* Today is the one-year anniversary of the governor signing the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act into law. Crain’s…
The elimination of carbon-emitting power plants in Illinois over the next 20 years will leave the Chicago area without enough generating capacity to meet its needs, forcing the region to import electricity from other states for the first time in modern memory.
That’s the conclusion of a new report by PJM Interconnection, the power-grid manager for a multistate region from northern Illinois to the mid-Atlantic. PJM blames the closing of fossil fuel plants—which to date has been driven by poor economics but soon will be mandated by the state’s year-old Climate & Equitable Jobs Act, or CEJA—for a projected capacity gap that will force the area to look elsewhere for power by 2030 at the latest. PJM further concludes that billions in spending on new and upgraded power transmission lines will be required to bring power to Chicago from Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania. […]
“The [Pritzker] administration finds this study incredibly myopic and is confident that as we work to implement the goals of CEJA over the next two decades there will be enough clean energy options for consumers and the grid—it’s exactly why the bill incentivizes the production of clean energy and the market has already moved away from fossil fuel options on its own,” spokeswoman Jordan Abuddayeh says in an email. […]
“Based on the additional clean, renewable energy expected to come online as a result of CEJA and the amount of power nuclear plants in northern Illinois can produce, we project that there will be enough generation at nearly all times of the year to continue to reliably meet our customers’ needs without importing power from other regions,” ComEd spokesman Paul Elsberg says in an email. “While it’s possible there will be times in future years when some generation will need to be imported to meet demand when it’s at its highest, this will depend on many factors—among them, how much solar energy, wind energy and battery storage is added to the power grid, and when.”
The report is here.
* And that’s not all. Earlier this week, Sangamon County Judge Raylene Grischow issued a preminary injunction against the Illinois EPA to stop its enforcement of an annual emissions cap that predated the actual implementation of the rules. The retroactive rule meant that Elwood Energy LLC did not have “fair notice” of “how its 2021 conduct was regulated until IEPA issued its rules in January 2022.” The company was asked to generate more electricity than normal in the fall of last year and that generation had left precious little space under the retroactive cap imposed in January. The company claimed it was losing millions of dollars because it could not operate. The ruling is here.
“By requiring compliance four months in the past,” Grischow wrote, “the rule penalizes Elwood and harms its business, in violation of the Federal and Illinois Due Process Clauses.”
React from the Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition…
We’re not surprised that fossil fuel companies would challenge Illinois’ new clean energy direction. The Climate and Equitable Jobs Act’s steady path to eliminating pollution from gas and coal plants is gradual, achievable, good for public health, and essential to becoming a leader in the clean energy economy.
These provisions were rigorously reviewed by experts. The preliminary injunction would allow a 1,700-MW methane gas plant to flout CEJA’s emissions limitations because JPower’s Elwood gas plant has claimed it cannot accurately calculate how much nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and other harmful pollutants it emits.
We are confident the provisions will ultimately be upheld by the judicial system and thwart Elwood’s efforts to avoid compliance. We look forward to achieving CEJA’s bold goals of decarbonizing our electric sector and creating good, equitable jobs and economic opportunities in the clean energy sources that will power Illinois in the future.
…Adding… On a related note, here’s a press release…
The Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) approved the Dakota Access Pipeline and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline expansion in the Prairie State today.
The approval comes after a court decision vacating the previous approval, because the prior approval did not demonstrate how the expansion benefited Illinoisians and the ICC failed to consider the troubling record of the pipeline operator.
In January 2022, the Illinois 4th District Appellate Court vacated the approval of the pipeline expansion and remanded it back to the ICC. The suit was brought by Save Our Illinois Land (SOIL), the Sierra Club, NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), and area landowner William Klingele.
Following are quotes from the litigants:
“This decision shows the ICC’s continued favoritism toward business interests at the expense of Illinois citizens. It endangers us all,” said Deni Mathews, chairperson of Save Our Illinois Land. “Instead of evaluating the full impact of such projects, we are left to grapple with the continued effect of carbon pollution on our air, water, and soil. Carbon emissions increase while our earth’s climate systems are providing clear evidence that we must stop.”
