New England's persistent reliance on fossil fuels, nuclear By EPN Staff New England residents are staying warm this winter thanks to the fossil fuels and nuclear power that remain a vital part of the energy mix, despite state lawmakers’ attempts to eliminate them. During recent week-long extreme cold spells, ISO-New England depended on supplemental power from oil, coal and nuclear plants, as the region’s solar and wind sources could not meet peak demand, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. This reliance on traditional power sources comes as the region has shut down more than 5,200 megawatts (MW) of power generation since 2013, predominantly shuttering coal, oil and nuclear plants, with another 5,000 MW at risk. Why it matters Demand for electricity in New England is projected to increase 17% by 2033, largely driven by demand from heat pumps and electric vehicle chargers, both of which are being promoted and encouraged by state policy. At the same time, lawmakers have shut down the state’s most reliable energy sources in favor of wind and solar. Current energy storage technology cannot capture enough renewable energy to ensure power keeps flowing reliably, even when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. Maine, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Vermont have all passed legislation requiring each state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by the year 2050. All New England states are also members of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a cap-and-trade program that penalizes power plants for CO2 emissions. This has dramatically reshaped the makeup of the region’s power grid: In 2000, nuclear, oil and coal accounted for a combined 57% of the region’s energy In 2022, nuclear, oil and coal accounted for a combined 25%% of the region’s energy. In 2040, that number is projected to be just 13%. Today natural gas provides 45% of the region’s power, but that will fall to 12% by 2040. Deeper context As New England furthers its dependence on intermittent resources, the region will require massive upgrades in its energy storage capacity while at the same time maintaining fossil fuel infrastructure to ensure it can meet peak demand. Renewable energy advocates frequently do not include the cost of building out utility-scale energy storage systems when detailing the total price tag for transitioning to renewables. However, studies have shown that the strategy New England is pursuing will not be cheap. “The levelized cost of electricity will be more expensive than what we have now, perhaps by as much as 50%. But desperate times call for desperate measures,” a study advocating for renewable expansion in Advanced Energy Materials reported. High prices and importing power New England is a case study in what happens when states prioritize reducing greenhouse gases over maintaining reliable power supplies for millions of homes and businesses during extreme weather events. Not only does the region still end up using the fossil fuels that its policymakers have tried to eliminate, ratepayers shoulder exorbitant costs. The region’s most populous states also have to import energy from less restrictive neighbors. New England has the most expensive electricity in the lower 48 states: Residential: $0.2868/kWh, compared to $0.1701 nationally Commercial: $0.2171/kWh, compared to $0.1222 nationally Industrial: $0.1664/kWh, compared to $0.0789 nationally And Massachusetts, the region’s most populous states, imports more electricity than 47 other states, only falling behind data-center rich Virginia and equally restrictive California. This is driven in part by the commonwealth’s liquified natural gas terminal in Everett, where it has taken receipt of Russian LNG, and also because its in-state power generation was cut in half between 2010 and 2023.
