COLUMBUS, Ohio - Essential elements of Ohio's clean-energy law could be scrubbed. When the General Assembly returns from break, Senator Bill Seitz (R-Green Township) is expected to introduce legislation that would limit how much utilities can spend on energy-efficiency programs and eliminate requirements for in-state solar and wind power.

According to the executive director of Ohio Partners for Affordable Energy, Dave Rinebolt, rolling the standards back would send the wrong message to the investment community.

Rinebolt said such action would show "that Ohio is not interested in moving forward in the critical energy sector, and that will have impacts on our ability to attract new investment, new companies and build new companies here in Ohio."

Seitz says he's only looking to modify the standard, which requires utilities to obtain a certain percentage of their electricity from renewables and to reduce energy consumption. But Rinebolt and other consumer advocates say the standards have created jobs, saved customers money and made the state more competitive, and should be left alone.

Over 1,000 renewable-energy projects have been built in Ohio since the state standard was introduced five years ago, including a $600 million investment in a wind farm, the largest single corporate investment in the state in the past couple of years.

Rinebolt said that, besides being critical to economic development, the standards also are a pocketbook issue for consumers.

"The Public Utilities Commission just released a report that indicates that these renewable-energy projects are actually reducing energy prices that customers pay."

Senator Seitz has also indicated a concern about the price of energy-efficiency programs, which Rinebolt said have proved their effectiveness. He pointed to a recent analysis that found energy-efficiency programs essentially produce power at a rate of 1.6 cents per kilowatt hour.

"A new natural-gas power plant produces energy at a cost of about 7 cents, so if you look at energy efficiency as the equivalent of a power plant, there's no doubt that it's the cheapest power plant going," Rinebolt said.

It's estimated Ohio's energy-efficiency laws have achieved over $900 million in savings for Ohio ratepayers.




get more stories like this via email

Ohio will receive more than $32 million in federal funding to help revive auto manufacturing and jobs in the state, specifically electric vehicle production at a plant in Toledo.

U.S. vehicle manufacturing has been on the decline since the 1970s, but the Biden administration is providing $1.7 billion in grants from the Inflation Reduction Act to help convert nearly a dozen manufacturing facilities on the cusp of closing into EV producers.

Anne Blair, vice president of policy for the nonprofit Electrification Coalition, said the projects will collectively create more than 2,900 new, skilled jobs and help ensure more than 15,000 union workers are employed in eight states.

"We're excited to see the Biden administration investing in domestic manufacturing of EVs," Blair pointed out. "This funding will create good-paying American jobs and give consumers and businesses more vehicle choices."

Around four in 10 Americans said they are "very or somewhat likely" to consider an electric vehicle as their next car purchase, according to a 2023 Pew Research Center survey. Opponents of EVs argued they are expensive, and said people are not buying enough of them to warrant more production.

Blair believes the nation's continued heavy reliance on fossil fuels leaves it increasingly vulnerable to foreign influence and the whim of global markets.

"For a century, oil has had a monopoly on our transportation, which has led to dire national security risks," Blair asserted. "Electric vehicles are a critical alternative to the dangers of our oil dependency."

The U.S. is among the largest consumers of oil in the world; in 2022, the Americans used an average of around 20 million barrels of petroleum per day, according to federal data.


get more stories like this via email

By Miranda Lipton for Reasons to be Cheerful.
Broadcast version by Suzanne Potter for California News Service reporting for the Solutions Journalism Network-Public News Service Collaboration

Across the United States, landfills are accumulating trash faster than materials can decompose. In the nearly 2,000 landfills in the US, food waste contributes over 50 percent of fugitive methane emissions from municipal solid waste landfills, those invisible plumes of potent greenhouse gas emissions that seep out of landfills and into the atmosphere.

Landfills rank as the third-largest human-generated source of methane emissions in the US, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). While diverting trash altogether would be the preferred outcome for pollution reduction, about 500 landfills across the country have turned to a novel way of combating pollution from the waste that is ending up in landfills: capturing the gas emitted from organic materials and transforming it into electricity.

"Methane is already in our environment today. You either use it or lose it," says Mike Bakas, alluding to the methane that is wasted if it's not captured. Bakas leads all landfill projects and renewable natural gas business at Ameresco, a company that designs, builds and operates renewable energy plants for landfills around the US.

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, about 28 times as potent as carbon dioxide at trapping atmospheric heat. Capturing it removes the gas's ability to stimulate the greenhouse effect that comes with its infiltration into our atmosphere.

Landfills that utilize Landfill Gas-to-Energy (LFGTE) systems, which allow for the conversion of methane to energy, are equipped with infrastructure designed to collect the gas, often encased with a layer of clay or synthetic membrane to prevent gas from escaping into the atmosphere. Once collected, the methane can be utilized in one of a few ways, as electricity to use on-site or feed into the local power grid, or as natural gas.

