In his quest for a net-zero emissions house, Tim Leroux has already achieved gold status. But he’s not content to rest on those energy-efficiency laurels.

The Albemarle County homeowner is itching to reach platinum. And he believes a heat pump upgrade will eventually punch that ticket.

For guidance, the healthcare risk manager will turn to a free online calculator recently unveiled by Charlottesville-based Pearl Certification to help homeowners nationwide navigate the maze of tax credits and point-of-sale rebates for cleaner appliances covered by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. 

Pearl built its niche reputation awarding green seals of approval to customers such as Leroux seeking higher-performing homes.

Leroux, who says he is “evangelical about energy efficiency,” is bullish on the company’s offerings, which range from certifying contractors to training real estate agents.

It ties into Pearl’s dual mission of decarbonizing the nation’s housing stock and maximizing the return homeowners receive on their energy-efficient upgrades. The whole idea is to encourage people to take stock of the hidden — and thus often ignored — infrastructure that keeps their home ticking.

“It can be flat-out confusing for the uninitiated,” he said, adding that eligibility requirements and potential savings offered by the IRA adds another layer of complexity. “It’s hard to sell a solution for a problem people think they don’t have.”

The company’s origin

Residential energy use accounts for about 20% of this country’s greenhouse gas emissions.

That figure prompted Cynthia Adams to launch Pearl Certification in 2015. Adams, who grew up in Northern Virginia’s Prince William County, was no rookie to energy efficiency.

Adams entered the technical field in the late 1990s while leading a sustainable design/build company and then a green building consulting firm. In 2008, she had a hand in originating a climate action plan for the Charlottesville region.

Within two years, she had helped write the grant that funded what became the Local Energy Alliance Program (LEAP), where she began serving as executive director in 2010. The nonprofit provides energy efficiency and solar solutions for homes and businesses in the Charlottesville region and Northern Virginia.

Adams co-founded Pearl because she yearned to move the needle on residential energy efficiency as painlessly as possible. Her goal is for homeowners to earn points and advance their green ranking while plotting a strategic plan toward living in a healthier house with a lower carbon footprint, reduced utility bills and a higher appraisal value. 

“We’re very much a human organization, not a bunch of techies,” said Adams, now based in Durango, Colo. “And that personal touch is how we get a national movement going.

“That, and never tell a woman she can’t do something. It’s a surefire way to get her to do it.”

Seeking a stable model

Jennifer Amann, a senior fellow with the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy’s buildings program, watched Pearl come into existence during her lengthy career in the industry.

“Cynthia and her co-founder, Robin LeBaron, were asking how they could create a steady demand for high quality, efficient services to improve buildings, address climate change and make homes healthier,” said Amann, based in Washington, D.C.

For the most part, energy efficiency updates at the residential level tend to lurch along unevenly, dependent on the vagaries of the U.S. Congress and how much money the federal government attached to assorted rebates and credits.

That “super, super challenging” up-and-down pattern led the two entrepreneurs to form a network of local, reliable contractors with high-level expertise revolving around appliances, insulation, drainage, heating and ventilating, and every other aspect of energy efficiency, Amann said. Pearl vets and accredits each contractor.

Contractors pay fees to belong to the network, which is how Pearl earns its money.

“That is not at all an unusual model,” Amann said. “It’s valuable for contractors to invest because they know they can get better leads and relationships, and return business. Customers benefit because they have access to somebody who can help them through a confusing process and not be stuck with just a guy and a truck.”

Home performance is a complex market, she said. Most homeowners don’t upgrade all at once and part of Pearl’s appeal is that homeowners can easily track their progress toward peak efficiency.  

Homeowners can contact their own contractors, use any number of free IRA calculators now available and do their own homework with their state energy office to cash in on credits and rebates, Amann noted.

“But there’s peace of mind in working with somebody who can walk through all the steps with you,” she said. “I mean, energy efficiency is my world and I don’t want to do all of that myself.” 

Virginia’s IRA rebate rollout set for 2025

IRA-related tax credits of up to 30% on the cost of electric vehicles, home energy audits, electric appliances, solar panels and other projects became available nationwide last year.

However, rebate programs remain stuck in the bureaucratic process because state energy offices are tasked with crafting and operating their own initiatives.

A few states might roll out programs later this year,  but Virginia won’t be among them. Bettina Bergöö, associate director of energy efficiency and financing at the Virginia Energy Department, confirmed that the state’s rebate program likely won’t debut until the first few months of 2025, at the earliest.

When available, the IRA-funded rebate programs will be split into two components. One, the home efficiency rebate, is based on measurable energy savings achieved so it does not specify any required retrofits or technologies. 

The other, the home electrification and appliance rebate, is technology specific. Upgrades that qualify include heat pumps for space heating and cooling, heat pump water heaters, heat pump clothes dryers, electric stoves, cooktops, ranges or ovens, electric wiring, and insulation, air sealing and ventilation.

Virginia has been allocated a total of $189 million to fund the rebates, according to Virginia Energy. That total is split about evenly between the two rebate programs.

The federal government has set eligibility parameters for the rebates, which states are allowed to expand or contract as they see fit. For instance, states could choose to set income limits to steer the benefits toward poorer households.

“These decisions are to be made by each state based on their respective needs and program objectives,” Bergöö said, adding that such a review is still underway in Virginia. 

