CHARLESTON, W. Va. – Consumer and citizen groups say a plan by First Energy to sell the Pleasants Power Station near Belmont, now before the Public Service Commission, is corporate welfare at the expense of ratepayers.

The groups say First Energy selling the Willow Island plant to Mon Power and Potomac Edison would cost the typical ratepayer $60 to $70 a year.

Emmett Pepper, executive director of the advocacy group Energy Efficient West Virginia, says First Energy wants to shift the big, coal-fired power station from a subsidiary – where the corporation has all the risk – to two subsidiaries where, by law, the companies can charge all costs to consumers.

"Instead of First Energy, which currently owns the plant, to go around the free market, and to make it so that they are guaranteed income, while we ratepayers take the risk," he points out.

First Energy argues that its projections indicate the need for more generating capacity.

Pepper says the company is using a higher standard for peak demand than grid regulators require.

At a hearing last week, the PSC chairman said the commission is looking at conditions for the sale that might change the result if the company's projections are overstated.

Power companies have moved to shift several coal plants from risky, deregulated markets to West Virginia's regulated market in recent years.

Soft demand for electricity, low-cost natural gas and cheap wind and solar is increasingly making big baseline coal plants such as Pleasants expensive white elephants.

Pepper argues that Pleasants is no longer competitive or valuable on the open market.

He says if First Energy were really concerned about meeting demand, there are easier gains to be made through energy efficiency.

"'Cause it's cheaper to incentivize people through rebates and such to become more energy efficient than it is to pay to produce electricity,” he explains. “This is one opportunity where, A – we don't think we need it at all, and B – if there is any kind of need in the near future, it's going to be very small."

The Public Service Commission looks likely to have a decision on the sale by the end of the year.





get more stories like this via email

A Senate committee will decide whether to advance House Bill 1007, which, if passed, would allow Indiana utilities to recover costs for small modular nuclear reactors before obtaining permits.

The bill also includes a 20% tax credit for reactor manufacturers. Supporters said it will lower long-term energy costs and improve reliability, while opponents warned it could raise consumer bills.

Robyn Skyua-Boss, Hoosier Chapter director for the Sierra Club, said the bill shifts financial risk to utility customers.

"Hoosier customers could see their bills going up to subsidize and cover the costs of building out these extremely expensive small modular nuclear reactors," Skyua-Boss pointed out. "As well as we could see costs going up because of the provisions in the bill that could delay coal plant retirements."

No small modular nuclear reactors currently operate in the U.S., and past projects have faced cost overruns and cancellations. Opponents cited Indiana's abandoned Marble Hill nuclear plant, which left consumers paying for an incomplete facility.

Skyua-Boss argued the bill could slow Indiana's transition to renewable energy.

"We really want to see more engagement from our state leaders," Skyua-Boss urged. "We want to see community solar legislation advance. Unfortunately, the bills around community solar did not advance this session; instead, we're here talking about House Bill 1007."

Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, the bill's author, said it positions Indiana as an energy leader while balancing cost and sustainability. The bill now moves to a Senate committee.

Clean-energy advocates in Texas are closely monitoring a bill before the Legislature that, if passed, could stop the development and operation of additional projects.

The state has experienced a huge increase in wind and solar energy use.

A recent study shows that Texas ranks first in the nation for wind power generation, second for solar power generation, and is second in the nation for battery storage.

Luke Metzger, executive director of Environment Texas, said they're hosting a meeting tonight to better explain Senate Bill 819 - which could hinder further expansion.

"Our webinar seeks to educate the public about some of these attacks on clean energy," said Metzger, "reminding people how critical they are for our environment, for public health, as well as working to bust some of the myths out there about renewables."

A similar bill passed in the Texas Senate during the last legislative session but didn't make it through the House of Representatives.

The webinar starts at 6 o'clock. Viewers can register on the Environment Texas website.

The demand for electricity in the State is projected to double over the next five years.

Problems with the Texas grid have more people turning to clean energy to cool and heat their homes and businesses.

Metzger said it's estimated that Texans save $1 billion each month because of wind and solar.

"As renewables have grown - as of just last year producing almost one third of the electricity in the state of Texas," said Metzger, "we're starting to see some pushback from fossil-fuel companies and others that are threatened by the growth in clean energy."

He said Senate Bill 819 includes discriminatory permitting requirements, setbacks for wind and solar facilities, and new taxes and fees targeting renewable energy.





get more stories like this via email

In Wyoming, electric utility PacifiCorp's draft 2025 plans show a shift away from renewable energy additions compared with last year, according to a new report.

Final plans are expected later this month, following industry wins during the state's legislative session. One new law passed by the Wyoming Legislature decreased the severance tax rate for surface coal from 6.5% to 6%, saving the industry about $10 million annually. A second creates a new fund, also $10 million, to support companies pumping carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas, into the ground in order to increase oil production.

Emma Jones, climate and energy organizer for the Wyoming chapter of the Sierra Club, said the moves are pushing the state in the wrong direction.

"What it's doing is providing an incentive for fossil fuel industries to continue to produce carbon dioxide," Jones pointed out. "What we've seen is that it's not increasing the number of jobs available for people and it's not making energy cheaper."

Jones added in Wyoming, tax breaks and extra funding to fossil fuel companies come at a cost to state beneficiaries, such as education and public services. According to the report, in 2023, the state's electricity generation profile consisted of about 71% coal-fired power plants, 21% wind and the rest was a mix.

Jones noted state officials fret Wyoming is becoming a "retirement community." She emphasized over roughly the past decade, the state ranked second lowest in the U.S. for job growth, at just 1% compared with the national average of nearly 14%.

"Our most important export today is not coal or natural gas, but jobs," Jones contended. "Skilled laborers, educated young people who are leaving the state for better opportunities elsewhere."

In its 2023 plan, PacifiCorp calculated two outlooks, one with high renewables and one with low. It projected higher renewables would mean about 10,000 more jobs than the alternative.