“In signing off yet again on this reckless expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline, the ICC is putting critical water resources at even greater risk,” said Catherine Collentine, Director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign. “From the beginning, DAPL has threatened clean drinking water and trampled on Indigenous rights. Allowing even more dirty oil to run through it could be disastrous for communities along its route. We will continue to work to shut down this dangerous oil pipeline altogether.”
“This pipeline expansion threatens our health, our climate, and Illinois’ waters,” said J.C. Kibbey, IL clean energy advocate at NRDC. “There are few, if any, benefits to the people of this state, but the massive risks to Illinois are clear. While we bear the risk, big out-of-state fossil fuel companies reap the profits.”
- Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 1:56 pm:
The IMA and business community predictions have been borne out by PJM who I trust far more than the CEJA “experts.” Closing baseload generation with no available backup creates capacity issues.
- SWIL_Voter - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 2:01 pm:
“The IMA and business community predictions have been borne out”
Like when they predicted earlier in the Spring that we’d have rolling blackouts this summer because of the closure of fossil fuel plants?
- Ok - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 2:04 pm:
From the report:
“The study does not include in its modeling renewable generation that is expected to be added to the system in the future as contemplated and incentivized under CEJA.”
I mean, it’s not really a note of caution for anything other than we better build all the renewables in the bill. Which was always obvious.
But of course, this is not an actual news article. This is just another Steve Daniels hit piece using an old report timed to step on the messaging of all the one-year anniversary congratulatory pieces.
- How high - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 2:11 pm:
Politically motivated energy law leads to disastrous, predictable, and in fact predicted results.
- Michelle Flaherty - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 2:27 pm:
A wise man at the statehouse once told me to not make predictions.
PJM should get that advise.
- Lefty Lefty - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 2:28 pm:
The people who say climate change predictions are bunk also say fossil fuel industry predictions are gospel.
- Biker - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 2:38 pm:
The coal plants closed early to avoid cleaning up their unlined coal ash pits under federal law. They also can’t compete with new wind and new solar on price per kWh. I appreciate that the report backs up the reality that these wind and solar assets need to be built in timely fashion. The long lead time to add these resources to the grid is due to the mountain of paperwork and a lack of utility will to hustle, and the wild swings in nat gas and solar supply chain pricing making everyone nervous about whether the final number on the PPA is enough for everyone to follow through. CEJAs incentive structure is the exact right policy for the exact moment we are in. You can’t blame a state solar and wind incentive program for coal plant closures due to fear they needed to deal with their legacy pollution under federal law. And you can’t fault a state program that creates a decade of incentive certainty for solar and wind when the grid is saying these new assets need to be built. Deploy, deploy, deploy.
- Nobody Sent - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 2:48 pm:
Anybody who read the documents on the ICC’s Dakota Access case can see the pipe isn’t needed and will only serve overseas markets anyway. Just another example of the ICC rolling over and giving the industry what it wants. With this kind of thinking, the goals in CEJA won’t be achieved and of course it will fail. JB - when will you appoint responsible people to the ICC?
- Benjamin - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 3:25 pm:
This could be rephrased as “PJM says that PJM members will need more money, probably from rate-payers, because of something that definitely wasn’t the fault of any of the utilities.” Sure, that might still be right, but let’s apply a little skepticism.
- The Velvet Frog - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 4:12 pm:
So they’re saying we need to go full speed ahead on renewable energy sources. Noted, and agreed.
- Walker - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 4:13 pm:
I suspect PJM’s priorities and biases, but also suspect we’re being a little too reliant on unproven technologies to meet baseline needs. On balance CEJA is much closer to real.
- DuPage - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 4:18 pm:
They need to provide incentives to companies to bring in lower cost wind power from wind farms in Iowa, South Dakota, Kansas, and any other sources that become available.
- Joe - Thursday, Sep 15, 22 @ 9:41 pm:
DuPage: Who are the’They’ you mention, are your ‘incentives’ Taxpayers’ money, and what qualifies ‘companies’ and how do you propose wind be brought in?