COLUMBUS, Ohio – A new energy bill is making its way through the Ohio Senate and is generating significant controversy, pitting consumer advocates and environmental groups against industry players and some lawmakers. Senate Bill 2 (SB 2), sponsored by Senator Bill Reineke, aims to overhaul Ohio’s energy infrastructure with a focus on deregulation and faster approvals for new power plants. While proponents tout the bill as a way to modernize the grid and attract investment, critics warn of potential risks to consumers and the environment.
Deregulation Under Scrutiny
One of the most debated aspects of SB 2 is its push for deregulation of the electricity market. The bill proposes to end Electric Security Plans (ESPs) and mandate Market Rate Offers (MROs) for standard electricity service. Supporters argue this will increase transparency and competition, potentially lowering costs for consumers. However, the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel (OCC) has expressed concerns about a provision allowing utilities to file “mini rate cases” for economic development projects, arguing it lacks sufficient consumer protections and could lead to higher rates. The OCC worries that the broad definition of allowable expenditures in these mini-rate cases could allow utilities to pass on various charges without proper justification.
Fast-Tracked Approvals Raise Environmental Concerns
Another contentious point is the bill’s accelerated permitting process for power plants in designated “priority investment areas” (PIAs). SB 2 would shorten the Ohio Power Siting Board’s (OPSB) decision timeline to just 45 days. While the goal is to expedite the development of new generation capacity, critics fear that this could lead to rushed environmental reviews and insufficient consideration of community concerns.
Nuclear Power in the Spotlight
The bill’s implications for nuclear power are also drawing scrutiny. While SB 2 doesn’t offer direct subsidies, its market-oriented approach is supported by Vistra Corp., a major nuclear power generator in Ohio. Vistra believes a competitive market will ensure reliable and affordable electricity. However, some consumer advocates are wary, drawing comparisons to the controversial House Bill 6, which involved a bribery scandal related to nuclear plant subsidies. They fear that SB 2 could indirectly benefit aging nuclear facilities at the expense of ratepayers. While SB 2 repeals subsidies for coal and some solar projects, the lack of similar measures for nuclear has raised questions about a level playing field in the energy market.
Impact on Clean Energy Questioned
The repeal of solar energy credit payments within SB 2 has sparked criticism from clean energy advocates. While proponents argue this eliminates a cost for ratepayers, opponents contend it could slow down the growth of solar power in Ohio. The Buckeye Institute, a proponent of SB 2, suggests that past government policies have favored less reliable “green” energies over more dependable sources. However, environmental groups view the removal of solar incentives as a step backward in the transition to cleaner energy.
Stakeholders Divided
Testimony before the Senate Energy Committee reveals a sharp divide among stakeholders. Industry groups like the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association and the Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA) strongly support SB 2, arguing it will foster competition, attract investment, and ultimately benefit consumers by eliminating what they see as anti-competitive and costly regulations. The Ohio Energy Leadership Council also backs the bill, emphasizing the elimination of subsidies and the promotion of new-generation resources.
Conversely, consumer advocates like the OCC are pushing for stronger protections within the bill to ensure affordable utility rates. Environmental groups have voiced concerns about the potential negative impacts on renewable energy and the environment.
What’s Next?
Senate Bill 2 is currently under review in the Senate Energy Committee. The committee has held hearings on the bill, with numerous stakeholders offering their perspectives. As the debate continues, the question remains whether lawmakers can reconcile the differing viewpoints to create an energy policy that balances affordability, reliability, and environmental concerns for all Ohioans.