** Southern Company Pledges Net Zero Emissions by 2050 but Doubles Down on Fossil Fuels ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
By Daniel Tait on May 28, 2020 09:46 am
Southern Company unveiled ([link removed]) an updated “net-zero” carbon goal yesterday at its Annual Meeting which relies heavily on negative emissions to enable continued investment in fossil fuels such as coal and gas. Southern’s goal stands in stark contrast to commitments from peer utilities such as Consumers Energy ([link removed]) , NIPSCO ([link removed]) , and PSEG ([link removed]) , all of which have pledged to forego new gas plant development. Others, such as
APS ([link removed]) and Xcel ([link removed]) , have committed to fully decarbonizing by 2050 without the use of offsets.

Southern has asked Alabama regulators to approve almost 2 gigawatts in new gas ([link removed]) -burning power plants. The company also asked for and received approval from Mississippi ([link removed]) and Georgia ([link removed]) regulators to continue operating uneconomic coal plants.


** “Net-Zero” Details Scant
------------------------------------------------------------

Southern Company CEO Tom Fanning provided few details at the company’s Annual Meeting about how the utility would achieve net zero carbon emissions. Details were relegated to a few bullet points discussing expanded research and development on negative carbon technologies and other items such as planting trees and equipping biomass units with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology.
Figure 1. Southern Company’s “Net Zero Plan” as presented at its 2020 Annual Meeting

Southern’s previous attempts to build CCS in Kemper County, Mississippi were disastrous, both for the company and customers. Southern was forced ([link removed]) to write off at least $6.4 billion in losses on Kemper after the price tag of the plant ballooned from $2.9 billion to $7.5 billion.

Fanning previously floated ([link removed]) transportation electrification as an opportunity for Southern to “take credit for” decarbonization. Customers switching to electric transportation, however, does not obviate a utility’s need to fully decarbonize its electricity production in order to stave off the worst effects of climate change.


** Gas and Coal Reign Supreme
------------------------------------------------------------

Despite Southern’s net-zero emissions pledge, the company has moved aggressively to invest in new gas, and has worked to preserve coal in its generation mix even as most other utilities race to divest themselves of it. Clean energy advocates challenged the company to close uneconomic coal plants in Mississippi – Plant Daniel ([link removed]) – and in Georgia – Plant Bowen ([link removed]) . Southern fought the attempts to close both ([link removed]) plants ([link removed]) .

The Georgia Public Service Commission attempted to split the difference between Georgia Power and Sierra Club when it disallowed most new capital expenditures ([link removed]) at Plant Bowen Units 1 and 2. However, Plant Bowen is still in service as part of Georgia Power’s generation fleet.

The Mississippi Public Service Commission allowed Mississippi Power to charge customers as much as $96.8 million to extend operations at the Plant Daniel, despite the fact that the utility could save customers hundreds of millions of dollars ([link removed]) by shutting down the plant. Mississippi Power derives 93% of its electricity from gas ([link removed]) , and just 1.5% from renewable energy.

Alabama Power filed ([link removed]) with the Alabama Public Service Commission for approval to expand its generation capacity by almost 20%, mostly with 2 gigawatts of new gas despite the company’s data showing ([link removed]) solar-plus-storage projects to be the most economically favorable for consumers. Alabama Power stated ([link removed]) that one of the gas units, Plant Barry Unit 8, would have a 40-year useful life. The company added that it was “unlikely” ([link removed]) that Plant Barry Unit 8 would become a stranded asset by 2060, ten years beyond Southern’s claimed net-zero emissions
target of 2050.

CEO Tom Fanning’s greenhouse gas reduction bonus plan ([link removed]) gives Fanning credit ([link removed]) for the development of Southern’s liquified natural gas business. The transportation and combustion of natural gas emits greenhouse gases.


** Southern’s Operating Companies Appear Unaccountable to Carbon Reduction Goals
------------------------------------------------------------

Each of Southern Company’s regulated electric subsidiaries has dismissed the company’s carbon goals as immaterial to their planning processes. Southern Company previously claimed ([link removed]) that integrated resource plans (IRPs) were a key tool to help the company plan to reach its greenhouse gas reduction goals.

But in a Mississippi Power’s IRP meeting, the utility admitted under questioning about its share of Southern’s carbon reduction goals that, “Right now, there is no particular cap on Mississippi Power emissions and no particular requirement that we do anything other than maintain cost effective, reliable generation.”

Sister companies Alabama Power ([link removed]) and Georgia Power ([link removed]) have echoed Mississippi Power’s position regarding Southern’s climate goals. Alabama Power said, “We don’t have a share of that, per se. That is a Southern company enterprise-wide goal.” When asked by the Georgia PSC staff how Southern Company’s goals affected Georgia Power’s IRP, the utility responded ([link removed]) that the goals “did not influence the target amount of renewables proposed.”

