Kentucky's major utilities, Louisville Gas & Electric and Kentucky Utilities, are asking the state's Public Service Commission to approve a plan to build natural-gas power plants in Louisville and Mercer County - and residents can voice their input on the plan at a virtual public hearing tomorrow afternoon.

Critics and environmental groups say they're concerned about the long-term impact on ratepayers - the total cost of the projects are estimated at more than $1 billion - and the environmental footprint.

Carrie Ray - director of energy programs with the Mountain Association - said the plants will be cranking out greenhouse emissions for decades, amid an uncertain future for the price of natural gas.

"However, we do know that natural-gas prices are extremely volatile," said Ray. "And we know that investing in plants like this is is locking LG&E and KU customers into the costs of this power plant again, for 40 years."

The utilities contend their proposal also includes investments in in solar and battery-storage facilities to meet projected energy needs. For more information on joining the virtual meeting at 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time tomorrow, visit psc.ky.gov.

Ray said the utilities' plan to build a plant in the predominantly Black area of West Louisville will increase health risks for the city's most vulnerable residents, noting that communities of color and low-income communities in the state disproportionately bear the burden of polluting industries...

"And suffer from increased heart disease, increased levels of asthma and respiratory illnesses and cancer," said Ray. "So from an environmental-justice standpoint, in particular, this West Louisville plant is very concerning."

She said she believes the utilities could focus on improving residential and commercial energy efficiency, along with investing more in renewables.

"We believe there are alternatives to building these plants that both the Public Service Commission and LG&E KU need to be at digging into more thoroughly," said Ray, "before saying that the only choice is to lock ourselves into 40 more years of natural gas."

An in-person meeting on the proposal will be held in Louisville this Wednesday at the Louisville Free Public Library. Comments can also be submitted via email to 'PSC.comment@ky.gov.'

A federal proposal moving through Congress could stall Michigan's booming rooftop solar industry by ending key tax credits that have fueled clean energy growth, nationwide.

What is being called the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" would eliminate the 30% credit for rooftop solar and other home energy systems, including those leased by companies.

Michigan leads the nation in Inflation Reduction Act-funded projects, attracting more than $27 billion in investment and creating more than 26,000 jobs.

Allan O'Shea, founder and CEO of 50-year-old CBS Solar in Copemish, said about 90% of his family-owned business is residential rooftop solar.

"That 90% would lose one of the benefits that go with solar and that's a 30% tax credit," O'Shea pointed out. "The other 10% of our business is commercial and it would survive but the damage would be done. We're talking 25+ employees here."

O'Shea sent a heartfelt letter to most senators, expressing concerns about the bill's effects on his livelihood and others'. Supporters of the big tax-cut and spending bill argued it would boost the economy and strengthen national security.

Backers also said the bill delivers the biggest tax cut in U.S. history for those earning $30,000 to $80,000 a year, with 15% off their taxes. O'Shea emphasized he and his customers are money-smart and value long-term investments, adding the issue is not the goal, but how the bill is being pushed through.

"I just hope for the saner minds, the senators and the Congress people that we have in Michigan, to step up and slow the pace down," O'Shea urged. "You can sunset it."

In 2023, solar power jumped 51% nationwide, with solar making up more than half of all the new electricity added to the grid.


get more stories like this via email

A new analysis of what Congressional lawmakers have dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act found it would eliminate thousands of jobs in South Dakota and slow economic growth.

The bill's current language repeals multiple federal policies, funding programs and tax credits meant to boost American clean energy and manufacturing.

Daniel O'Brien, senior modeling analyst for the nonpartisan think tank Energy Innovation, said South Dakota could lose as many as 1,600 jobs by 2030 as funding is diverted to jobs in the coal, oil and gas industries.

"Those are but a fraction of the number of jobs that are being lost in manufacturing, construction, utilities, farming and agriculture," O'Brien explained.

O'Brien noted up to 840,000 jobs nationwide could be eliminated over the next five years if the current bill remains intact. It repeals more than $500 billion in Inflation Reduction Act investments, which some House Republicans have dubbed a "green new scam."

South Dakota households currently benefit from low energy prices, partly due to the growth of renewable energy. The industry has drawn more manufacturing to the state, along with data centers in need of large amounts of cheap power. But the analysis showed a shift toward fossil fuels will increase annual statewide energy bills by more than $180 million by 2035.

O'Brien stressed industries looking to reduce costs may choose to operate elsewhere.

"When you repeal these tax credits, you lose the incentivization of companies to build out cheap renewables in South Dakota," O'Brien pointed out. "For that reason, companies that are relying on their cheap power might go to other states or they might move outside of the U.S."

He added gas prices are also expected to rise with the repeal of EPA rules on vehicle tailpipe emissions and fuel economy standards. Zero-emission vehicle sales in South Dakota are expected to fall from more than 50% in 2030 to around 30% over the next five years.

As Washington D.C.'s sole gas company continues a multi-billion dollar, 40-year project to replace methane pipes, clean energy advocates argue the projects are misguided and alternatives to gas pipes are better for public health and the environment.

Washington Gas's plan will upgrade 200 miles of gas pipes in the District, costing more than $200 million for the third phase of pipe replacement, paid for by rate hikes on consumers.

In February, a majority of District council members signed a letter urging the Public Service Commission to direct the company to focus only on pipes that need to be fixed.

The company has fallen behind on a similar project in Maryland.

Claire Mills, District of Columbia campaigns manager with the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said many pipes being replaced are plastic and less than 25 years old.

She says only lead pipes over 40 years old are likely to leak.

"Even small gas leaks that don't have the potential to explode," said Mills, "are putting methane gas, which is a hugely powerful greenhouse gas, into our atmosphere and creating climate change."

Washington Gas claims in a brochure that the D.C. project has led to the creation of more than 600 jobs. The company also argues it cuts down on greenhouse gas emissions by more than 5,000 metric tons.

Since 2018, when the District project began, the number of gas leaks across the District has decreased by nearly 25%, according to the Public Service Commission.

There were more than 1,200 instances of the gas leaks in 2023.

Mills says groups like hers are urging the Public Service Commission to create a plan that transitions the District to clean electricity, rather than doubling down on methane gas.

"Even if your gas pipe is all good, just burning methane gas in your home in your gas stove or your furnace has really negative health impacts," said Mills. "So in the long term, the real solution to this problem is moving the District off of methane gas through a managed transition that takes a serious approach."

The Public Service Commission is holding a hearing on the project tomorrow at its office in downtown D.C. at 5:30 p.m.