Opening a green door

Pearl will be updating its calculator as Virginia and other states release their rebate parameters.

In the meantime, Leroux and other efficiency aficionados can tap into Green Door, an application Pearl invented in 2020 that offers customized, step-by-step plans toward reducing reliance on fossil fuels to power their homes.

It links users with Pearl’s contractors and allows them to earn points verifying the efficiency ranking of their home. An “asset” rating means a home has at least one high-performing feature. From there, enrollees can graduate to silver, gold and platinum levels.

“I liken it to airline or hotel loyalty points,” Leroux said about Green Door. “It tells you exactly where you’re at and what you need to do to reach the next level. I’m working toward platinum because I think it’s super cool.”

To vault from silver to gold over the last several years, he earned Pearl points for modernizing his lighting and switching to a tankless water heater and a more efficient refrigerator. He achieved “gold with solar” status last year after installing a 9.72-kilowatt rooftop array.

“A lot of this stuff is a little hard to get excited about because it isn’t as sexy” as his 27 solar panels, he said, adding that he gets an adrenaline boost when he plugs his data into the application and “I see the needle go way up.”

As intuitive as the online application is, Leroux recommends property owners reach out to a nonprofit weatherization organization or a contractor for an energy audit.

“After that, you can use Green Door to build out a plan,” Leroux said. “It lays out the incentives, connects you with contractors and shows you how you can get the biggest bang for your buck.”

Efficiency now part of sales pitch

Leroux, a retired U.S. Army officer, bought his Charlottesville area house in 2020, realized what a bargain he had escaped with when, post-purchase, he found paperwork confirming it was Pearl-certified with a silver rating.

“It wasn’t marketed that way,” Leroux said. “When I called a friend in real estate, he told me I should have paid $20,000 more than I did because of that certification.”

That friend was Greg Slater, a Charlottesville broker and Realtor. The two knew each other through LEAP. During Adams’ tenure there, Leroux had served as director of operations and Slater was on the nonprofit’s board of directors. 

Slater, in business for 27 years, schooled himself early on about the intricacies of energy efficiency improvements and how they can add value to a home’s sale price.

Now, as a member of the Pearl network, he pays for a certification report on each house he markets so he can pitch the benefits of energy efficiency to potential buyers. The reports that accompany home listings cover details of the building shell, heating and cooling, baseload electricity use and management of future upgrades.

“You don’t have to become a building-science expert, but you have to figure out a way to get comfortable with this information,” said Slater, who earned green credentials a decade ago from training via the National Association of Realtors. “The average realtor is intimidated and afraid to have that conversation.”

Buyers are savvy about sizing up curb appeal and the value of visible assets such as type of countertops and number of bedrooms and bathrooms, he emphasized.

“But they won’t pay for the features they’re not aware of,” he continued, “and that includes heat pumps, tankless water heaters, air sealing, solar and other upgrades they likely won’t notice or care about unless somebody takes the time to educate them.”

Pearl certification can add about 5% to the sale price of a Charlottesville-area house, Slater said. He pointed to a study completed in 2021 by an independent appraiser.

That premium is enticing to Leroux, though he has no immediate plans to put his home, built in 2012, on the market.

“For me, the real proof is when I go to sell this house,” he said.

Barring an emergency breakdown of his current heat pump, Leroux will track what type of replacement might be possible next year when Virginia publicizes its IRA-related rebate specifics. He suspects his income might be too high for him to qualify. 

If that’s the case, he will pursue a different route to update his mechanical system, and seek out other nips and tucks to fine tune his home.

“This house already produces more energy than it uses,” he said. “Once you’ve tackled everything on the Green Door roadmap, you start running out of updates. But I’m a believer in living a net-zero life.”

How a Virginia company is helping homeowners navigate energy efficiency – and add up the rewards is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Virginia clean energy champions have their fingers crossed that members of a resurrected legislative commission won’t water down four utility-focused bills when they meet in the off-season to reshape the failed measures for next year’s General Assembly.

The rebooted Commission on Electric Utility Regulation, created to provide Virginia’s legislators guidance on increasingly complicated energy bills, is so new that it’s still hiring an executive director and other staffers. 

The commission won’t meet until after the session adjourns on March 9, but the list of bills it is expected to review is growing. Thus far, it includes House Bill 792, designed to prevent investor-owned utilities from adding expenses for lobbying and other political activities to ratepayers’ monthly bills. 

Also on the commission’s agenda are two separate bills attempting to boost competitive, third-party bidding on solar and offshore wind projects. 

A fourth — and probably not final — piece of legislation seeks to require utility regulators to enact energy policy at the lowest reasonable cost. Details are outlined in SB 137 and its companion, HB 976.

Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell, D-Mount Vernon, led the charge to revamp the long-dormant commission last year and budget money to hire a professional staff. He was frustrated that lawmakers, who all serve part time, counted solely on input from industry lobbyists and environmental advocacy organizations while shepherding Virginia’s transition to clean energy.

Its 13 members — three policy-savvy citizens and 10 legislators — are tasked with figuring out how stalled bills can be fixed and advanced.

Liz Veazey, the policy and rural energy director for the nonprofit Solar United Neighbors, understands the potential value of advice from a neutral body.

“Energy legislation can be extremely complex, so legislators do rely on lobbyists for information,” she said. “But utilities have a lot more lobbyists than we do. It’s hard to overcome the power Dominion Energy has in the legislature.”