The amount of energy generated through LFGTE projects varies widely depending on the size and age of the landfill, the composition of waste and the efficiency of the gas collection system.

One massive landfill that spans 629 acres in Virginia produces enough landfill gas (LFG) to create 70,000 megawatt hours of energy each year - that's enough to power about 6,700 homes for a year, based on the average US household's annual electricity consumption.

While most landfills using LFGTE are actively collecting waste, not all of them are. "We've got a landfill that's been shut down for about 10 years and we still have another 10 to 20 years of gas in it," says Bakas.

Puente Hills in California is the largest LFGTE program in the country, producing enough energy to power about 70,000 homes. Before the Puente Hills landfill closed in 2013, it was the largest landfill in the US, spanning 700 acres and reaching a whopping height of 500 feet above ground level.

These types of projects first came on the scene in the mid-1970s, and experienced a big rise in popularity in the '90s - largely due to the fact that, in 1994, the EPA began encouraging landfill operators to develop LFGTE projects through its Landfill Methane Outreach Program.

So why isn't every landfill owner taking advantage of its latent treasure trove of energy? Funding, mostly.

According to Bakas, LFGTE systems can cost between $10 million and $100 million to implement.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) provided tax deductions for landfills to install these systems, but there are still limitations that prohibit smaller landfills from being able to finance LFGTE. Specifically, the IRA didn't explicitly permit the use of Investment Tax Credits (ITC) for LFGTE projects, something Bakas says the industry is pushing for, as it would go a long way in helping smaller landfill projects that wouldn't otherwise be economically feasible.

There are also caveats embedded among the IRA's tax offerings that restrict landfills from receiving any of these benefits unless its owner owns both the landfill collection system and the energy processing plant, which, according to Bakas, is often not the case.

"So we need the treasury to come out and say, you can own either one or both, which would free us up to invest money in the equipment we need to do it," says Bakas.

And supporting these projects isn't just good for our air quality and atmosphere, but potentially for our pockets too. The dollars put into building these systems can be returned through the sale of electricity. And in some regions, landfill gas projects can generate renewable energy credits, which can be sold to utilities needing to meet renewable energy standards, providing an additional revenue stream.

But these projects aren't always profitable, and some may not have the capacity to ever be.

"To the extent that the site is economic, which I don't think it's a guarantee that it is, operators would probably look at how much [energy] can we produce ... and how close are we to where the energy can be used?" says Daniel Bresette, president of the Environmental and Energy Study Institute.

Bresette says that if a plant is processing landfill gas for electricity, as opposed to other types of energy, the plant may be able to do so with existing equipment, and with less concern for where the landfill is located. This is because the electricity can be fed directly into the energy grid, rather than needing to be transferred off-site to be processed.

The EPA estimates that a project that requires the installation of a new capture system would cost about $8.5 million to install and maintain, and would cost about another $3.5 million over the course of its 15-year lifespan. That number would drop dramatically for a project that doesn't require the support of a supplemental capture facility to process the LFG. It would also drop if tax credits, carbon credits or on-site electricity are utilized.

Landfills of a certain size are required by the Clean Air Act to install and operate gas collection systems. For those that don't meet sizing requirements, the industry is pushing for more government support.

"If the treasury confirms that we can use the ITC tax credits under the IRA towards these projects, then those smaller projects that were not economic might very well become economic," says Bakas.


Miranda Lipton wrote this article for Reasons to be Cheerful.


get more stories like this via email

New York's Building Code Council is set to include the All-Electric Buildings Act in its 2025 code update.

The 2023 law bans natural gas and other fossil fuels in new buildings. All-electric cooking and heating will be required for new buildings of less than seven stories by 2026, and 2029 for taller buildings.

Michael Hernandez, New York policy director with Rewiring America, said it's one thing to pass laws and quite another to implement them.

"It is vitally important that we stop digging ourselves in a hole by building new buildings with fossil-fuel combustion systems installed in them," said Hernandez. "Those fossil-fuel combustion systems would be in place for the next 20 years, if not longer."

He added that it's impractical to install fossil-fuel systems that would be phased out before the end of its lifespan.

The council will hold a public comment period before voting on the new code language. Buildings are 32% of New York's annual greenhouse gas emissions - making them the state's largest emitter.

To meet its 2050 net-zero emissions goal, the state has to install 396,000 heat pumps above expected sales.

While the new language applies to new buildings, other programs exist for homeowners and building owners to go green.

Hernandez noted that funds from the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law are helping existing buildings convert to electricity.

He said this all begins with a free home energy audit from NYSERDA.

"They'll have a qualified contractor come look at your house," said Hernandez, "and say, 'okay, these are the energy efficiency measures that you would benefit from, and these efficiency measures will make your energy costs go down.' "

Those contractors can help homeowners receive state and federal rebates to implement the recommended measures.

Low-income New Yorkers can qualify for 100% of electrification and climate efficiency rebates depending on a person's household income.