Posts by
Massachusetts Policy Advocate
In the recent debate over how to reduce Massachusetts's high electricity prices, one area has been mostly overlooked: reforming the Commonwealth’s less useful energy standards. We think this is unfortunate, because a couple of straightforward reforms could cut people’s bills without increasing the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Liquified natural gas (LNG) terminals are large pieces of infrastructure that can either turn pipeline natural gas into a liquid to move onto ships or turn liquified natural gas into a gas to put into a pipeline. They have recently made national headlines because the buildout of LNG export terminals has allowed the US to export more natural gas to the rest of the world, which in turn has led to higher domestic natural gas prices.
Uniquely for the mainland United States, New England’s LNG facilities are primarily used to import, not export, natural gas. This is because the region’s position at the end of the national gas pipeline system means that pipeline gas alone cannot meet the region’s demand during cold snaps. That is where the Everett Marine Terminal (EMT) comes in.
Last night, Thursday, the Massachusetts House passed H.5151, the latest iteration of its energy affordability bill. While we strongly oppose its proposed cut to Mass Save, overall, this bill is a massive improvement, both in terms of its impact on the climate and energy affordability, over the first version put out by the House Telecommunications Utility and Energy Committee back in November. Thanks to everyone who reached out to their lawmakers in opposition to that legislation, the Representatives who pushed back against pro-fossil fuel policies, and the hard work of House Ways and Means leadership and staff, many of the worst provisions originally in the bill, such as a pipeline tax, were removed.
Here is a summary of many of the best and worst provisions in this 100+ page bill.
The Massachusetts House Ways and Means Committee seems to be close to advancing the controversial energy House Bill 4744. This would keep Massachusetts dependent on fossil fuels by cutting Mass Save’s budget, subsidizing gas equipment, and opening the door to putting the cost of new gas pipelines on the backs of electricity ratepayers.
In 2024, third-party “competitive” electric suppliers increased residential electric rates by $80.7 million, according to data from the Energy Information Administration and Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities.
We are reporting here a continuation of a pattern in which retail electricity suppliers who sign up individual customers greatly overcharge them compared to what the customers would pay if they received supply service from either their utility (Eversource, National Grid, or Unitil) or their municipal aggregation if it was available.
These companies did this by signing up residential customers, often by promising to lower their electric bill, and then charging their customers an average of 2.1 cents more per kilowatt-hour (kWh) than customers would have paid had they stayed on either their utilities’ basic service rate or their community’s municipal aggregation program (if it had one).
Our friends at theBuilding Electrification Accelerator asked us to present information about legislation, House Bill 4744, now working its way through the Massachusetts House of Representatives. This blog is an adaptation of the presentation.
Most of Rhode Island is served by one utility, Rhode Island Energy, and they have a monopoly over the distribution of electricity (poles, wires, meters, billing), but not over the supply of electricity. This leaves residents of Rhode Island with three choices as to who to buy their electricity supply from: “Last Resort” power from the Rhode Island Energy, their city or town through municipal aggregation (if the community has a program), or from a third-party, sometimes called a competitive supplier.
It is becoming clear that the cost of maintaining and modernizing our electricity grid is going to require large capital expenditures by our local electric utilities. Financing these investments, while keeping electric rates from rising further, is going to be a challenge.
One policy that could help do this, which has already been used across the country, is utility securitization.
Massachusetts has some great, and sometimes nation-leading, energy programs; the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (APS) is not one of them. That’s why we are excited that Governor Healey has proposed phasing out the APS by 2028 as part of H.4144, An Act relative to energy affordability, independence and innovation, which she filed back in May.
In Massachusetts, third-party electric suppliers, also called “competitive suppliers”, are allowed to sell electricity directly to residential customers of Eversource, National Grid, and Unitil (although the cost of delivering the power is always charged by the local utility). While the idea behind allowing these companies to operate was that they would increase competition and bring down electric prices, this is not how things have worked in practice.