Solar United Neighbors is backing the bill to limit the use of ratepayer funds on lobbying and other political activities. Veazey said she’s hoping interactions with the new commission will convince legislators to embrace accountability and transparency guardrails outlined in the measure.

Briefly, in addition to blocking Dominion and Appalachian Power from charging customers for lobbying government officials, the bill also would bar collecting money from customers for trade association dues, issue advertising, charitable giving and litigation to challenge laws and regulations.

The bill, sponsored by freshman Del. Rozia “J.R.” Henson, a Democrat representing counties in Northern Virginia, spells out that the two utilities would have to fund those activities with dollars that otherwise would have been returned to investors as profit.

“Ratepayers shouldn’t be covering these costs when investor-owned utilities use some of that money to lobby against solar and fight against our interest in clean energy,” Veazey said. “We’re not saying the utilities can’t participate in these activities … but they should be using shareholder money instead of ratepayer money.”

Smoothing what’s stuck

Over at the Southern Environmental Law Center, staff attorney Josephus Allmond has faith that the new legislative utility commission can dislodge sticking points that stymied progress on the Affordable, Reliable and Competitive bill (House Bill 638, Senate Bill 230) earlier this month.

The legislation’s goal is to elevate the role of customers and private developers in meeting the state’s clean energy targets via less expensive, third-party solar and onshore wind projects in Dominion and Appalachian Power service territories. 

“During a two-month legislative session, it’s difficult to get all the information out there,” Allmond said. “The extended forum of the commission allows us to get our data out there and make our case, and then for the opponents to rebut it.”

As the commission adapts and grows, it can “do legislative committees’ homework in the off-season,” he added.

At issue with the competitive procurement bill this session was how many third-party projects the utilities would include in their renewable energy portfolios. After legislators green-lighted the bold Virginia Clean Economy Act in 2020, regulators capped them at 35%. Proponents of the original legislation called for that 35% to act as a floor instead of a ceiling. Utilities balked at the initial bill, but pushed back vociferously when that figure was bumped up to 45% in a substitute bill.

The two sides also sparred over how quickly to forge ahead with a provision for a fivefold increase in the percentage of distributed energy generated by small-scale solar and solar storage projects.

Solar installers are on the verge of exceeding the 1% renewable portfolio limit included in the state’s clean energy law because of customer demand for closer-to-home energy. Bumping that upward to 5% is an incentive to let Virginia veer away from a more costly utility-only approach.

“I don’t think we are worlds apart in our negotiations,” Allmond said. “We have room to come together.”

While he isn’t clear on every procedural detail, he’s hoping that suggestions the commission forwards to the relevant committees can be a starting point for legislation next January.

“Legislators might be more comfortable with recommendations vetted by the commission,” he said.

Relatedly, on the offshore wind front, advocates are encouraged that a version of Senate Bill 578 has the potential to re-emerge next year. It was designed to enable private developers to compete with Dominion on offshore wind procurement for projects serving Virginia.

The Senate Commerce and Labor Committee’s decision to quash it in late January followed intense lobbying from Dominion to protect its monopoly.

Democratic Sen. Creigh Deeds, the bill’s sponsor and commerce committee chairman, had joined advocates in claiming that such competition would provide a swifter, cheaper, more transparent, and less risky path to meet or exceed the target of 5,200 megawatts of offshore wind by 2032 outlined in the four-year-old Virginia Clean Economy Act.

“We hope that Virginia’s Commission of Electric Utility Regulation will give these issues careful review later this year, ” Evan Vaughan, executive director of the Maryland-based Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition Action, said in an interview.

Surovell, of Northern Virginia, chairs the revamped commission, and Del. Terry Kilgore, who represents the state’s Southwest, also serves on it. The Republican sponsored the House companion bill. Appointed citizen members are required to have expertise in economic development, energy affordability and public utility regulation. 

Advocates: Safeguards being violated

Charlottesville-based Clean Virginia, which focuses on utility transparency, is a strong proponent of the legislation to limit political spending by investor-owned utilities.

Deputy director Cassady Craighill said her organization is grateful legislation led by Surovell last year “gave the commission more teeth” because bills before it are likely to be revived in some fashion instead of being tossed away.

“Yes, it would have been better for House Bill 792 to pass this year,” she said. “But we’re looking at its commission review as a conversation-starter.”

It’s possible, she noted, for the proposal that re-emerges from Surovell’s commission to be just as robust as the original while also more palatable for lawmakers. 

“With any legislative proposal to change the way utilities are regulated, it’s very difficult to introduce it and have it pass in the same year,” Craighill continued, adding that it’s not surprising hurdles arise even when Democrats control both legislative chambers. “Utilities are different from other industries so historically there has needed to be some sort of study done first.”

A Dominion spokesman didn’t weigh in for or against the bill.

“All the political activities listed in HB 792… are already excluded from our rates and are funded by shareholders,” Aaron Ruby said.

However, he also said the measure “goes much further than political activity” excluding “routine business expenses like travel, litigation, etc.”

Ruby was referencing prohibited activities the bill outlines, such as “travel, lodging, or food and beverage expenses for the utility’s board of directors or officers” or “leasing, owning, or chartering an aircraft for the utility’s board of directors or officers.” 

