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.

The Sierra Club's Utah chapter said electric utility PacifiCorp's long-term plan to embrace renewable energy has changed and is now placing more reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, which they argued poses a threat to the state's resiliency.

A new report commissioned by the Sierra Club aims to highlight the economic impacts of renewable energy in Utah. Put simply, the study found the deployment of renewable energy projects, such as wind, solar and storage facilities, would generate significant economic benefits for the Beehive State.

Luis Miranda, senior campaign organizer for the Sierra Club, acknowledged families in coal country are facing economic uncertainty.

"I can't help but feel so proud for the legacy of generations of Utahns and coal miners and coal plant workers who have sacrificed so much to ensure the lights stay on in this country," Miranda noted. "And yet the question I hear again and again isn't just about jobs, it's about long-term stability."

Miranda explained people want to know if there will be careers allowing them to stay in their communities and plan for the future. He emphasized the answer lies within "greener" forms of energy. But conservatives disagree and argued energy must remain cheap, reliable and dispatchable. Advocates countered they realize the grid cannot solely run on renewables but want to see utilities like PacifiCorp make more of an effort and not stall on progress.

Utah's electricity-generation profile is currently made up of about 47% coal, 36% natural gas and 17% renewables.

Rosa Monahan, staff attorney for the Sierra Club, said PacifiCorp's latest integrated resource plan extends rather than shortens the life of coal operations in Utah and Wyoming. She called it a mistake.

"That is the wrong direction to go," Monahan contended. "To make no progress until after 2030 is really just going to continue to put us behind the 8-ball, and so we want to see progress continuing to move forward as more resources are developed like the long-duration storage, more geothermal, particularly in Utah."

The report authors said the data used in the analysis was developed and came directly from PacifiCorp, when company published a report in 2023 with a "high renewable outlook" portfolio and believed it would be able to meet demand as well as utilize renewable energy in a cost-effective and reliable manner.

A Minnesota organization opposed to a Midwestern carbon pipeline project plans to file a request with state regulators Thursday, asking them to reconsider permit approval. They say upheaval in South Dakota raises new questions. Summit Carbon Solutions has been trying to secure permits and voluntary land agreements for a multi-state pipeline to capture ethanol plant emissions for underground storage. The company just asked that its South Dakota application be suspended indefinitely following a new action to ban seizing land by eminent domain.

Maggie Schuppert, director of strategic initiatives for the environmental group CURE, said it is one reason Minnesota's Public Utilities Commission should take a second look.

"They didn't know South Dakota was going to pass this law, which again, sort of calls into question the entire project," she said.

In December, the PUC greenlighted Summit to build a 28-mile pipeline in western Minnesota. The project has angered some residents about property owner rights and safety concerns. South Dakota's new law bans eminent domain proceedings when a landowner raises objections to a carbon pipeline. The company, which didn't respond to requests for comment, claims the state "changed the rules in the middle of the game."

In Minnesota, Schuppert said they wouldn't be surprised if regulators stick with their original decision. But she says they want their new arguments to go on record, in the likelihood Summit and other companies seek approval for additional routes in the state.

"It is a documentation of what we believe to be the various errors in terms of their decision-making. And it's something that would be relied on if we or others were going to take any further action on this in the future," she continued.

For these situations, Minnesota doesn't have eminent domain, a legal procedure where land is forced to be given up for a public-related project, with compensation for the property owner. Instead, Minnesota leans more on environmental impact statements. Summit has won permit approval in other states, but some of those rulings are contingent on meeting regulatory milestones elsewhere.