The state recently took the first step to potentially becoming a leader in next-generation nuclear energy.

By Rambo Talabong, Inside Climate News

With growing energy demand and delays in renewable energy rollout, New Jersey is doubling down on nuclear—its largest source of in-state electricity—and is now looking at positioning itself as a national leader in developing next-generation reactors.

In March, the state’s Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU) issued a request for information, a document signaling the state’s interest in exploring nuclear energy, asking for input from experts and New Jersey residents.

“To ensure resource adequacy can be met in the region without unreasonable impacts on ratepayers, new sources of electricity generation must come online to grow the supply of resources into the electricity grid,” the request reads.

At the same time, its energy master plan is undergoing an update, from declaring that it would only sustain its current nuclear fleet to recognizing in its latest draft summary that “there will be a role for emerging clean firm technologies such as new nuclear, long duration storage and decarbonized fuels.”

It adds: “New Jersey has the opportunity to emerge as a leader in this space.”

Read the full story here

---

If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics. It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Please do not take our word for it, try it free for a full month

From the NJ Senate Democrats

The NJ Senate Environment and Energy Committee has advanced legislation from its Chair, Senator Bob Smith, and Senator John Burzichelli to require the Board of Public Utilities (BPU) to establish a program to procure and incentivize the development of transmission-scale energy storage systems with a reasonable likelihood of successful and timely completion.

In essence, energy storage systems are a technology that stores generated energy for use at a later time. For example, solar panels and wind turbines produce energy when the sun is out or when there is sufficient wind. Absent the correct conditions, they do not produce the amount of energy that may be needed to satisfy the demand for electricity at a given time. Energy storage systems allow surplus energy to be captured and stored for later use, such as when demand is particularly high or when other conditions, like lack of sun, reduce the amount of energy that can be generated. In doing so, they can reduce energy costs, improve grid resilience, and make a variety of different energy types more reliable. 

“The benefits of energy storage systems are hard to understate. They enable wider application of clean, renewable energy and they can more broadly reduce energy costs by charging during low-demand, low-cost hours and discharging when demand on the wider electrical grid is higher,” said Senator Smith (D-Middlesex/Somerset). “As projected energy demand rises and electricity costs are scheduled to rise, it is especially important now to invest in these systems and enable the cost savings that they can create.” 

“Energy storage is one of the more effective ways to make the grid more resilient to fluctuations in demand and to reinforce the supply of energy – which will help lower costs,” said Senator Burzichelli (D-Cumberland/Gloucester/Salem). “We have to do what we can to protect consumers from being hit by rising electric bills, and investing in transmission-scale energy storage is an important part of that effort.”

The bill, S-4289, would define “transmission-scale energy storage systems” to mean an energy storage system capable of at least five MW of storage that is interconnected to the PJM Transmission Network and situated inside a Transmission Zone in New Jersey or is otherwise located within the state and qualified to provide services in the wholesale markets established by PJM. The legislation would authorize the BPU to develop a program to provide a long-term, stable financial incentive to large transmission-scale energy storage projects, with eligibility criteria targeting projects that are further along in the development process and show the most promise for successful deployment. 

---

If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics. It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Please do not take our word for it, try it free for a full month

By Stephana Ocneanu, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Tucked away into the rolling farmland of Butler County is the Connoquenessing Township Municipal Building, where dozens of residents turned out for the May supervisors’ meeting.

In a small room with no air conditioning, neighbors were pressed against one another, shoulder-to-shoulder, many waiting for an opportunity to speak out against a sewage plan that would cost them $252 a month plus thousands to tap into a public system.

“I pray Jesus takes the wheel because this train is going off the tracks,” lifelong resident Jim Marburger, 63, said during the meeting. “You’re letting these outside people come in here and change our beautiful community into something that it’s not. If they want this, let them go back to the damn city.”

As a result of a consent order from the state Department of Environmental Protection, the township has until June 21 to submit a sewage plan. Local officials must decide by then whether to move forward with a $53 million plan that many say would be devastating to residents.

