The Energy Consumer's Bulletin- a New England energy news blog

  • There are no suggestions because the search field is empty.

Massachusetts (10)

House Omnibus Energy Bill Hits the Floor: Members expected to vote on Wednesday, June 8th

UPDATE: House passed its Energy Bill (H.4385) on Wednesday, June 8 by a vote of 154-1. The bill includes a procurement of 1,200MW each of offshore wind and hydroelectricity. It also includes a technical amendment that addresses the need to fix gas leaks. A total of 61 amendments to the bill were filed and nearly all, including those that Mass Energy supported, were not voted on because they were withdrawn or laid aside as beyond the scope of the bill. This includes an amendment that would have increased the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and an amendment that would prohibit the “pipeline tax” on electric customers to fund unnecessary gas infrastructure. 

The bill has made its way to the Senate where lawmakers are developing what we hope will be a more comprehensive energy bill. We would like to see the Senate version include the “pipeline tax” prohibition, an increase to the RPS, alongside the energy procurement and gas leak repair included in the House version.


After months of speculation, the House’s “omnibus” energy bill is slated to be taken up for a vote today (Wednesday, June 8th). H.4377 (An Act to promote energy diversity) directs utilities to procure a large amount of offshore wind and hydroelectricity.

Picture of Eugenia T. Gibbons Eugenia T. Gibbons

Webinar Recording: “New Perspectives on RGGI and the Massachusetts Global Warming Solutions Act”

On June 2nd, our Executive Director, Larry Chretien, and Pat Knight (Synapse Energy Economics) spoke on a webinar about increasing RGGI reductions and the recent SJC ruling in favor of the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA). This webinar was presented as part of Synapse's Spring Webinar Series on trending topics in the electricity sector.

Picture of Katy Kidwell Katy Kidwell

Massachusetts: Early pioneer with ambitious goals, A Case Study on Climate Action and Energy Finance

In April, Mass Energy and People's Power & Light's Executive Director Larry Chretien spoke in front of a group from the Boston Area Sustainable Investment Consortium (BASIC). Larry spoke about policies that stimulate investment in renewable energy and how they can pay off. Below is a recap written by a BASIC member, Dan Saccardi from Synapse Energy Economics.

Dan Saccardi, Guest Blogger

Mass. Court Ruling Hurts Case for Pipeline

On May 17, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) issued a unanimous opinion confirming that the landmark 2008 climate protection law, the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA), requires the state to take enforceable action to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on an annual basis in order to achieve the law’s mandate. Basically, they said “limits are limits”, the targets are binding, more needs to be done to achieve the emission target for 2020, and the law is unambiguous

Larry Chretien and Eugenia Gibbons

State High Court Rules in Favor of Global Warming Solutions Act

Unambiguous. That’s the word the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court used in it's unanimous decision to describe a requirement of the Department of Environmental Protection to write regulations ensuring that we see “declining aggregate emissions” of greenhouse gas emissions over time.  As a coplaintiff in this case, Mass Energy is  thrilled with the SJC’s order. We support the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA), which requires greenhouse gas emissions of 25% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 (both compared to 1990). And the GWSA clearly states that the Department must write regulations to get the job done. We hope that the Department will move quickly to write strong regulations that will get us to the important first milestone of 25% by 2020.

Picture of Larry Chretien Larry Chretien

Taxing Electricity to Pay for a Gas Pipeline Makes No Sense

On February 25, the Mass. Department of Public Utilities (DPU) held a public hearing on a petition filed by Eversource that permits the company to charge electricity ratepayers for a 20 year contract to source fracked gas from New York and Pennsylvania. The gas would come to Massachusetts through the proposed Access Northeast gas pipeline. This is the first of three such cases. National Grid has filed a similar petition with the DPU and is seeking permission to charge its electricity ratepayers for the Access Northeast and Northeast Energy Direct gas pipelines.

Picture of Eugenia T. Gibbons Eugenia T. Gibbons

A Reality Check on the Massachusetts Clean Energy & Climate Plan

The Baker Administration just released its Clean Energy & Climate Plan (CECP) as required by the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA). They claim that the Commonwealth is on pace to meet our GWSA requirement of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 25% by 2020 and that we will reach that number if certain things fall into place. It’s worth reading in full, but here’s a bit of a reality check.

Picture of Larry Chretien Larry Chretien

Validation from the AG’s Study: More Gas Pipeline Capacity Not Needed

As readers of the blog are aware, on October 26 I voted against the Massachusetts Energy Efficiency Three-Year Plan for 2016-2018. I did so primarily because the plan represented a retreat on energy savings in the Commercial and Industrial (C&I). Compared to every other resource, savings from that sector is the cheapest by a country mile.

Picture of Larry Chretien Larry Chretien

Climate Change Had Its Day in Court

Back in November 2014, I wrote about how Mass Energy has joined with the Conservation Law Foundation in a lawsuit against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts because the Mass. Department of Environmental Protection had not written regulations required by the Global Warming Solutions Act. The regulations are about ensuring that we meet the law’s requirement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 25% by 2020, an important milestone on the way to the ultimate requirement of 80% by 2050. On Friday, January 8, oral arguments in the case were presented to the Supreme Judicial Court. I’m happy to report that the attorney on our side, Jenny Rushlow of the Conservation Law Foundation, did an outstanding job of presenting our argument and answering good questions from the justices.

Picture of Larry Chretien Larry Chretien