Bill proponents not only disputed Ruby’s claims, but provided evidence that current safeguards were being violated.

Kendl Kobbervig, advocacy director at Clean Virginia, pointed to research by the nonprofit utility watchdog Energy and Policy Institute revealing that Dominion and Appalachian Power sought to charge their customers a combined $10 million in various trade association dues in recent rate cases. Dominion’s share of that dues total was $9 million.

For instance, Dominion wanted customers to pay for $1.3 million to the Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned electric companies. Appalachian Power sought at least $500,000 in dues for the same institute from its Virginia customers.

The Washington, D.C-based trade group has a long record of fighting clean energy policies as well as environmental and public health rules.

“It’s inappropriate for utilities to pass expenses on to customers for trade associations like the Edison Electric Institute that turn around and lobby against climate policy,” Kobbervig said.

SCC utility audits not enough

Virginia’s State Corporation Commission is tasked with regulating monopoly utilities and establishing fair rates. The regulatory body began excluding lobbying costs from customer bills for all utilities in 1984, spokesman Andy Farmer said. In 2018, regulators followed suit with charitable donations.

Despite those rulings, state regulatory auditors have removed close to $10 million from customers’ bills in political or related costs in four rate cases dating back a decade, said Kobbervig, referring to data gathered by the California-based Energy and Policy Institute.

For instance, she pointed to a state audit of a recent Dominion rate case. Utility regulators combed through paperwork to identify $306,000 in charitable contributions and lobbying expenses that Dominion improperly placed in what are called above-the-line accounts.

Kobbervig noted that Dominion also tried to charge customers $5.7 million for charitable contributions and lobbying expenses in a 2021 triennial review, $45,000 for industry dues connected to lobbying in a 2015 biennial review, and $3.9 million for advertising costs in a 2013 biennial review. All those reviews are connected to rate cases.

Those “would have been included in Dominion’s customers’ bills if not for the audit,’ she said. “That is part of a longstanding pattern for Dominion.”

While HB 792 called for barring utilities from recovering advertising costs from customers, Virginia has had that restriction on its books since at least 1996, according to state code.

Delving into Appalachian Power’s 2023 rate case, the Energy and Policy Institute documented that the utility tried to charge ratepayers $926,000 in lobbying activities, advertising expenses and the lobbying portion of industry association dues.

“Right now, we’re relying on SCC staff to catch all of this,” Kobbervig said. “But is that really the way this should be handled?”

State Corporation Commission staffers conduct regulatory audits of a utility’s application for a rate increase, Farmer said. Part of that review includes verifying that costs for lobbying, charitable donations and lobbying aren’t being charged to customers.

“If we discover (they are), then we propose a regulatory accounting adjustment to exclude the costs,” he said. “There are no fines proposed or assessed on the company.”

One crucial piece of HB 792, advocates agreed, would have allowed state regulators to fine utilities for charging customers for prohibited political activities.

Equally important, they said, is a provision requiring utilities to file annual itemized reports clearly stating what charges ratepayers are expected to cover. In addition, the companies would have to list job titles of employees involved with lobbying, trade associations, charity, political litigation and advertising, along with what percentage of their salaries the utilities are seeking to recover from ratepayers.

“Electric utilities have been given monopoly structure and we need to hold them accountable,” said Veazey, of Solar United Neighbors. “What’s important is transparency.”

Whatever becomes of the bill, Virginia’s attempt to clamp down on utilities isn’t the first. Colorado, Connecticut and Maine adopted similar measures last year.

In neighboring Maryland this session, legislators are considering the Utility Transparency and Accountability Act. As well, proposals are pending before legislators in California, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York and Ohio.

“These efforts across the country tie into preventing utility shenanigans,” Veazey said. “If utilities have all of this money to spend on public relations or lobbying, you could argue that they could lower people’s bills or do more to advance clean energy.”

Rebooted commission could breathe new life into bills challenging Virginia’s largest utility is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Renewable energy advocates have vowed to double down next year on legislation designed to enable competition with Dominion Energy on offshore wind projects serving Virginia.

A legislative committee unanimously tabled a proposal to let private developers compete with the utility on offshore wind procurement. The Senate Commerce and Labor Committee’s late January decision to push Senate Bill 578 onto the 2025 agenda followed intense lobbying from Dominion Energy to protect its monopoly.

Evan Vaughan, executive director of the Maryland-based Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition Action (MAREC), was among the disappointed.

“We … will continue to advocate for competition as the best way for Virginia consumers to achieve a strong and cost-effective offshore wind industry,” Vaughan said in an interview. 

Democratic Sen. Creigh Deeds, the bill’s sponsor and commerce committee chairman, had joined advocates in claiming that such competition would provide a swifter, cheaper, more transparent, and less risky path to meet or exceed the target of 5,200 megawatts of offshore wind by 2032 outlined in the four-year-old Virginia Clean Economy Act.

The measure would not have interfered with the lock Dominion already has on constructing its 2,600 MW Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project 27 miles from Virginia Beach. 

As drafted, the bill would have required the state’s next 2,600 MW to be competitively bid among private developers. In a nutshell, the state would set up and operate a competitive procurement system. Rather than having the sole authority it now has, Dominion would then have to purchase power from the winning entity.

MAREC lobbyist Alex Thorup, with the Commonwealth Strategy Group, said private wind developers offer a bargain for ratepayers by taking on the burden of financial risk. That’s in contrast to the utility model, where costs are passed off to the ratepayer whether or not a project generates power.