Township supervisors said they’re waiting on approval for a 60-day extension from the DEP, which would allow them to draft up more affordable options from the local Pennsylvania American Water Co.

Until then, the current plan being considered was prepared by the Cranberry engineering firm Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, or HRG. It would include four phases of construction of a system that would send wastewater to the Saxonburg Area Authority for treatment.

By 2033, all customers would be required to tap into the system — costing them thousands of dollars to do so, unless the township received help through grants or loans that could be passed along to residents.

If approved, the HRG plan could also leave Connoquenessing residents paying a $252 monthly sewage fee, which is up to five times more than what people pay in nearby areas. For example, in the Butler area, where PAW has taken over, customers pay $45.50 a month. In Saxonburg the rate is $79 a month, and in Pittsburgh it’s $100. 

“It makes no sense,” said resident Dianna Edwards. “You would never put your own personal family in that kind of financial strain. You would never put your own business in that kind of personal strain. Why in the world would you do it to everybody else?”

Mr. Marburger owns more than nine acres of land in Renfrew. His mother, Bonnie, 81, lives nearby on land that was passed down by her father. Like many older residents of the township, she lives on a fixed income.

“She gets $900 a month. How is she going to afford a $300 sewage bill?” Mr. Marburger said. “This would take everything from her and then some.”

Read the full story here

---

If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics. It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Please do not take our word for it, try it free for a full month

By Jacob Fischler, NJ Monitor

The U.S. Senate voted early Thursday to prevent California from enforcing regulations on tailpipe emission from new cars and trucks, upending state regulations for the nearly 40% of Americans whose states follow California standards.

The House has already passed an identical measure, meaning the Senate vote sends the resolution to President Donald Trump’s desk.

The 51-46 vote, with Michigan Democrat Elissa Slotkin joining all Republicans present to vote in favor, cleared a Congressional Review Act resolution repealing Environmental Protection Agency waivers that allow California to set regulations for emissions from cars and light-duty trucks.

The state policy includes a ramp-up to having no new gas-powered cars sold in the state by 2035.

Ray Cantor with the New Jersey Business & Industry Association thanked the Senate for voting “pragmatically and with common sense to overturn California’s ban on sales of new gas cars.”

“New Jersey has been working toward reducing carbon emissions, as we should. We have seen organic growth in the usage of electric vehicles, also as it should be. But continuing efforts to mandate a ban of new gas-powered cars in such an expedited time frame would be to ignore feasibility, practicality and affordability in New Jersey,” he said.

Doug O’Malley, state director of Environment New Jersey, told ROI-NJ that the action by the Senate was “a legally questionable vote that will be litigated; it will not stand,” adding that “the feds are moving backwards while the industry is moving forward. This is a clear 180 on the national level.” The Senate overruled the guidance of the parliamentarian, a nonpartisan staffer who interprets the Senate’s rules, and voted to overturn a waiver that permitted California to set its own air pollution standards for cars that are stricter than national regulations.

Related:

Senate Republicans Kill California’s Ban on Gas-Powered Cars (NY Times)
US Senate votes to block California 2035 electric vehicle rules (Reuters)

Democrats blasted the near-party-line vote for contradicting the Senate parliamentarian, who’d ruled the waiver that the EPA had granted to California to set its own tailpipe standards was not a regulation that could be rolled back under the Congressional Review Act, or CRA.

The CRA allows for a simple majority in the Senate to vote to repeal recent executive branch rules, bypassing the chamber’s usual 60-vote threshold for legislation.

‘Chaos and uncertainty’ around the U.S.

The EPA under President Joe Biden issued waivers under a Clean Air Act provision that allows California, which had more stringent standards than what Congress enacted in the 1970 law, to set its own standards for air pollution.

No other state is allowed to set independent standards, but any state may adopt California’s.

For the light-duty vehicle emissions rule, 17 other states — Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington — and the District of Columbia adopted some portion of the standard.

Read the full story here