NC Sierra Club and Allies Urge Veto of S266, Citing Higher Rates and Carbon Emission Rollbacks
Key Insights
Environmental and clean energy groups, alongside ratepayers, are pressuring North Carolina Governor Josh Stein to veto Senate Bill 266, which they argue benefits Duke Energy at the expense of consumers.
S266, initially a hurricane relief bill, was amended to include provisions allowing Duke Energy to bypass carbon reduction commitments and shift financial burdens to residential customers.
The bill introduces changes to cost recovery mechanisms, favoring natural gas over renewables and enabling more frequent rate hikes for consumers.
Critics highlight the lack of transparency in the bill's passage and its potential to undermine North Carolina's progress in renewable energy adoption.
Environmental advocates and ratepayers rallied at the North Carolina General Assembly on June 26, urging Governor Josh Stein to veto Senate Bill 266 (S266), a measure they claim prioritizes Duke Energy’s profits over consumer protections and climate commitments. Originally drafted as hurricane relief legislation, S266 was overhauled to include provisions that critics argue will increase utility bills for North Carolinians while rolling back Duke Energy’s pledge to reduce carbon emissions by 70% from 2005 levels by 2030.
State Representative Maria Cervania (District 41) condemned the bill, stating, "Senate Bill 266 is not about climate progress or affordable energy—it’s about giving monopoly utilities more power and profit while North Carolinians pay the price." The bill’s revised language, introduced abruptly in a House committee hearing, includes changes to Duke Energy’s cost recovery mechanisms, incentivizing natural gas over renewable energy sources like solar and wind. It also shifts fuel cost allocations to place a heavier burden on residential customers and allows for quarterly rate adjustments, potentially leading to more frequent bill increases.
Chris Herndon, Chapter Director of the NC Sierra Club, criticized the lack of public scrutiny, noting, "If S266 were truly about reducing power bills, it would have been debated openly. Instead, it was buried in a budget bill disguised as hurricane relief." The bill further removes the $500 million cap on new generation projects included in rates outside normal regulatory processes and alters construction financing cost recovery, raising concerns about accountability.
Shelley Robbins of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy highlighted the financial impact, estimating a $24.8 million cost shift from non-residential to residential customers due to revised fuel cost allocations. "This bill increases bills for families while corporations pay less," she said. Meanwhile, Shannon Binns of Sustain Charlotte warned of additional rate hikes, citing a 14.6% increase over the next three years, with S266 exacerbating the financial strain on households.
Jeffrey Robbins of CleanAIRE NC emphasized the environmental repercussions, pointing to Duke Energy’s plans for new natural gas plants, which would emit harmful pollutants despite the state’s renewable energy potential. Jeff Monico of the Sierra Club’s Cypress Group underscored North Carolina’s leadership in renewables, urging lawmakers to uphold policies that balance economic growth with environmental protection.
Beverly Bard, a retiree from High Point, voiced concerns about affordability, stating, "It isn’t right for legislators to favor Duke Energy at the expense of ordinary citizens." The bill’s opponents argue it undermines decades of progress in clean energy and consumer protections, calling for a veto to safeguard North Carolina’s future.