For the last few years, the nuclear energy industry has stood on the precipice of the Maryland energy policy debate, waiting for its close-up.

Industry leaders and their lobbyists have repeatedly talked about how important nuclear is to the state’s power portfolio. They have implied, without saying so outright, that nuclear, which accounts for 40% of the energy generated in the state, and 80% of its carbon-free energy, ought to get greater recognition from Maryland policymakers — along with state subsidies.

On Thursday, the head of the industry’s national trade association, the Nuclear Energy Institute, got more than an hour in the House Economic Matters Committee to boast about nuclear’s potential, as state lawmakers wrestle with an energy shortage, spiking prices, clean energy goals and climate mandates.

“The value of nuclear is you get all of this very reliable, clean power,” Maria Korsnick, the NEI CEO, testified. She later told lawmakers, “The point of my being here is to be helpful to you.”

The Calvert Cliffs nuclear plant in Southern Maryland has been a workhorse for five decades and is likely to be relicensed for several more decades sometime in the 2030s. But scientists and engineers are also developing more compact nuclear technologies that don’t require so much space and water to operate, which are often called small modular reactors (SMR).

A package of bills from legislative leaders designed to generate more energy in Maryland and reduce ratepayer costs, includes giving nuclear energy “tier 1” status, making it eligible for certain state clean energy subsidies. But House Economic Matters Chair C.T. Wilson (D-Charles), an architect of the just-introduced measures, said he invited NEI to speak to his committee not to hype nuclear power, but to inject a dose of reality, because the newer technologies still won’t be ready for several years.

“It’s a reminder to people it’s not a magic word,” Wilson said in an interview. “It’s got to be planned. It’s much more challenging than saying the word ‘SMR.’ It wasn’t to sell it.”

The nuclear briefing was part of a long day of hearings in the Economic Matters Committee on hot energy topics. The panel also heard testimony on legislation that would scale back a controversial natural gas infrastructure program, and on a massive bill to promote the generation of clean energy in Maryland.

In a way, it was a microcosm of the energy debates that will dominate the rest of the General Assembly session in a single afternoon.

A range of Maryland policymakers believe nuclear needs to become a bigger part of the state’s clean energy portfolio, especially as other technologies like solar and wind struggle to fully realize their potential.

“Nuclear has the opportunity to play — or to be — part of the solutions, like never before,” Korsnick told Economic Matters Committee members Thursday.

She laid out some of the new technologies that are being developed, answered questions about nuclear plant safety and security, the disposition of nuclear waste, the nuclear workforce, and steps states are taking to incentivize nuclear energy. Korsnick did not come with a specific ask of lawmakers, but did say that states and local communities are increasingly embracing nuclear power, where once they feared and shunned it.

“When I say nuclear is going to be thriving, it’s not because we’re pushing for it, it’s because people are pulling for it,” she said.

Boosting nuclear energy is part of the bill that the committee heard later in the day, the Abundant Affordable Clean Energy – Procurement and Development Act, sponsored by Del. Lorig Charkoudian (D-Montgomery). That bill would ease state regulatory hurdles for relicensing the Calvert Cliffs plant in the 2030’s (though the federal government takes the lead in that process).

Charkoudian’s bill also seeks to boost battery storage in the state, taking energy generated during off-peak hours and holding it in reserve for when there’s greater consumer demand. It would also ensure that whatever electric power is generated from offshore wind in federal waters off the coast of Ocean City remains in Maryland, and it would seek to dedicate a greater portion of state energy taxes assessed on data centers to more relief for utility ratepayers.

Charkoudian conceded the complexity of her legislation, and said tweaks and amendments are still being made.

“When you have a hundred different agencies and stakeholders and people working on a bill, it’s never going to be perfect,” she said.

But most of the individuals who testified on the bill were generally supportive, though Frederick Hoover, chair of the Maryland Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities, warned it could lead to more battles over where to site clean energy installations in the state.

Ambitious as Charkoudian’s bill is, it may be subsumed by the forthcoming debate over the House and Senate leaders’ legislative package on energy, and Thursday’s hearing on the bill was remarkably speedy, all things considered.

In fact, the hearing about the other bill on the committee’s docket, to place limitations on the state’s STRIDE program to repair and improve natural gas infrastructure, was far lengthier and more contentious. The bill, from Del. Elizabeth Embry (D-Baltimore City), would require gas companies to focus on safety when making upgrades to gas pipelines and other infrastructure.

The STRIDE law, which took effect in 2013, provides incentives to gas utilities to make a range of infrastructure improvements, which are paid for with fees on ratepayers’ gas bills. But with utility bills rising, critics of STRIDE have argued that gas companies are pushing forward on infrastructure work that may not be necessary, adding needless costs to consumers’ bills — especially as the state looks to move away from fossil fuels.

“Utilities generate higher profits by spending extra money with the government’s approval,” said David Lapp, who heads the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel, which represents consumers’ interests on utility matters.

Proponents of the legislation said it would emphasize community safety while saving ratepayers money.

“This bill does not repeal STRIDE,” Embry told her colleagues Thursday. “It’s a modest bill. It makes modest changes to the current law.”

But gas companies — and some Republicans on the committee — made the opposite argument, and the Republicans also suggested that Embry’s bill, as the state pushes to meet strict climate mandates, is secretly designed to kill off the natural gas industry.

Mark Case, a vice president at Baltimore Gas & Electric, warned that limiting the program — and the surcharges — could hinder the gas companies’ ability to replace aging industry that could pose a danger to communities. He said that since the inception of STRIDE, the company has typically replaced about 42 miles of pipe a year.

