.
- The NCUC will explore on-bill financing of energy efficiency.
- The NCUC will develop a rider for a voluntary energy program that will allow customers to purchase renewable energy or renewable energy credits. This is posed to be a big win for commercial, industrial, and residential customers, but it remains unclear on whether this program will be inclusive of local governments.
These developments in isolation are wins for the state that stakeholders should be proud of; however, a lot of attention has been centered on the shortcomings of the Act. Consumers and consumer advocates, who are concerned about potential electricity rate increases, preferred 100 percent securitization of coal retirement costs and 100 percent competitive all-source procurement. While these targets were reduced, the passing of this legislation creates major strides forward in the right direction.
North Carolina’s Clean Energy Transition — Wins and Lessons Learned
While a lot of the legislation was crafted behind closed doors with few stakeholders directly involved, there were a lot of voices that helped influence this legislation that haven’t been historically present in energy or regulation engagements. For example, the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) led an inclusive stakeholder process that included local governments, businesses, industries, power providers, technology developers, residents, and others to increase the use of clean energy technologies, energy efficiency measures, and clean transportation solutions. RMI was honored to support DEQ and the state to run this inclusive stakeholder process and summarize the input from these groups that led to the development of the Clean Energy Plan (CEP).
Following the release of the CEP, DEQ and the state demonstrated commendable leadership. They didn’t put the plan on a shelf. Instead, they worked with a broad set of North Carolina stakeholders to explore two of the top CEP recommendations. DEQ was tasked with setting up “key stakeholder groups to design policies that align regulatory incentives and processes with 21st-century public policy goals, customer expectations, utility needs, and technology innovation.”
RMI supported this effort by facilitating a group of North Carolina energy stakeholders, alongside the Regulatory Assistance Project, through the North Carolina Energy Regulatory Process to develop recommendations for policy and regulatory changes. The efforts of these North Carolina stakeholders yielded a variety of policy proposals and proposed legislation that were carried forward into the 2021 legislative session.
Another component that may have contributed to this legislation was stakeholder input received on Duke’s 2020 Biennial Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). RMI, through the American Cities Climate Challenge Renewables Accelerator, in partnership with World Resources Institute, supported 15 North Carolina cities and counties in learning about pathways for elevating their goals and priorities. The local governments from across the state then requested that the NCUC take their clean energy goals into consideration when reviewing the IRP. All of these cities’ concerns became key topics during legislative discussions. This is prime example of the power that local governments have in swaying the clean energy conversation in their state.
The persistent work of cities, stakeholders, and advocates in North Carolina to make their voices, and the voices they represent, heard haven’t gone unanswered. While the resulting legislation in North Carolina may not be ideal from the perspective of all stakeholders, because of their efforts, the law now better supports a cleaner and more equitable energy transition plan.
After Legislation Comes Implementation
While the Energy Solutions for North Carolina Act is a big win for the state and an example of bipartisan climate collaboration, more work is ahead of North Carolina stakeholders. Over the next 180 days, the commission will host several proceedings and rulemakings that will determine the extent to which the Act’s vision is realized. North Carolina stakeholders need to provide input to ensure the ambition of the North Carolina Clean Energy Plan’s main carbon reduction target is met equitably. RMI was pleased to have the opportunity to support North Carolina stakeholders in getting to this point and looks forward to continuing to support them in realizing the law’s target CO2 reductions.
Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.
Environment
Solar and wind industry faces up to $7 billion tax hike under Trump’s big bill, trade group says
Is Nissan raising the red flag? Nissan is cutting about 15% of its workforce and is now asking suppliers for more time to make payments.
Nissan starts job cuts, asks supplier to delay payments
As part of its recovery plan, Nissan announced in May that it plans to cut 20,000 jobs, or around 15% of its global workforce. It’s also closing several factories to free up cash and reduce costs.
Nissan said it will begin talks with employees at its Sunderland plant in the UK this week about voluntary retirement opportunities. The company is aiming to lay off around 250 workers.
The Sunderland plant is the largest employer in the city with around 6,000 workers and is critical piece to Nissan’s comeback. Nissan will build its next-gen electric vehicles at the facility, including the new LEAF, Juke, and Qashqai.
According to several emails and company documents (via Reuters), Nissan is also working with its suppliers to for more time to make payments.
“They could choose to be paid immediately or opt for a later payment,” Nissan said. The company explained in a statement to Reuters that it had incentivized some of its suppliers in Europe and the UK to accept more flexible payment terms, at no extra cost.
The emails show that the move would free up cash for the first quarter (April to June), similar to its request before the end of the financial year.
One employee said in an email to co-workers that Nissan was asking suppliers “again” to delay payments. The emails, viewed by Reuters, were exchanged between Nissan workers in Europe and the United Kingdom.
Nissan is taking immediate action as part of its recovery plan, aiming to turn things around, the company said in a statement.