“If you are a renewable energy advocate or with an environmental group, the ultimate goal is to see wind development be done at the lowest cost possible,” Thorup said. “Without the tools to make sure that happens, Virginia might lose the political will to move forward with what should be very successful projects.”

Vaughan emphasized that Dominion would still be eligible to participate in the federal auction bidding.

“There’s a misconception out there that this bill takes away Dominion’s status as a monopoly utility,” said. “That is just not true. Dominion can compete on a level playing field to supply that energy themselves, and the independent developers we represent welcome the challenge to deliver the best value to Virginia ratepayers.”

Advocates were eager to pass SB 578 this session so as to align with the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management leasing schedule. The agency has proposed only two areas in the central Atlantic region for wind energy lease sales this year. What BOEM refers to as C-1, which is adjacent to Dominion’s 113,000-acre Coastal Virginia project site, is the one with the potential to serve Virginia utility customers.

At 176,505 acres, C-1 is expansive enough to generate 2,600 MW of power. Dominion isn’t a shoo-in to win the lease, advocates said, noting that BOEM has expressed willingness to divide the site among multiple wind developers.

“The way I see it, Dominion will bid as much as it can to get area C-1,” Vaughan said. “They could well win it at auction, but that’s not guaranteed.”

Losing that bid to a private wind developer — without SB 578 in place — means there would be no clear path to selling that electricity in Virginia, he continued.

“We’re not saying Dominion can’t compete,” Vaughan said. “We’re saying that passing this bill encourages Dominion to be more responsible toward its ratepayers.”

Dominion: Why import ‘failed model?’

The committee voted to postpone Deeds’ bill on Jan. 29, the day before Dominion announced that federal authorities had approved construction and operations plans for its 176-turbine Coastal Virginia wind farm. Initial offshore construction is slated to begin this spring.

Dominion, the largest utility serving Virginia, put its considerable muscle into quashing the measure before it even emerged from the Senate committee.

“There is nothing about this legislation that would make offshore wind more affordable or accessible for Virginians,” Dominion spokesman Aaron Ruby said before the committee vote. “Bottom line, the Virginia model for offshore wind is working and the (competitive) model is failing. Let’s use our common sense. If it ain’t broke, don’t break it.” 

Ruby pointed to several slowed or canceled wind projects in the Northeast — which were competitively bid and rely on power purchase agreements — as reasons enough to reject importing “that failed model to Virginia.”

Two other shortcomings he cited centered on cost controls and consumer protection, as well as economic growth. For instance, he said it’s a mistake to take regulatory authority away from the State Corporation Commission and hand it to the state Department of Energy.

He also questioned the validity of potentially importing energy from another state and exporting economic benefits out of Virginia. He was evidently referring to the Kitty Hawk wind farm that Avangrid Renewables is scheduled to construct on the coastal border between Virginia and North Carolina, and a separate BOEM lease area farther north set to be auctioned this year. The latter, a 101,443 acre site near the Delaware Bay, is known as A-2.

“The Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project is creating thousands of jobs, hundreds of millions in economic benefits and millions in tax revenue,” Ruby said. “Don’t we want the economic benefits … here in Virginia?”

Wind advocates countered each of Ruby’s points. For instance, they said the bill requires that prevailing wages and apprenticeships be part of any bid, which would mimic the relations that private wind developers have forged with organized labor across the Northeast.

They also said multiple companies building an array of projects would position Virginia as an ideal regional offshore wind hub, opening opportunities for jobs and small businesses in tandem with investments in ports and infrastructure.

On canceled projects in the Northeast, they pointed out that skyrocketing interest rates, supply chain disruptions and uncertainty about federal tax credits contributed to those failures.

Further, they emphasized that ratepayers weren’t on the hook for any payments and that some states received termination fees. Further, procurement terms were modified to include updates such as inflation adjustment clauses.

They also noted that the cost of Dominion’s current offshore wind project ballooned to $9.8 billion from an estimated $8 billion when Dominion filed a cost recovery plan in 2021 with utility regulators. While it has remained on budget and on time since then, that could be subject to change as the project progresses.

Bill a boon for Kitty Hawk

Avangrid is in the midst of obtaining permits for a yet-to-be-built wind farm named Kitty Hawk on the North Carolina-Virginia border. In 2017, the New England-based company won the lease on the site roughly 27 miles from the Outer Banks.

Chief development officer Ken Kimmell said Avangrid is champing at the bit to “deliver power to Virginia at a favorable rate, but the missing element is a clear path to that market.”

Even if SB 578 turning is delayed by a year, turning it into law would let Virginia authorities compare Avangrid’s electricity prices to Dominion’s.

“It doesn’t guarantee anything to us, but at least it gives us an at-bat,” Kimmell said. “Right now, we don’t even have an at-bat. What’s so evil about competition?”

At full capacity, Kitty Hawk would be capable of generating up to 2,500 MW. Wind from its first phase of development could help Dominion meet at least part of its Clean Economy Act targets, Kimmell said.

He also questioned Dominion’s seeming assumption that it would win sole dibs on the C-1 lease. 

“There’s a lot of uncertainty here,” Kimmell said. “I don’t really know why you would want to put all of your eggs in one basket.”