“These are not 5-year-old pipes where we’re going in and saying, ‘let’s go replace them.’”

Washington Gas lobbyists came with Cynthia Quarterman, who was the administrator of the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration under former President Barack Obama. She said Maryland must “stay the course [with STRIDE] to catch up to other states” and that upgrading gas pipelines is “of the utmost importance.”

But Laurel Peltier, who assists low-income ratepayers through her work for AARP, told Maryland Matters that the STRIDE program has become perverted.

“The issue with gas delivery and STRIDE overall is, ratepayers have become ATMs and gas utilities have their PINs,” she said.

By Josh Kurtz

 The coal-fired Chalk Point power plant in Prince George’s County was recently closed. Maryland is part of a regional program to limit emissions from power plants. Photo courtesy of the Integration and Application Network, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science.

Here’s some rare good news for Marylanders on climate change: A new analysis of federal government data found that Maryland led the way when it came to states reducing greenhouse gas emissions over a 17-year period.

Maryland cut carbon emissions by 36% between 2005 and 2022 and by 42% per capita, according to the report released this week by Environment America Research & Policy Center.

The center, part of Environment America, a national network of 30 state environmental groups that includes Maryland PIRG, took data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on greenhouse gas emissions across the nation and used the numbers to evaluate the states’ performance reducing carbon pollution.

While Maryland saw emissions reductions in most sectors, the building sector continues to lag — a fact reinforced by another environmental study that was released this week.

Nationally, the United States reduced its overall greenhouse gas emissions by 15% and its per capita emissions by 25% — though the report found significant variations in emissions trends by state for the 2005-2022 period.  Maryland was the top state in reducing emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gases, followed by the District of Columbia, Maine, New Hampshire and Georgia.

While 44 states reduced their carbon emissions over the 17 years, Mississippi, Texas, Nebraska, South Dakota, Idaho and North Dakota saw increases, largely attributable to increased oil and gas production in those states. Every state but North Dakota decreased their emissions on a per capita basis.

Ferguson seeks to remove incinerators from state’s renewable energy subsidy program

Emily Scarr, senior adviser with the Maryland Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) Foundation, attributed the state’s strong showing to durable state policies and its participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a consortium of Northeastern and mid-Atlantic states that have worked together to cut coal plant emissions. Collectively, the initial 10 RGGI states (excluding Pennsylvania) cut pollution from power plants by 50% from 2005 to 2023, with much of that reduction resulting from the closure of coal-fired power plants.

“Our progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions shows that state and regional policies and actions can make a difference,” Scarr said. “Improving the efficiency of our homes, retiring coal plants, and making cars that pollute less all contributed to the decline we’ve seen.”

According to the analysis, Maryland has reduced its emissions in the electric power sector, industrial sector, agricultural sector, transportation sector and residential sector. The largest decrease was in the electric power sector, cutting emissions by 66% between 2005 and 2022. Maryland has seen several coal plants shuttered while others are scheduled to do so; states that still produce a significant amount of their electricity using coal and gas saw fewer reductions and have high per capita emissions.

As of 2022, Maryland saw only a 4% reduction in emissions from the residential sector, however, leaving significant room for improvement. And the only sector that has seen an increase in emissions in Maryland is the commercial buildings sector, which saw a 23% rise in emissions. In 2022, the majority of carbon emissions from the commercial sector was from burning fossil fuels for heat and hot water in commercial buildings.

The latter finding was echoed in a newly released study commissioned by the Sierra Club, which found that buildings play an unexpectedly large role in contributing to dangerous levels of smog pollution.

Smog pollution, otherwise known as ground-level ozone, is a major public health issue in Maryland, with approximately 5.1 million Marylanders living in areas with unsafe levels of smog. Smog can cause chronic respiratory illnesses, asthma attacks, bronchitis, and premature death, and it’s a particular problem in the state’s more urban areas.

While heavy-duty vehicles and power plants contribute to smog, the Sierra Club study, conducted by Sonoma Technology, found that gas-burning appliances in buildings, like water heaters, play an increasing part in contributing to smog pollution.

Maryland is in the process of implementing Building Energy Performance Standards (BEPS) as required under the Climate Solutions Now Act of 2022. The standards apply to large buildings in the state, including commercial buildings, with a goal of achieving zero net direct greenhouse gas emissions by 2040.

But the Sierra Club and other environmental groups have argued that Maryland can reduce its smog problem by requiring buildings to replace dirty gas-burning equipment with clean, efficient electric equipment, such as efficient heat pumps.

“Maryland can take action to reduce pollution from the building sector by adopting policies that promote clean, energy-efficient electric equipment in buildings,” said Josh Tulkin, director of the Sierra Club Maryland Chapter. “Such policies would significantly improve public health and help Maryland meet its climate goals.”

The release of the two studies comes as Maryland scrambles to meet its goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2031 and having a carbon-neutral economy by 2040. The state’s plans to implement ambitious climate programs and promote the use of clean energy could be stymied by their high price tag: A study released late last year by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) estimated that it would cost the state about $10 billion to achieve all its climate goals — at a time when the state’s revenue estimates are gloomy.

World leaders are meeting this week and next in Azerbaijan for the annual United Nations climate conference, amid fears that President-elect Donald Trump will pull the U.S. from its previous international climate commitments and try to dismantle many of President Joe Biden’s climate and clean-energy initiatives. MDE Secretary Serena McIlwain is attending the conference, as she did last year.

by Josh Kurtz, Maryland Matters
November 15, 2024

Maryland Matters is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maryland Matters maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: [email protected]. Follow Maryland Matters on Facebook and X.