SC House discusses new environmental bill as conservation groups rally in protest

COLUMBIA, S.C. (WIS) – While the South Carolina State House discussed environmental bill H.5118 Tuesday afternoon, Conservation Voters of South Carolina (CVSC) and other environmental advocacy groups gathered outside to protest the new proposals.

Bill H.5118, also known as the “South Carolina Ten-Year Energy Transformation Act,” includes a list of changes the bill claims will “reduce the cost, delay, and uncertainty of planning, siting, and constructing new generation and transmission resources serving customers in this state.”

The new proposals were introduced and read for the first time on Feb. 15 by a bipartisan group of sponsors.

Some of the changes in the bill include:

Reducing the Public Service Commission from seven members to three, where the General Assembly approves members.
Build larger, more fuel-efficient, lower-emitting units, while at the same time reducing the environmental and land-use impact of the natural gas pipeline and transmission infrastructure required to support separate units.
Encourage Dominion Energy, the Public Service Authority, Duke Energy Carolinas, and Duke Energy Progress to evaluate certain electrical generation facilities and provide for considerations related to these facilities
Permit the public service authority to jointly own electrical generation and transmission facilities with investor-owned electric utilities and to provide requirements for joint ownership
Permit the commission to approve a request for any electric supplier to serve any transformational economic development project customer under certain conditions
Anchor the expansion of natural gas pipelines serving certain coastal counties of South Carolina

Environmental groups from across the state have criticized the bill, claiming it will provide a “blank check” to some of the state’s most powerful energy companies.

“This event directly opposes H.5118, which presents significant risks for the state’s energy future, the CVSC said in a statement. “Most notable is the proposed authorization for a ‘blank check’ to build a massive combined cycle gas plant in Canadys, a site in Colleton County near the banks of the Edisto River. This project would tie ratepayers to cost volatility, pollution, and public health impacts until around 2070.”

During the meeting, CEOs and officials from multiple energy companies and advocacy groups went to the stand to discuss their support, or disagreements, of the bill. These included officials from Duke Energy and Dominion Energy, which covers the majority of South Carolina.

“We’ve got 20% growth on our gas business in Horry County and Myrtle Beach,” said CEO of Dominion Energy South Carolina W. Keller Kissam. “We’ve been trying to do for three years, what I consider a minor pipeline extension, that parallels what we have, and we’ve been held up by an environmental group out of North Carolina for three years.”

Kissam continued, “people in South Carolina want natural gas.”

In the 3-hour discussion, members discussed complications in the bill, including the wording of some key phrases involving plans for new facilities.

“South Carolina is booming,” said Michael P. Callahan, president of Duke Energy’s utility operations in South Carolina. “Some of the key provisions of the aptly named South Carolina ‘Ten-Year Energy Transformation Act’ will help regulated utility companies like Duke Energy address its growth, and ensure continued prosperity for our state for many years to come.”

Some of the most contentious parts of the hearing came from a senior litigating attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, Frank Holleman, arguing for more transparency and citizen input in the proposed bill.

“For several years I’ve worked with landowners, families, and communities that have been harmed by large utility infrastructure, and who have faced the threat of eminent domain by monopoly utilities to seize their property, particularly for gas pipelines, and force utility projects in their communities, said the former US Secretary of Education.

“(Projects) will be through Aiken, or the Ace basin … and definitely through the Edisto Watershed. This bill does not place any new protections for the private property rights of the people who live in these areas.”

Feel more informed, prepared, and connected with WIS. For more free content like this, subscribe to our email newsletter, and download our apps. Have feedback that can help us improve? Click here.

Source link