Vaughan pointed out that competition for the two lease sites along the East Coast will be fierce because demand for offshore wind is high among states with clean energy objectives.

“Regionally, offshore wind from Maine to Maryland is procured competitively,” he said, adding that both Virginia and North Carolina have a monopoly structure. “On that front, Virginia is kind of the odd duck.”

All of those factors are more fodder for propelling SB 578 forward, said Cassady Craighill, deputy director at Clean Virginia, a Charlottesville-based nonprofit focused on utility transparency.

“Virginia’s changing political winds have put affordability, reliability, and sustainability at the forefront of the commonwealth’s energy future, but the job is only half done,” she said. “Sen. Deeds is right to advance the conversation about a competitive bidding process.”

Revamped commission gets first crack

Deeds’ bill won’t linger in a bell jar until next January because soon it’s scheduled to be reviewed — and likely reshaped — by the newly revamped Commission on Electric Utility Regulation.

Last year, a bipartisan measure to reboot and free up money to staff the long-dormant commission narrowly passed the Senate and sailed through the House.

Sen. Scott Surovell, D-Mount Vernon, told the Energy News Network last year that he led the charge because he thought it was crucial for legislators, who all serve part-time, to count on a professional staff for guidance as they sort through increasingly complicated energy bills. Republican Del. Terry Kilgore, who represents Southwest Virginia, sponsored the House companion bill. 

The commission needs to robustly monitor the state’s massive transition to clean energy to “ensure we’re doing it in the best way we can,” Surovell said, emphasizing that legislators should not be solely reliant on industry lobbyists and environmental advocacy organizations for energy policy decisions. 

Both Surovell, of Northern Virginia, and Kilgore, who represents the state’s Southwest, are serving on the rebooted commission. Its 13 members — three citizens and 10 legislators — are tasked with reviewing and explaining proposed energy policies to lawmakers and the public. 

Surovell had called for appointing citizen members with expertise in economic development, energy affordability and public utility regulation. The search is still on for the commission’s executive director.

Vaughan is optimistic that commissioners will keep competition and costs for ratepayers top of mind during their upcoming evaluation.

“We hope that (the commission) will give these issues careful review later this year,” he said.

Governor already on board? 

The bill that Deeds put on the table didn’t come as a surprise to the Southeastern Wind Coalition, a nonprofit that represents regional players in the industry, but doesn’t lobby for or against legislation across its 11-state membership.

Julia Pendleton, the coalition’s Richmond-based program director, said the language in SB 578 resembled some unexpected amendments that Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin had added to a separate piece of wind legislation in April 2023 after it had already passed both the House and Senate.

The governor’s changes signaled that he backed the idea of competitive bidding and power purchase agreements to enhance the trajectory of Virginia’s offshore wind growth. 

Both chambers rejected Youngkin’s amendments to the measure, SB 1441, which had a companion bill in the House. The underlying bill, which became law, required utility regulators at the State Corporation Commission to consider economic and other benefits to Virginia when reviewing offshore wind proposals. It also accelerated the offshore wind development timeline from 2034 to 2032.

“People knew months ago that this is something Youngkin wanted to support, so we had heard that legislation was coming this year,” Pendleton said about his evident support for competitive bidding.

Her coalition will continue to track the journey of Deeds’ delayed legislation. After the November election, Democrats held on to a slim majority in the Senate and flipped the House back to their control. Barring any unexpected changes, those margins would still be in place next year.

“Knowing it has the potential support of the governor makes it a potential reality,” she concluded. “We’re very curious to see what happens.”

Virginia lawmakers delay decision on Dominion Energy’s offshore wind monopoly is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Virginia is on a roll transitioning to electric school buses. And that momentum could remain uninterrupted if legislators activate a precedent-setting but dormant initiative to tap into state dollars.

Freshman Del. Holly Seibold has submitted a budget amendment this legislative session asking Virginia to catch up with other states by allocating $200,000 to jumpstart the Clean Vehicle Grant Fund. It has been left penniless since Seibold’s predecessor set it up three years ago specifically to help school districts rid their fleets of polluting, noisy diesel-powered buses.

The amendment calls for moving the money — half in 2025 and half in 2026 — from the general fund to the Department of Environmental Quality. DEQ staffers would use the $200,000—nowhere near enough to buy even one e-bus—to set up a working group tasked with establishing sources of long-term state funding for the transition.

A yes or no decision by the House Appropriations Committee could be made within the next month.

Seibold, the Democrat who represents Fairfax County, was responding to a plea — and an eleventh-hour phone call — from advocate Bobby Monacella, who played a pivotal role ushering in an e-bus evolution in Northern Virginia.

“Ideally, I just want Virginia to have a consistent stream of money so school districts that want to continue to electrify their fleets after this round of federal money runs out, can do so,” said Monacella, a Mothers Out Front campaigner in Fairfax County.

Thus far, Virginia’s approach to greening its diesel bus fleets has been piecemeal. School districts have plugged into federal dollars, public-private ventures, utility programs and even bought buses directly.

For instance, 67 buses are on the road or on order in Virginia thanks to grants the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has awarded nationwide since 2022. That $5 billion for school bus electrification, folded into the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, is expected to run out in 2026.

“When that federal money goes away, we have to figure out a way to pick it up at the state level so we can transition all the buses,” Monacella said about her hopes for a seamless switch. “That means convening a stakeholders work group to hash out the details of the program. So, this budget amendment is perfect timing.”