“While we are taking these actions, we aim for sufficient liquidity to weather the costs of the turnaround actions and redeem bond maturities,” the company said.
Nissan didn’t comment on the internal discussions, but the emails did reveal it gave suppliers two options. They could either delay payments at a higher interest rate, or HSBC would make the payment, and Nissan would repay the bank with interest.
The company had 2.2 trillion yen ($15.2 billion) in cash and equivalents at the end of March, but it has around 700 billion yen ($4.9 billion) in debt that’s due later this year.
As part of Re:Nissan, the Japanese automaker’s recovery plan, Nissan looks to cut costs by 250 billion yen. By fiscal year 2026, it plans to return to profitability.
Electrek’s Take
With an aging vehicle lineup and a wave of new low-cost rivals from China, like BYD, Nissan is quickly falling behind.
Nissan is launching several new electric and hybrid vehicles over the next few years, including the next-gen LEAF, which is expected to help boost sales.
In China, the world’s largest EV market, Nissan’s first dedicated electric sedan, the N7, is off to a hot start with over 20,000 orders in 50 days.
The N7 will play a role in Nissan’s recovery efforts as it plans to export it to overseas markets. It will be one of nine new energy vehicles, including EVs and PHEVs, that Nissan plans to launch in China.
Can Nissan turn things around? Or will it continue falling behind the pack? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
Elon Musk said to bet on Tesla delivering Robotaxi in June, yet those who did just lost big
Elon Musk said just a few weeks ago that betting on Tesla delivering its promised Robotaxi in June is a “money-making opportunity,” and yet, those who listened to him just lost big.
A fan of Musk lost $50,000 betting on Tesla Robotaxi.
With the rise in prediction markets, you can bet on virtually everything these days.
Sites like Polymarket have about a dozen prediction markets related to Tesla, where anyone can bet on events such as Tesla delivering its robotaxi service.
There have been a couple of specific markets about that, and Musk directly commented on one titled “Will Tesla launch a driverless Robotaxi service before July?:
Less than two weeks ago, the market gave Tesla only a 14% chance of launching the service, and Musk called it a “money-making opportunity.”
At the time, less than $500,000 was traded on this market, but Musk made it way more popular.
Now, over $7 million has been traded on this market, and while Tesla claims to have launched its Robotaxi service on June 22nd, the market currently gives Tesla less than 1% chance today, with less than a day left in June.
Each prediction market has clear “resolution” rules and Musk evidently didn’t read them before suggesting there was money to be made betting “yes”:
This market will resolve to “Yes” if Tesla publicly launches a fully driverless taxi service by June 30, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, it will resolve to “No.”
Any service that allows a member of the general public to summon and ride in a Tesla vehicle operating without any human—onboard or remote—actively controlling the vehicle will count. A human may be present in the vehicle or monitoring remotely for emergency intervention, but they must not be physically positioned to take control (for example, no safety driver in the driver’s seat) and must not actively steer, brake, accelerate, or otherwise drive the car under normal operation.
A program that is restricted to Tesla employees, invite-only testers, closed-beta participants, factory self-delivery features, or the mere release of Full Self-Driving software for private owner-drivers will not qualify. Regulatory permits or approvals, press demonstrations, and prototype unveilings without live public ridership likewise will not count toward resolution.
This market’s resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.
There are a few things in the resolution that disqualify what Tesla launched on June 22nd. First off, there’s a human inside the vehicle ready to take control with their finger on a kill switch. We have already seen interventions from the in-car Tesla supervisor, who are still very much necessary.
Secondly, the resolution requires a launch that is not restricted to an invite-only basis, which is currently the case.
The level of remote operations could also prove challenging to confirm, and it is part of the resolution.
Electrek found someone who lost $50,000 following Musk’s “money-making opportunity”:
Someone else has lost $28,000 and is now betting another $27,000 that Tesla will achieve this by the end of July.
Currently, Polymarket‘s odds only put a 21% chance of Tesla delivering on the service based on the previously mentioned resolution before August:
There’s another market predicting if “Tesla launches unsupervised full self-driving (FSD) by the end of 2025” that has arguably an even more restrictive resolution, and it currently gives it a 59% chance of happening:
With Polymarket, users are not really “betting” on an outcome, but they are trying to beat the current odds by buying shares in “yes” or “no”, which they can sell to other users before the end of the timeline.
Electrek’s Take
It’s quite amusing that Musk was so confident people would believe in his Robotaxi that he didn’t bother to investigate what other people think an actual robotaxi service would entail, like in the Polymarket resolution.
Historically speaking, you are way better off betting against whatever timeline Musk claims about self-driving. He has been consistently wrong about it for a decade now.
Polymarket even has a market about Tesla launching unsupervised self-driving in California this year. I threw some money in that one because California has much stricter regulations when it comes to self-driving, and it requires a lot of testing before being deployed, as described in the resolution.
I doubt Tesla can go through that this year, but it’s not impossible.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike