Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) – Climate- Science.press

VCEA could cause Dominion’s average customer to pay over $40,000 for batteries

The Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) mandates that Dominion Energy, the state’s big electric utility, rapidly shift its power generation to wind and solar. Dominion’s latest Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) provides dramatic evidence that this shift does not work, making blackouts inevitable. Making it work would be fantastically expensive, with the average customer paying over $40,000 for batteries by 2030.

From CFACT

By David Wojick

First let’s look at how it does not work. There is a nifty little graphic showing this on page 62 of the IRP which is here. https://cdn-dominionenergy-prd-001.azureedge.net/-/media/content/about/our-company/irp/pdfs/2024-irp-w_o-appendices.pdf?rev=5b28b014e4814135bb2fcec470dcc92b

The graphic summarizes Dominion’s VCEA compliance plan. It is a vertical bar showing the installed mix of generating capacity in 2030. The vertical scale is megawatts (MW) and the height of the bar is the projected maximum summer power demand for that year which is about 33,000 MW.

The bar is divided into different colored segments for each generator type such as solar, wind, gas, nuclear, etc. The height of each segment is the amount of installed capacity at that time in MW.

Dominion actually flags solar pointing out that it makes up 23% of the available capacity. They also point out that solar, wind and batteries together make up 34% of capacity. Note that the battery segment is very small and batteries are not generators. The bar also includes a little bit of imported power making installed capacity less than peak demand.

The problem is obvious. Peak summer demand typically occurs after 4 pm when there is no solar generation. Moreover it is often caused by a stagnant high pressure system called a Bermuda high with very low winds so there is no wind power either. Plus these highs are regional in scale so the neighbors may have nothing to sell.

If there is no solar, no wind and no imports then we are over 34% short of the power needed to keep the lights on. Clearly there will be a blackout. No solar alone will do it for that matter. Nor are these inconvenient short term rolling blackouts. Being 20 to 30% short is a prescription for catastrophe.

This is where batteries come in. It is often claimed that batteries can make renewables reliable so let’s now see what that would take in this VCEA case.

Here is a very simple back of the envelope analysis to just give the scale of the batteries required to prevent blackouts.

Peak need is about 33,000 MW in 2030. Dispatchable capacity is around 20,000 MW leaving 13,000 MW. Solar is about 10,000 MW but for simplicity let us generously assume it too is 13,000 as though non-performing wind and import capacities were not there. For one day this leaves 16 hours with no solar and demand at 13,000 that must come from the batteries.

This is a need of 208,000 MWh of batteries. The battery capacity in the graphic is around 10,000 MWh or basically nothing. Note we are assuming 100% battery charge and discharge when reality is more like 60-80%.

At the typical $500,000 or so per MWh the battery facility capital cost is an incredible $104 billion. That is $104,000,000,000. Given Dominion’s 2.6 million customers this averages a nice round $40,000 per customer for batteries. Dominion ignores this simple fact.

But it gets much worse because there is no spare generating capacity to charge the batteries. Given a typical multi-day near peak heatwave several hundred billion dollars worth of batteries would be required to prevent a massive sustained blackout. This is likely physically impossible but it is certainly economically ruinous.

Thus we have the VCEA dilemma. Rapidly switching to solar and wind as proposed in the Dominion IRP for 2030 either leads to catastrophic blackouts or economic ruin. The “clean economy” is no economy.

The obvious solution is to repeal the Virginia Clean Economy Act.

Virginia candidate would impose carbon taxes as governor

Virginia voters, taxpayers, and ratepayers should know that if Abigail Spanberger becomes their next governor, they will pay higher energy costs that will show up on their utility bills and everyday purchases.

From CFACT

By Kevin Mooney

Spanberger made this clear during a podcast last year when she told a political science professor that as governor, she would have the state rejoin a climate change initiative built around “cap and trade” regulations and carbon taxes.

While Spanberger is committed to the carbon tax plan, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, her Republican opponent, supported Gov. Youngkin’s decision to withdraw. Given how costly RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative) was to Virginia residents and how costly it could become in the future, the candidates’ divergent positions could become a major campaign issue.

Glenn Youngkin, the incumbent Republican governor, withdrew Virginia from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) in 2023 after describing the program as a “regressive tax on families and businesses.” A circuit court judge ruled last November that Youngkin’s actions were unlawful. But the state will remain outside of RGGI pending Youngkin’s appeal of that ruling. The outcome of this year’s gubernatorial election could also determine RGGI’s future in Virginia.

