CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The demand the huge Atlantic Coast Pipeline was intended to meet is disappearing, according to documents from the corporations behind the project.

Dominion and Duke Energy own almost all of the pipeline, as well as the electric utilities it would supply with natural gas. When applying for a federal permit, they argued it was needed to meet rising electricity demand in North Carolina and coastal Virginia.

But Cathy Kunkel, an energy analyst with the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said utility filings in those states now show the outlook has changed dramatically - in part because of competition from cheap, renewable energy.

"Dominion is not projecting any increase in natural-gas demand until 2032,” Kunkel said. “Duke is still planning to build some natural-gas plants, but most of that has shifted to the late 2020s."

The energy companies say they need more pipeline capacity to move fracked gas out of the Marcellus and Utica fields of northern West Virginia, where the price for it is artificially depressed by a transportation bottleneck.

The 600-mile pipeline across the three states has faced a number of setbacks, including lawsuits by landowners and conservationists. It was recently announced that the total cost of the project would rise to $7.5 billion, and its opening would be delayed until 2021.

If the builders can get state utility regulators' approval, they can shift the full expense of the line onto ratepayers, along with a guaranteed profit. But Kunkel said investors in the utilities may be starting to worry about the financial risks.

"The project has been delayed by these court challenges, it's also over-budget,” she said. “And if the state regulators say, 'You clearly don't need all of the gas capacity that you signed up for here; we're not going to let you charge it to your ratepayers,' then that would be a very significant blow."

Kunkel said the incentives tend to make utilities and pipeline companies overestimate demand and overbuild capacity. She said that's becoming a more serious issue as climate change poses increasing risks.

Kunkel helped write the analysis for a report from IEEFA and Oil Change International.



get more stories like this via email

Overseas markets could be harming forests in the U.S. Demand for wood pellets for biomass energy has increased dramatically around the world, especially in Europe where burning wood is treated as renewable energy and heavily subsidized.

The UK-based company Drax Group plans to build a 450,000 ton per year wood pellet plant in Longview.

Peter Riggs, director of the Washington state-based nonprofit Pivot Point, said the region has a productive wood sector.

"This new wood pellet plant proposed for Longview is very different," Riggs pointed out. "First of all, it's not for the domestic market, it's not making pellets for home stoves. It represents a substantial and entirely new source of wood fiber demand for export."

Riggs said much of the biomass would be bound for Asia. His organization signed a letter, along with more than 100 others in the U.S. and Canada, calling for the European Union to stop incentivizing wood burning as renewable energy.

Laura Haight, U.S. policy director for the Partnership for Policy Integrity, said despite its label as renewable energy, burning wood from forests one of the worst activities for the environment. It releases emissions when burned and removes trees that store carbon. Haight's organization also signed the letter to the European Union, urging it to no longer classify forest biomass as renewable.

"It's the money that's driving this system," Haight asserted. "If they change that policy, then this will no longer be subsidized, and we can see a better future for our forests and for our climate."

Riggs noted solar and wind energy were subsidized, and the costs have gone down dramatically. However, the same is not true for forest biomass. He emphasized plant operators have struggled to reduce the costs involved in sourcing, transporting and burning biomass fuels.

"If they're going to subsidize it, you kind of got to subsidize it forever," Riggs contended. "But with wind and solar, those are already cost-competitive."

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has awarded Iowa State University a $1.8 million grant to raise high-dollar crops in the shadow of huge solar array panels that are becoming more common across the state.

Ag researchers and energy experts are studying ways for people to benefit from investments in renewable energy beyond just clean electricity.

It's called agrivoltaics, and it couples solar farms with agricultural practices in, around and underneath huge solar panels, where the resulting shade won't allow traditional agricultural crops to grow well.

Matt O'Neill - professor in plant biology, entomology and microbiology at Iowa State - said researchers are trying what are known as horticultural crops in the shadow of the solar arrays, crops he said could grow better and also tend to be more valuable.

"It's a mix of things," said O'Neill. "It can be things like broccoli, tomatoes, squashes - but also perennial crops like strawberries and blackberries and raspberries. "

O'Neill said Iowa's corn and soybeans, known as commodity crops, need a lot of land to be grown profitably - which is why he says 70% of Iowa's landscape is planted with them.

He said the growing number of solar farms will create more available land for horticultural crops, potentially creating another avenue for people who want to get into farming on a smaller scale than commodity crops such as corn and soybeans require.

O'Neill said there is some evidence that growing horticultural crops beneath the panels creates a cooler micro-climate, allowing the solar arrays to operate more efficiently when they are producing electricity.

Anne Kimber directs the Electric Power Research Center at Iowa State. She said given all of the benefits, she wants people to understand that using farmland in multiple ways - as agrivoltaics does - will be economically and environmentally beneficial for everyone.

"But that means that we're using land in a different way for those kinds of home-grown power systems," said Kimber. "And if we can demonstrate multiple values from these projects, then it does have greater value for the state of Iowa. It has greater value to the people who see these developments happening around them."

Construction on the 1.35-megawatt solar-farm agrivoltaics test site will begin next month on 10 acres south of Ames. Research is scheduled to begin next spring.

Tucson community leaders gathered at an event to highlight opportunities to grow Arizona's clean-energy economy say it's been made more accessible through incentives in President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

Tucson City Council member Kevin Dahl predicted that clean-energy incentives will not only help lower-income households in the state consider solar but will also address a previous gap in benefits for nonprofit organizations. The IRA bill allocates $20 billion for nonprofits to implement projects that cut pollution and energy costs.

"Even as the clean-energy industry has exploded in our state, a lot of Arizonans have been left out," he said. "New solar incentives, however - including a 30% tax credit off the cost of installation and another 30% for standalone battery installation - will be transformative."

Leaders have estimated an additional 150,000 Arizona households will install rooftop solar panels because of the investments present in the Inflation Reduction Act.

More solar power may also be coming to rural Arizonans, with increased funding for the Rural Energy for America Program. It provides grants and loans to farms and small businesses that invest in clean-energy technology.

Robert Neifert, director of business development for Solar Gain, Inc. and co-chair of the Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association, said he's excited about what this could mean for Arizona. He said they're already seeing an uptick in business.

"We were looking at the tax credit going down to 22 [percent], and then down to 10 [percent], and wondering what would happen to solar, in Arizona and the country," he said. "And now, it's turned the other direction and we're more excited than ever. And having 10 years of certainty is absolutely amazing."

Neifert said what is important about the clean-energy transition is that it be accomplished affordably and executed fairly. As some members of Congress try to roll back investments in clean energy, all speakers at the event shared an urgent need to continue with what they called "bold climate action."