Health, climate drive electrification

In the federal government’s eyes, Virginia is viewed as an electric school bus pioneer because of legislation sponsored in 2021 by then-Del. Mark Keam, a Fairfax County Democrat. 

His original measure was stripped of its original funding source, a tax on dyed diesel fuel, used in farm machinery and other non-highway vehicles. The substitute version, passed into law, directed the state DEQ to hash out details for the grant fund via a workgroup. Neither the working group nor the financing mechanism ever materialized.

Keam, who resigned in 2022, had advanced the bill because his daughter suffered from asthma and he wanted all children to have a healthier, pollution-free ride to school. 

Despite the lack of a dedicated state funding source, Virginia ranked fourth nationwide in the number of electric school buses either on the road or on order, according to data compiled by the nonprofit World Resources Institute through December. 

Since 2021, several other states — including top three finishers California, Maryland and New York — have enacted either robust incentive, mandates, or both to encourage school districts to switch to electric buses.

Climate change and students’ health and safety motivated Monacella, then a volunteer activist, and other members of a joint environmental task force to spur Fairfax County into adopting a mandate in 2019 that all 1,625 buses in its fleet be electric by 2035. 

Mothers Out Front carried the enthusiasm of that local victory to the General Assembly two years later to be a driving force for House Bill 2118, Keam’s bipartisan, ambitious undertaking to create a specific grant funding model for bus electrification over 10 years.

This session, Monacella decided that three years is long enough for the law to languish, unfunded.

“It’s a tribute to former Delegate Keam that Delegate Seibold has picked up the flag and carried it,” she said. “What he did was precedent-setting.”

Tish Tablan, who leads the Electrify Our Schools program at the Charlottesville-based Generation 180, is as motivated as Monacella about dedicating dollars to fleet conversions.

“State funding is necessary to support school districts in upgrading to electric buses,” said Tablan, senior program director at the nonprofit. “It’s time for Virginia to invest in protecting our children and communities from the harmful effects of diesel air pollution.”

Down to the wire

Monacella and Seibold had discussed funding for electric school buses months ago, but nothing specific had emerged from those conversations.

A budget amendment likely wouldn’t have surfaced if Monacella hadn’t participated in an online question and answer session with legislators on Jan. 12 organized by the Virginia Grassroots Coalition.

“Being aware of the deadline for budget amendments should’ve been my first priority,” said Monacella, who only recently had become a full-time advocate. “I thought I had missed it.”

When another delegate attending the online forum told her the deadline was 5 p.m. that day, Monacella signed off and sprang into action with Seibold’s staff.

“It was kind of a crunch but we got it in there,” she said about the scramble. “I totally admit I dropped the ball. It was kind of everyone to help me recover.”

Electric school buses are roughly three times as expensive as traditional diesel ones. A basic price tag on a 77-passenger electric bus in Virginia is $368,500, compared to $120,099 for a diesel model, according to Whitney Kopanko, the electric vehicle program manager at Sonny Merryman. The Prince William-based bus dealer controls 60% of the overall school bus market in Virginia.

Through January, Fairfax County had 73 buses on the road or on the way to the district. That’s close to one-fourth of Virginia’s electric bus total of 302 — out of 16,000-plus buses in service statewide. 

“I don’t know about the ins and outs of a potential funding stream,” Monacella said about the eye-popping investment needed to replace thousands more buses. “I do know we have a long way to go and the federal money isn’t going to cover that.”

She’s willing to devote the legwork to the cause in the name of curbing carbon emissions.

As evidence, Monacella “repented” for her budget amendment oversight by traipsing to the offices of House Appropriations Committee members in Richmond earlier this month to drop off flyers she designed to educate staffers about restoring Virginia’s status as a leader on school bus electrification. Seibold, who doesn’t serve on that committee, also will be nudging her fellow legislators.

“I wanted to bring it to their attention so when they sit down and sort through all of these amendments they might remember this one,” Monacella said. “I figured, why not?”

Virginia legislation would activate state program to fund electric school buses is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Newly empowered Virginia Democrats are pushing legislation this session that would elevate the role of customers and private developers in meeting the state’s clean energy targets.  

A chief aim of the ARC bill — shorthand for Affordable, Reliable and Competitive — is to significantly expand the amount of power generated by less expensive, third-party solar and onshore wind projects in the service territories of both Dominion Power and Appalachian Power.

After legislators green-lighted the bold Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) in 2020, regulators capped those types of projects at 35% of an investor-owned utility’s renewable energy portfolio.

Backers of the ARC legislation, House Bill 638 and Senate Bill 230, are calling for that 35% to act as a floor rather than a ceiling.

“We know the market can support at least 35%,” said Nate Benforado, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. “We’re not saying the new target should be 100%. Whatever the number is, it’s best left to the discretion of the State Corporation Commission.”

Benforado’s organization collaborated with policy specialists at organizations including Advanced Energy United and the Sierra Club to shape the ARC legislation. They expect the proposal — with its emphasis on increasing market competition and lowering costs — will attract Republican supporters on its way through the General Assembly. 

“This is one of those issues that is bipartisan,” he said about adjusting the existing statutory framework to escalate growth of renewables. 