Higher Costs Without Environmental Benefits

RGGI currently includes 11 New England and Mid-Atlantic states where government regulators impose an upper limit, or “cap,” on the amount of carbon dioxide emissions that power plants can emit. The initiative also creates “allowances” within interstate auctions that may be traded back and forth among companies subjected to the emission caps. The “cap and trade” plan adds a carbon tax to the price of fossil fuels that gets passed along to residents. Virginia joined RGGI in 2020 under Democratic Governor Ralph Northam, who signed off on legislation from the Democrat-controlled General Assembly. Virginia became the first Southern state to join the initiative. Since then, RGGI has not worked as advertised.

David Stevenson, director of the Center for Energy & Environment at the Caesar Rodney Institute in Delaware, took a deep dive into the impact RGGI had on Virginia in public comments he delivered on behalf of Youngkin’s decision to exit the initiative in March 2023.

Virginia electric generation fell 12% in 2022 compared to 2020. Power imports from the regional grid grew from 12% of demand to 30%, and that grid expects power shortages by 2030. In state CO2 emissions fell by 6.6 million metric tons from 2020 to 2022, but increased electricity imports increased emissions 10.3 million tons elsewhere for a net 3.7 million ton increase. Meanwhile the $523 million in RGGI revenue will be added to electric bills while in state generators lost $840 million in electric generation revenue. Over a decade the RGGI could cost Virginia $25 billion. Virginia needs to leave RGGI behind.

RGGI failed to reduce emissions in Virginia—and created a net increase—while raising energy costs for consumers. As Stevenson explains, any CO2 reductions that occurred in Virginia were more than offset by the higher costs of importing power from states not part of RGGI. Since Spanberger sounds determined to put Virginia back into the initiative, voters should demand she address the rising costs of those carbon auctions.

Stevenson pulled together figures from RGGI that showed allowance prices averaged $13.46/ton in 2022 and ended the year at $13, resulting in $128 million in costs added to electric bills. RGGI anticipates that these prices could rise to as much as $24/ton by 2030.

“It would be a priority for me to get Virginia into RGGI…” Spanberger said during the podcast. She claims the multi-state climate agreement would enable Virginia to “meet clean energy goals.”

But the facts and figures Stevenson presented indicate that the Spanberger-backed carbon tax scheme would raise energy costs in Virginia without producing any environmental benefits.

There’s another problem Stephen D. Haner, a senior fellow for environment and energy policy at the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, has highlighted in his research. RGGI would put Virginia in a position where it would become more dependent on imports from other states. This would be particularly true, Haner warns, when wind and solar experience enter low production phases.

Do They Hate Reliable Energy?

Spanberger’s support for carbon taxes is very much in step with the anti-energy posture she assumed as a member of Congress. Some key examples include Spanberger’s vote against a bill that would have ended efforts to ban gas powered cars at the expense of consumers. Spanberger also voted down a bill that called for the Department of Energy to consider the cost-effectiveness of any new policy standards. Under the legislation, the department would also need to account for how mandated home appliance updates affect low-income families.

A decision to rejoin RGGI would come at a steep price for Virginia families since they are already contending with the fallout from the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA), a.k.a. the Virginia Green New Deal. As Restoration News previously reported, Haner is expecting an almost 50% increase for Virginia ratepayers within the next two years based largely on green energy mandates of the VCEA, which went into effect in 2020.

If elected governor, Spanberger seems poised to deliver a one-two punch against Virginia ratepayers by imposing RGGI’s carbon taxes on top of the already spiraling costs of the VCEA. This opens up a weakness for Winsome Earle-Sears to hammer in the upcoming campaign.

This article originally appeared at Restoration News

Virginia ratepayers smacked with 50% increase in electricity bills

Virginia residents will continue to experience a sharp increase in their electricity bills based mostly on “green” energy mandates in the run up to this year’s gubernatorial race.

From CFACT

By Kevin Mooney

Virginia residents will continue to experience a sharp increase in their electricity bills based mostly on “green” energy mandates in the run up to this year’s gubernatorial race.

Earlier this year, Dominion Energy—the state’s public utility headquartered in Richmond—submitted applications for rate increases to the State Corporation Commission, the state regulatory authority overseeing utilities, that will begin to show up on monthly bills.

After analyzing the applications, Stephen D. Haner, a senior fellow for environment and energy policy at the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, identified the Democrats’ 2020 Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) as the major culprit. He’s expecting an almost 50% increase for Virginia ratepayers within the next two years.

The 1,000-kilowatt hour monthly bill was about $116 just before VCEA was implemented, but Haner expects “pending price increases” to take this amount to about $170 in 2027. But that’s not the end of it, Haner explained, since VCEA compliance costs will continue to pile up.

“Clean energy requirements are the biggest component of the increase,” Haner said. “And all these costs get passed along not just to residential people but to businesses and industry. When Virginia becomes an expensive state for industry that’s not helpful, because we are competing against other states further south with much lower electricity rates.”

The construction for Dominion Energy’s Coastal Offshore Wind project is particularly expensive, Haner said. Other costly line items he highlighted include solar construction initiatives and renewable energy credits (RECs) that Dominion must purchase when it fails to meet renewable targets.

Since the vote in favor of the VCEA occurred along party lines with Democrats united in favor of the legislation, Haner sees an opportunity for Republicans to seize on rising energy costs as a major issue in the governor’s race. But he also expressed disappointment that Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, a Republican, has not yet made a campaign issue out of the green energy mandates. Winsome-Sears is running to succeed Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin in the Nov. 4 election. She will face off against Abigail Spanberger, a former Democratic member of Congress. Under state law, the Virginia governor is limited to one consecutive term.

Several environmental advocacy groups that support the VCEA have also endorsed Spanberger, including Clean Virginia and the Virginia League of Conservation Voters. Spanberger has also expressed support for the goals of the VCEA on her campaign website. As a member of Congress, she consistently voted in favor of climate initiatives that would raise energy costs and limit consumer choice. Spanberger, for example, voted against a bill that would have ended efforts to ban gas-powered vehicles. That vote is highly relevant now that the U.S. Senate has passed a resolution under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) overturning a waiver the EPA granted to California enabling the state to set national vehicle emission standards.

“Energy policy is one area where there is a lot of daylight between the candidates,” Haner said. “Winsome-Sears should be making an issue out of this.”

But, as Haner explains, Dominion Energy does not make it easy for researchers to pull back and unwind the true costs of green mandates. There was a time when wind energy and solar energy were openly listed on utility bills, but those days appear to be over.

“Dominion now makes it difficult to do these calculations,” Haner said. “The wind is one charge, the solar is another, and the RECs are another. But they never add the three together because they want to make it as opaque as possible.”

As a political entity, Dominion packs a wallop with campaign finance records showing the energy company making significant contributions to both major parties. So far in 2025, Dominion has donated more than $2 million. Haner expects the utility to continue to wield significant influence in the state legislature.

Looking ahead to the November election, no discussion of energy costs in Virginia is complete without mentioning the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a multi-state climate agreement built around the imposition of carbon taxes. Youngkin withdrew Virginia from RGGI in 2022. Although a circuit court judge ruled last year that Youngkin’s decision was unlawful, the judge also agreed to freeze his ruling pending the outcome of an appeal from the governor. Virginia will remain outside of RGGI pending the outcome of Youngkin’s appeal.

But in the meantime, Democrats, including Spanberger, have pledged to pull Virginia back into the carbon tax scheme. Spanberger went on record in support of RGGI during a radio interview last November.

If a new governor could work the state legislature to repeal the green mandates in the VCEA, Haner anticipates that this could save Virginia households and businesses billions of dollars over time.

This article originally appeared at Restoration News

Outside Study Confirms Natural Gas Needed to Run Data Centers

Another analysis of the energy dilemma facing Virginia, this one commissioned by a Democrat-controlled legislative panel, has concluded that use of natural gas to make electricity is going to have to grow over coming decades, not shrink. Virginia’s anti-hydrocarbon energy laws are doomed to fail because of Virginia’s global dominance in the data center industry.

From Watts Up With That?

Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy

By Steve Haner

The new 150-page report takes its own look at Virginia’s future energy demand and the best mix of generation to meet it. It reaches the conclusions Dominion Energy Virginia also reached in its most recent integrated resource plan. Data centers by themselves are driving an enormous future demand curve, as Dominion claimed. The abandonment of coal and natural gas demanded by the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) creates an energy deficit, even if the data center growth proves slower than the current projections.

The energy consulting firm Energy + Environmental Economics (E3) was retained by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) to look at the future electricity demand created by Virginia’s prominent role in the data center industry. Using proprietary models looking out to 2050, it produced several possible scenarios but all included expansion of natural gas and all caused significant rate increases, also a parallel conclusion from the Dominion IRP.

In fact, this report projects natural gas must expand, and will remain necessary beyond the mandated retirement dates in the VCEA even if the data center growth doesn’t happen. It plugs the gap in some scenarios by using hydrogen in place of natural gas in thermal energy plants. But that remains an unproven, experimental technology not used at scale anywhere. An entire very expensive infrastructure would be needed to create and transport the hydrogen to Virginia power plants.

Only fantasy technology can comply with the fantasy VCEA. The nuclear plants E3’s scenarios envision are somewhat closer to reality, but still years if not decades away. “In the absence of policy, there is still a significant role for coal and gas generation, comprising another ~30% of demand,” the consultant reports. This was on a slide marked “No Data Center Growth, No VCEA.” Carbon emitting source are even more prominent on scenarios that include the demand growth, with some adding a new natural gas plant every two years.

