Greenfield Recorder – Details emerge in massive state climate bill

BOSTON — The backbone of last session’s climate bill, promised by top Democrats in both branches, is being put together by Gov. Maura Healey’s administration, which says reforms to the siting and permitting of clean energy infrastructure are necessary for the state to meet its statutory requirements in in terms of reducing greenhouse gases.

The Healey Commission’s recommendations on siting and permitting clean energy infrastructure will serve as a framework for legislation that House and Senate Democrats plan to take up before the end of their formal sessions.

“The Administration largely believes that we will not meet our greenhouse gas reduction limits without making significant reforms to permitting siting and space,” said Under Secretary of Energy Michael Judge during the Western Massachusetts Solar Forum webinar on June 4 .

The judge said the administration prepared the bill based on the committee’s recommendations and shared it with the joint chairmen of the Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy Committee, Republican Jeff Roy and Sen. Michael Barrett.

Both House Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka referred to the climate bills being prepared by their branches, but refrained from providing many details about the purpose of the bills.

The governor’s siting and permitting commission — which Judge revealed would be a focus of the legislation being developed — was expected to recommend ways to accelerate clean energy projects in the state to help meet decarbonization goals.

There is broad agreement among utilities, environmentalists and others that the current permitting and siting process for energy projects is a poor model. It often takes a long time to get a project through the process, it can be too complicated for the public to follow, it requires a lot of financial resources for both supporters and opponents, it doesn’t always take into account feedback from affected communities, and it is disproportionately affected communities are places where residents are poorer, are minorities, or speak a language other than English.

The commission recommended consolidating all state, provincial and local permits required for larger clean energy infrastructure projects into a single permit issued by the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) within a time period of no more than 15 months, and consolidating all local permits for smaller projects clean energy infrastructure projects into one consolidated permit that the municipality will issue in less than a year.

The Commission’s recommendations also include the creation of a statutory Office for Environmental Justice and Equality to develop guidance on community benefit agreements and cumulative impact analyses, and a new Office of Public Participation at the EFSB to assist communities and project applicants with questions about permitting at the state level and a new Siting and Permitting Division within the Department of Energy Resources to assist communities and applicants with local permitting questions.

The judge said the administration’s draft legislation also includes proposals that were not included in the commission’s recommendations.

Some of these proposals include exempting clean energy infrastructure under EFSB jurisdiction from the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act review; delegating authority to the EFSB to locate the Department of Public Services, covering a significant transmission and pipeline domain; and requiring a cumulative impact analysis of projects to be conducted before the EFSB to ensure that existing environmental and public health burdens are considered in the siting and permitting process.

Under the bill prepared by the administration, the EFSB and DOER will have to disseminate the new regulations by March 1, 2026.

“It may seem like a long time, but I assure you it’s pretty quick,” Judge said. “For some of the things that need to be in place here, it’s going to take a lot of work to get all these policies in place.”

Massachusetts has committed to gradually reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050, establishing milestones along the way. By 2030, the state is obliged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% compared to the level from 1990 – which is the largest reduction on the curve of all obligations specified in the so-called Global Warming Solutions Act. The basic strategy is to shift energy generation towards cleaner sources such as solar and offshore wind, and maximize the electrification of buildings and transport.

This will result in much greater demand for electricity. The commission’s report said demand for heating electrification “is expected to increase 17-19-fold between 2023 and 2032” and demand for electric vehicle charging “is expected to increase 13-fold by 2030.” This means Massachusetts will need to more than double its solar electricity supply, install more than 3,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind and almost that much additional energy storage by 2030, and make significant upgrades to the power grid, according to the report order.

“Really at the core of all of this is the energy sector,” Judge said. “If the electricity we consume is not clean, then all the additional transition to heat pumps and electric vehicles will not be clean either. So we really need to focus our efforts on using as much clean energy as possible as quickly as possible.”

Massachusetts is falling short when it comes to meeting its long-term solar installation goals – to meet its 2030 goal, it will need to deploy an average of 600 MW per year, well above its current installation rate, Judge said. Offshore wind, which will require more than 1 GW of capacity deployed annually to meet 2035 targets, faces supply chain, inflation and labor challenges.

Another element of the draft administration bill is the proposal to provide financial support by interveners in DPU and EFSB proceedings.

“Just yesterday, we reached an agreement with the Office of the Attorney General on the structure of this proposal and will be sharing it with members of the Legislature and committee members shortly,” Judge said.

He continued: “This would provide financial support to parties that do not have sufficient resources. And in particular, what I want to emphasize, it would provide financial support to municipalities, especially smaller municipalities. We have proposed a threshold for any municipality with a population of 7,500 or less to automatically qualify for access to this funding if it is an intervener in an EFSB proceeding.”

Roy and Barrett outlined additional rules they hoped would be added to the final climate bill.

As chairman of the House Telecommunications, Economic Services and Energy Committee, Roy said he plans to add policies included in the House bills to expand electric vehicle charging statewide, decarbonize public schools and authorize new energy procurement.

It will include elements of a bill (H 4502) that forecasts electric vehicle charging demand through 2045 along highways and other major roads and service plazas, and identifies locations for a statewide network of fast charging hubs.

“I have been a long-time electric vehicle driver and I am well aware of how difficult it is to find reliable and fast charging,” Roy said.

The same bill, which he plans to include in an omnibus climate bill, establishes a statewide goal to decarbonize public schools, public universities and colleges by mandating energy audits, energy efficiency improvements and solar energy installations, with a priority on so-called Environmental justice communities.

It also authorizes DOER to update appliance energy efficiency standards to keep pace with technological improvements, Roy said.

Another bill (H 4503) that the House Speaker plans to add to the climate legislation calls for a new procurement of 9.45 million megawatt-hours of clean energy resources and authorizes additional procurements if the DPU deems them necessary.

“You heard the undersecretary say we have a long way to go, and we hope this bill will help revitalize the situation and get us back on track,” Roy said.

It also sets a solar target of 10,000 MW by 2030 and a short-term target of 4,500 MW for energy storage, he said.

Roy also said the House bill would include policies that include reforms to encourage the installation of solar panels on parking lots and remove barriers to solar access for low-income ratepayers (H 3144).

Barrett was less specific about the Senate bills he hoped to include in final climate legislation, but focused his remarks on bringing greater transparency to the siting and permitting process. He shared the idea of ​​requiring a dashboard that would show real-time updates on renewable energy projects.

Barrett said ideally the dashboard would be updated at least quarterly, with information about “which projects are at what stage and whether any constructive consents have been issued, without effective review.”

The administrative bill includes language that allows for “constructive approval” if the state entity is unable to complete the review by the deadline, Barrett said.

“The way it works is that we have 12 to 15 months to consider the project. If the state entity, which now must represent local concerns as well as Commonwealth-wide concerns about these issues, does not make a decision within 12 to 15 months, constructive acceptance begins. In other words, the project is fine anyway,” he said.

Barrett continued: “By necessity, if it hadn’t been for this, in many cases nothing would have happened. So I appreciate that the language has to be there. Still, I’m afraid the state (must) hire staff to ensure that constructive acceptance, if possible, never happens. We want every project to be thoroughly vetted, reflecting all local priorities.”

The second priority Barrett highlighted was keeping the energy transition affordable.

“Every time electricity bills go up, there are already protests,” Barrett said. “We need to make sure that two things happen: that we keep price increases under control if they occur. And to that end, we might offset them with declines on the natural gas side of the book.”