In Raleigh, North Carolina, Governor Josh Stein exercised his veto power on recent legislation that proposed rolling back a crucial greenhouse gas reduction target established in a 2021 mandate for power generation. According to Stein, this legislation would have impeded efforts to maintain an energy mix and placed undue financial pressure on consumers.
The bill largely focused on measures concerning Duke Energy, a leading player in the state’s electric utility sector. It sought to eliminate the existing requirement for electric regulators to take all feasible actions to achieve a 70% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. However, the 2021 directive to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 would remain unaffected regardless of the bill’s outcome.
Environmental advocates, keen on accelerating the transition to cleaner energy sources, had urged the governor to veto the bill. They were also discontent with other elements of the legislation that, in their view, would increase Duke Energy’s profitability while transferring the financial burden of electricity production and procurement to residential users.
“This bill compromises our state’s dedication to reducing carbon emissions, sending a discouraging message to businesses that wish to be part of our clean energy future,” Governor Stein declared in a statement. “I am committed to lowering costs and enhancing our economy. This legislation does not align with that commitment.”
Having assumed office in January and formerly serving as attorney general, Stein also rejected two additional bills on Wednesday, among the many awaiting his decision from a legislature dominated by the GOP. Both the energy bill and four other vetoes from Stein are poised for potential override votes in the coming weeks. Following the June vote on the energy bill, a significant number of House and Senate Democrats had supported the measure.
Originally, the 2021 greenhouse gas law marked a significant compromise on environmental policy between then-Democratic Governor Roy Cooper and Republican legislators. However, current supporters of the new bill, primarily from the GOP, argue that the 70% reduction target is redundant and would unnecessarily inflate customer rates by demanding substantial growth in renewable power sources, such as solar and wind.
The mandate’s supporters suggest that by shifting focus to the 2050 carbon-neutrality goal, regulators can guide Duke Energy — a supporter of the bill — towards developing lower-cost power sources, thus moderating potential electricity rate hikes. They refer to an analysis from a state agency representing utility consumers which predicted a savings of at least $13 billion over the next 25 years should the mandate be repealed.
Opponents of the bill, including several environmental organizations, challenge the reliability of these savings estimates. Governor Stein cited another report suggesting that the bill might ultimately increase costs for consumers by 2050, driven by elevated fuel prices. “We must diversify our energy portfolio to prevent over-dependence on natural gas and its volatile market,” Stein added.
Across the United States, at least 17 states, predominantly Democratic, have enacted statutes targeting net-zero emissions or 100% reliance on renewable energy for power plants, as reported by the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Moreover, the bill contained provisions facilitating Duke Energy’s ability to hike electric rates incrementally to finance construction costs for nuclear or gas-powered plants, rather than waiting for project completion.
Environmentalists have praised Governor Stein’s veto, calling on legislators to maintain the veto’s status. Dan Crawford from the North Carolina League of Conservation Voters remarked, “Support affordable energy and economic opportunities for everyone.” In contrast, Donald Bryson of the John Locke Foundation criticized the veto, stating Stein “favored ideology over affordability.”
Another bill vetoed on Wednesday sought to revise the scope of authority possessed by the state auditor, currently Republican Dave Boliek, which involved probing alleged misconduct involving individuals, nonprofits, and entities receiving state funds. Governor Stein indicated in his veto message that the bill’s expansive access to records within “any private corporation that accepts any state funding” could potentially hinder efforts to attract businesses.
Boliek expressed discontent, stating that Stein’s veto “erodes the crucial principles of transparency and accountability that citizens expect from their government.”