Briefly, the VCEA requires Dominion to incrementally meet a goal of 100% clean energy generation by 2045. Targets for 2025 and 2035 are 26% and 59%, respectively. Appalachian Power is supposed to follow suit by 2050.

Del. Rip Sullivan, a Fairfax County Democrat, is the patron of HB 638, while Sen. Ghazala Hashmi, a Democrat representing the Richmond region, is sponsoring the upper chamber version.

Just days after the legislative session convened on Jan. 10, Sullivan told attendees at a Virginia Grassroots Coalition online gathering that he was reluctant to attempt to tweak the VCEA until Democrats again regained majorities in both chambers.

That happened during the November election when Democrats held on to a slim majority in the Senate and flipped the House back to their control. Still, narrow vote margins mean they don’t have the supermajorities necessary to override vetoes or enact new laws that Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin opposes.

Bill also boosts distributed generation

Sullivan’s bill would also require the two large utilities to allow a fivefold increase in the percentage of distributed energy generated by small-scale solar and solar storage projects.

Solar installers are on the verge of exceeding the 1% renewable portfolio limit included in the VCEA because of customer demand for closer-to-home energy.

Bumping that upward to 5% is an incentive to let Virginia unlock the lowest-cost path to clean energy because it veers away from a utility-only approach, said Robin Dutta, acting executive director of the Chesapeake Solar & Storage Association.

His organization represents renewable energy developers in Virginia, Maryland, Delaware and the District of Columbia.

“There’s a huge climate argument for distributed generation,” Dutta said. “By lowering peak (energy) demand as much as possible, utilities don’t have to build out the grid with transmission lines and other infrastructure.” 

The legislation would allow local, small-scale projects — which include rooftop solar, community solar and related storage — to be as large as 3 megawatts. That triples the current 1 MW cap.

Inviting the private sector to play a larger role not only drives technical innovation, but also lets non-utility entities and regular ratepayers be armed with their own power generation, Dutta said.

He praised Sullivan’s bill for folding in a pair of renewable stalwarts — third-party-owned solar projects and distributed energy — that green the grid and protect affordability for ratepayers.

“Those two pieces move the ball forward in two different ways,” Dutta said. “And that leads to a more equitable clean energy transition for ratepayers.”

One advantage of distributed generation is that solar panels aren’t covering acres of farmland, Benforado said. Instead, projects are sited near the people using the renewable energy, which avoids costly transmission and distribution upgrades.

Despite industry enthusiasm, Dominion Energy has a “number of concerns with the legislation” and is “working with the sponsor to hopefully address some of them,” utility spokesman Aaron Ruby told the Energy News Network.

The utility’s most pressing issue revolves around raising the distributed solar carve-out. Dominion claims that boosting it to 5% would require the utility to buy renewable energy credits from roughly 3,700 megawatts of distributed solar projects by 2048.

That is “completely unrealistic,” Ruby said, adding that adhering to the increase would cost Dominion about $260 million in penalties annually for being out of compliance with the incremental renewable energy goals laid out in the VCEA.

Ruby explained that Dominion has lowered customer electricity rates significantly and is more than a year ahead of schedule on meeting its renewable energy requirements.

“This legislation heads in the opposite direction on both scores,” he said. “You’ve heard the old saying, ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.’ I’d go even further. If it’s working, don’t break it.”

Third-party solar: More attractive and affordable

Third-party solar developers in Virginia — and elsewhere — usually engage in a mutually beneficial arrangement known as a power purchase agreement, or PPA for short, to help customers meet sustainability goals. 

Generally, those deals allow the builder to install, own and operate the energy system on land the customer owns. The customer receives stable, often low-cost electricity with no upfront cost for a predetermined length of time, which enables the owner to take advantage of tax credits and earn income from the sale of electricity.

Environmental advocates maintain that solar projects built, operated and maintained by third parties are less expensive than those coordinated by utilities. For one, utilities receive a return on equity for capital expenditures and project costs are then passed on to ratepayers.

However, third-party builders are not only competing for business but investing their own capital, which means they assume all financial risks. That alone is incentive enough to deliver a successful project at a reasonable cost.

“With the Clean Economy Act, we have a path and a structure to improve the affordability of this transition to clean energy,” the SELC’s Benforado said. “We don’t want to see lower-cost options for customers dismissed because of a 35 percent cap.”

He pointed to testimony presented last January to utility regulators by Gregory Abbott on behalf of Appalachian Voices, an environmental nonprofit. Abbott, who had recently retired from the SCC after 24 years in the commission’s Division of Public Utility Regulation, was commenting on a case involving Dominion’s renewable energy portfolio.

Abbott stated that third-party-owned solar projects are a more affordable and “attractive option for captive customers” because of lower risks associated with performance and project development 

Abbott also noted that Dominion has consistently left lower-cost, third-party solar projects out of its renewable energy mix because of its interpretation of 35% as an exact number instead of a suggestion.

On the Senate side, the bill has been referred to the full Labor and Commerce Committee. Over in the House, it was in front of a Labor and Commerce subcommittee as of Jan. 16.  

“Virginia’s curve is headed up when it comes to renewables and clean energy,” said Sullivan, the House sponsor. “Despite what you may be hearing from some quarters, we can and should be on track to meet our goals. Having said that, we need to do better, we need to do it faster and we need to do more.”

Virginia legislation aims to unleash competition to speed progress on clean electricity is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.