Virginia’s average citizen ratepayers, those not advised by utility accountants and lawyers, have every reason to be wary. Just about everybody in the room will have an employer or client they seek to protect or enrich, or a political boss dependent on campaign contributions from the companies present. Utilities and green energy advocates are major funders of what remains of Virginia’s news media.

Financial rent seeking and political muscle helped put Virginia into this dilemma, a perfect example of the wise warning to be careful what you ask for. Major financial incentives were created as far back as 2010 to lure the data centers to Virginia, as outlined in the JLARC report.

The state gives a major tax break on the sales taxes it would otherwise collect as the data centers are constructed and filled with computers. The value of that tax subsidy was just under $1 billion in 2023, JLARC reports. In many cases, the state tax lure is coupled with local incentives. Virginia is also attractive because so much Internet fiber backbone runs through the state, and because federal government clients fill the landscape.

It worked. “Northern Virginia is the largest data center market in the world, constituting 13 percent of all reported data center operational capacity globally and 25 percent of capacity in the Americas,” JLARC reports. There are also significant facilities in the Richmond area, a cluster in Southside Virginia (mostly Microsoft) and even a new giant facility proposed for Appomattox.

Virginia’s Democrats didn’t want the lecture on energy reality they got from Dominion and have dismissed warnings against thermal energy retirements coming from the PJM Interconnection. Will a report from a consultant they commissioned get the message through?

Giant Utility Rejects Net Zero Power, Big Fight Follows

Dominion Energy, Virginia’s big electric utility, is telling the State it does not foresee complying with the 2045 net zero power target in the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA). The preferred option in Dominion’s latest Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) retires no fossil-fueled power generators, other than the few old ones that are already in the process of retirement. In fact, it adds a lot more fossil juice.

From Watts Up With That?

By David Wojick

Up front in the IRP, Dominion puts it this way: “Due to an increasing load forecast, and the need for dispatchable generation, the Alternative Plans show additional natural gas-fired resources and preserve existing carbon-emitting units beyond statutory retirement deadlines established in the VCEA. The law explicitly authorizes the Company to petition the SCC for relief from these requirements on the basis that the unit retirements would threaten the reliability or security of electric service to customers.”

So, in effect, this is a notice to Virginia’s utility regulator, the State Corporation Commission (SCC), that Dominion is prepared to petition for permission to not comply with the net zero power generation mandate in the VCEA.

In fact, this IRP may constitute such a petition. The anti-fossil forces apparently think so because they have petitioned the SCC to reject the IRP because it includes more gas-fired generation. In response, the SCC has initiated a formal legal proceeding to consider this request. A number of green groups have joined the proceeding; there has been a hearing, public comments have been taken, etc. The whole rulemaking deal.

The impetus for this unexpected bout of rationality from Dominion is, as the quote says, an increased load forecast. Specifically, the SCC requires Dominion to use the load forecast from the regional grid operator, which is PJM. They issued a whopping new forecast that is roughly double their earlier ones going back years.

So Dominion is saying they don’t think we can service this enormous new load and comply with the VCEA net zero mandate. They specifically propose not to retire most of their fossil fleet, plus adding almost 3,000 MW of gas-fired generation over the next 15 years. No wonder the anti-fossils are apoplectic.

Unfortunately, they also add a ridiculous amount of renewables. This is about 11,000 Megawatts (MW) of solar and 3,000 MW of mostly offshore wind, on top of the 2,600 MW of offshore already in process. With their usual smoke and mirrors, there is virtually no storage to make this intermittent junk reliable despite costing tens of billions of dollars. If the gas-fired power does that, why not just use it instead of the renewables? Plus, offshore wind is hell on whales. But I digress.

Dominion has 7 million customers in 16 States, so its Virginia no net zero action has much wider implications. Beyond that, it could be a national precedent, so other utilities, States, and interest groups should be watching closely.

What the SCC decides could be very important. Ironically, in a ridiculous sense, the SCC does not exist at this time. Due to a political stalemate, there is only one Commissioner, out of the called-for three, and it takes a quorum of two to issue a formal order. It looks like the most that can happen is that an administrative law judge can render an opinion on the anti-fossil petition.

The SCC legal mess is beyond my knowledge or understanding. Rejecting an IRP seems odd to begin with. Then, too, the VCEA seems to allow what Dominion is describing specifically. Nor is it at all clear that an IRP is a petition when the matter is just presented as an option. Perhaps it is a petition to be allowed to suggest it. The whole fight strikes me as an absurd confusion, but alarmism is like that. Maybe that is the message. Anti-fossil alarmism is an absurd confusion.

This confused action should be fun to watch. Stay tuned to CFACT as the no net zero drama unfolds.

Author