Energy debate continues in Annapolis as lawmakers weigh options

MARYLAND (WBFF) — Another week of the legislative session is over, but the energy debate is far from finished.

Throughout the course of several hearings in the House Environment and Transportation Committee, lawmakers heard from PJM, the regional grid operator, energy experts in Texas and California, and also debated a bill that could impose limitations on the costs utility companies can recover from residents.

Jason Stanek, the Executive Director of Governmental Services for PJM said last year he testified that the outlook for energy in the state of Maryland is dire. He said “the conditions have not abated.”

ALSO READ | Another energy rebate could be coming to Md., but some push for more long-term solutions

While he noted the difficulty with building high voltage transmission lines in the state, he also discussed how PJM is working to improve data center forecasts, as well as how they have been working to address challenges their queue of energy projects in the pipeline. Stanek said at the moment, the queue is made up of mainly renewable energy projects.

“What you see in the inset is concerning, because Maryland has retired in recent years about 6000 megawatts of thermal resources. So these are mostly fossil fuel resources, and the additions have been dwarfed by their retirements,” Stanek said.

“We beg you to avoid policies that would push existing resources off the system until an adequate and equivalent amount of generation is online to support it.,” he added.

Lawmakers also heard from David Hochschild, the Chair of the California Energy Commission, and Courtney Hjaltman, the Commissioner of the Public Utility Commission of Texas. Both experts answered questions about energy and utility regulation in their respective states.

House Bill 1 was also up for debate this past week, with lawmakers voting to advance the bill Friday afternoon. The bill, which is moving forward with amendments, prohibits an investor-owned utility company from recovering certain costs from ratepayers, including employee bonuses and high compensation for supervisors.

ALSO READ | Lawmakers discuss Maryland’s energy landscape

“We are not in any way saying what the utilities can pay or can’t pay their supervisors, their employees or their executives. We’re just saying that the ratepayer is going to pay for the first, in this case $250,000, after that it’s up to them,” said David Fraser-Hidalgo, a Democrat representing Montgomery County.

“It’s really at its core, a consumer protection bill,” Del Brian Crosby said. “Designed to lower utilities utility bills and really prioritize our rate payers over executives.”

“HB 1 also requires energy companies to institute policies limiting non-essential expenditures while excluding employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement.

“House Bill 1 does not address the root cause of high bills,” an official speaking on behalf of Pepco and Delmarva Power said. “The primary driver of high bills is supply cost, not the compensation of the hard working men and women working every day to keep the lights on and provide our customers and your constituents with safe and reliable service.”