South Carolina House pushes for a new gas plant and pipeline expansion
The last thing South Carolinians need is a massive new methane gas plant and pipeline on the banks of Edisto River.
As South Carolina’s Senate works on sweeping energy policy at the Statehouse this month, there’s a lot at stake for South Carolinians. While the Senate wisely halted an overreaching energy bill last year, the House has passed legislation with the same bad provisions that are once again being pushed by industry and utilities who are dead set on their fossil fuel agenda. This legislation jeopardizes the health and safety of our communities and the ACE Basin – a 1.6 million acre watershed that includes the Ashepoo, Combahee, and Edisto rivers.
Several bills have been introduced or passed through the house that would:
- Allow utilities to double down on major methane gas infrastructure in the name of profit;
- Rush and reduce oversight of impacts to our air, wetlands, and waterways;
- Roll back existing customer protections that ensure transparency and fairness in the energy planning process;
- Leave out provisions to bolster safe, reliable clean energy; and
- Fail to set strong energy efficiency requirements needed to raise South Carolina from dead last in the country for saving energy.
But there’s still hope that the Senate will take a more measured approach to South Carolina’s energy future.
Protect South Carolina, not utility profits
Methane gas harms communities and the environment
At the center of debates at the South Carolina Statehouse lies a proposed new methane gas plant on the banks of the Edisto River in Canadys, South Carolina – a joint project proposed by Santee Cooper and Dominion Energy that would be one of the largest gas plants in the United States. While utilities and pipeline companies support the construction, environmental groups like SELC are concerned that the project, which would convert an old coal plant to a gas plant, puts too much at risk.
Unlike power sources like solar and wind, methane gas infrastructure pollutes our clean air and exposes nearby communities to harmful toxins. Supplying gas to a plant in Canadys could require dangerous new pipelines and compressor stations, which can expose communities to health risks like birth defects, cancer, and damage to the heart, liver, kidneys, and central nervous system.
The resulting air pollution would threaten a community already burdened by decades of pollution from the former coal plant.
“Residents in this community had to live with pollution from the coal plant for 50 years, and the cleanup of the coal ash on site was only completed earlier this year,” says Robby Maynor, SELC Climate Campaign Associate. “Now, in addition to pollution from the interstate constructed through this small, rural community, utilities are asking to build another polluting power plant here—largely, it seems, to serve new data centers and other industries looking to relocate to South Carolina.”
The pipeline needed to fuel the gas plant would be extremely expensive, require impacts to private property, and ultimately run through the Ashepoo, Combahee, and Edisto (ACE) Basin, luring additional industrial facilities to locate along the pipeline and threatening some of the state’s most cherished natural areas.
Utilities profit more when they invest in methane gas
So why risk communities, the environment, and beloved natural resources?
When monopoly utilities build new power plants, they’re able to recoup expenses from energy customers. Across the South, despite the health and safety risks, utilities are doubling down on large methane gas plants partly because they stand to make more profits from them. And they tend to ignore affordable, clean energy and efficiency solutions that lower customer electric bills.
The price of methane gas is notoriously volatile. In South Carolina, Santee Cooper plans on two electric rate increases this year partly due to the price of gas going up, which will cause bills to increase by 10% or more for about 2 million people. By passing off those price increases to customers, utilities shield themselves and shareholders from financial risk.
To make it even easier to build large methane gas infrastructure quickly, utilities and gas companies have headed to the South Carolina Statehouse to weaken permitting processes and energy customer safeguards and strengthen the ability to profit off power plants.
South Carolina needs better energy efficiency programs and low-cost, reliable, and safe energy, not polluting methane gas pipelines and a plant that won’t serve customers until the 2030s.
Kate Mixson, SELC Senior Attorney.
Thankfully, there’s still a chance to protect our customer rights and our beloved natural resources. After stopping the misguided House bill last year, the Senate convened a special committee to listen to stakeholders and chart a better path forward, and they can still lead us toward a balanced and resilient energy future with reasonable legislation.
Dig into the bills with more detail:
Senate Bill 12 would authorize a gas plant at the former Canadys coal plant by:
- Authorizing the joint venture between Dominion and Santee Cooper, the companies responsible for a $9 billion nuclear plant debacle (VC Summer, which was abandoned after decades of delays and cost overruns, never went live, and energy customers are still paying for it on their monthly bills).
House Bill 3309 would hasten the approval of major gas infrastructure at Canadys and strip protections for energy customers by:
- Rushing and reducing oversight of impacts to our air, wetlands, and waterways;
- Rolling back existing customer protections that ensure transparency and fairness in the energy planning process;
- Leaving out provisions to bolster safe, reliable clean energy; and
- Failing to set strong energy efficiency requirements needed to raise South Carolina from dead last in the country for saving energy.
House Bill 3928 would put annual electric rate increases on autopilot to get customers to pay for major energy projects with no cost limit by:
- Allowing utility companies to submit annual expenses for quick review instead of undergoing the currently required scrutiny of a full rate case;
- Restricting the public’s right to investigate and testify on proposed rate increases and not allowing the public to challenge rate increases until after they are approved; and
- Allowing a utility to add “a return on construction in progress” for projects of any size, without any limit on cost before they are finished.