Operating company CEOs Mark Crosswhite of Alabama Power, Paul Bowers of Georgia Power, and Anthony Wilson of Mississippi Power are not compensated for their performance toward Southern’s greenhouse gas reduction goals.


** Blocking Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency
------------------------------------------------------------

Southern Company has actively blocked renewable energy progress and slow-walked energy efficiency across its service territory.

Georgia Power, as part of its 2019 IRP, was forced by Georgia regulators to include significantly more renewable energy and battery storage than it originally wanted. After asking to deploy just 1 gigawatt (GW) of solar, the Georgia Commission demanded ([link removed]) 2.21 GW instead.

Georgia Power has resorted to bureaucratic red tape and contractual maneuverings in an apparent attempt ([link removed]) to reduce customer uptake of renewable energy programs. The Georgia Solar Energy Industry Association criticized Georgia Power’s new distributed generation program guidelines as “a program that will most certainly fail ([link removed]) ”. The program, known as Customer Connected, proposed new fees ([link removed]) on distributed generation, an almost 40% cut ([link removed]) to participant compensation, and even the ability to prohibit ([link removed]) any program participant from making public comments about
the program.

Georgia Power’s anti-renewable energy tactics may cost the utility a large industrial customer, Nestlé Purina. Georgia Power filed ([link removed]) a complaint in April 2019 with the Georgia Public Service Commission to block a competing utility, the Walton Electric Membership Cooperative, from providing Nestlé Purina with renewable electricity at a lower price ([link removed]) than Georgia Power’s offering. The dispute stems in part from Georgia Power’s unwillingness or inability ([link removed]) to provide reasonable renewable energy options to its large customers. Georgia Power lost ([link removed]) its case before the Hearing
Officer and has appealed ([link removed]) the decision.

Alabama Power has consistently ranked at or near the bottom of utilities in energy efficiency, according ([link removed]) to the American Council for an Energy Efficiency Economy (ACEEE). Alabama Power disputed ACEEE’s report but refused to respond to its data requests prior to publication. The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy’s (SACE) Energy Efficiency Scorecard similarly ranked ([link removed]) Alabama Power as the worst utility in the Southeast for energy efficiency performance. Gulf Power, still owned by Southern Company at the time of SACE’s report, ranked ([link removed]) next to last. Alabama Power has asked for approval of 200 megawatts of demand-side management program but has failed to disclose to the Alabama Public Service Commission what those programs might be.

Alabama Power also levies a $5 per kilowatt (kW) per month fee on grid-connected solar systems of 100 kW and smaller. After advocates filed ([link removed]) a complaint alleging the fee was an unjust and discriminatory rate, Alabama Power doubled down and asked the Commission for approval to increase the fee to $5.42 per kW per month. Similar fees have been struck down by regulators or courts as discriminatory in Kansas ([link removed]) , Michigan ([link removed]) , and Wisconsin ([link removed]) .


** Southern’s Lobbying and Advocacy Misaligned with Decarbonization Goal
------------------------------------------------------------

Southern Company’s limited lobbying disclosures have enabled lobbying activity that has been divergent with the decarbonization objectives that the company is espousing to investors and the public.

Since 2010, Southern has spent ([link removed]) more than $135 million on lobbying at the federal level, the most of any utility in the country. Southern has actively lobbied or litigated against the Clean Power Plan ([link removed]) , Mercury and Air Toxics Standards ([link removed]) , Cross State Air Pollution Rule ([link removed]) , Coal Combustion Residual rules ([link removed]) , and the Paris Climate Accord
([link removed]) , among others.

The company’s state-level disclosures offer almost no indications of whether the company’s state lobbying follows its federal pattern or is aligned with Southern’s corporate carbon reduction goals. The company does not publish or report total lobbying expenditures in Alabama ([link removed]) or Georgia ([link removed]) despite employing almost 50 lobbyists in the two states.

Header image source: YouTube ([link removed])

The post Southern Company Pledges Net Zero Emissions by 2050 but Doubles Down on Fossil Fuels ([link removed]) appeared first on Energy and Policy Institute ([link removed]) .
Read in browser » ([link removed])
[link removed] [link removed]




** Recent Articles:
------------------------------------------------------------
** Major banks announce new policies to help push utilities away from coal ([link removed])
** Murray Energy paid nearly $1 million to law firm that fought renewable energy ([link removed])
** North Carolina utilities not reconnecting customers during COVID-19 pandemic ([link removed])
** Duke Energy Climate Report charts fossil fuel-laden path to net-zero, lagging behind peers ([link removed])
** Southern Company’s Lobbying Disclosures Obscure State-Level Information from Investors, Public ([link removed]

============================================================
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Twitter ([link removed])
** Website ([link removed])
Copyright © 2020 Energy and Policy Institute, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website via our Contact Us page.

Our mailing address is:
Energy and Policy Institute
P.O. Box 170399
San Francisco, CA 94117
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]