Duke Energy backs off renewables after North Carolina cuts climate goal

When North Carolina’s GOP-led legislature nixed a key decarbonization deadline for Duke Energy in July, critics feared it would upend the state’s transition to clean energy.

Now, a proposal Duke just submitted to regulators shows they were right to worry as the utility, North Carolina’s largest, seeks to walk back its clean-energy ambitions and enact one of the most aggressive fossil-fuel expansions in the nation.

Without a mandate to cut climate-warming emissions 70% from 2005 levels by 2030, the utility intends to build about half as much wind and solar capacity over the next decade compared to its previous trajectory. It also now aims to delay the construction of new nuclear power plants until later in the 2030s. Battery storage is the sole bright spot for clean energy in the blueprint — Duke wants to invest in about 1.5 gigawatts more than it did before.

Meanwhile, the company proposes to extend the life of aging coal plants and develop more natural-gas units, bringing its total build-out of new fossil-fuel plants to 9.7 gigawatts by 2035 and as much as 12.3 gigawatts by 2040.

“It’s certainly a regressive vision for North Carolina’s energy future,” said Josh Brooks, chief of policy strategy and innovation for the North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association.

Underlying Duke’s proposal is the unprecedented growth in electricity demand it expects from new large energy users, especially data centers. If the company’s ​“high load” projections materialize, its carbon emissions could rise by one-third or more by the middle of the next decade.

After that, greenhouse gases will ​“rapidly decline” as nuclear power plants come online, Duke says in its proposal to regulators. 

Critics say the increase in pollution puts a midcentury net-zero carbon target that remains in state law further from reach and burdens consumers with rising fuel costs.

“Delaying coal power plant retirements and adding new fossil generation is digging the hole deeper, not advancing toward where state law says we need to get,” said David Neal, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. ​“We have to find a way to get on a path to 2050 compliance with fuel-free resources that we know will be in the best longer-term interests of customers.”

Duke’s proposed blueprint largely aligns with how experts predicted the company would behave without the 2030 deadline to curb greenhouse gas emissions. ​“This is just about what we expected,” said Will Scott, Southeast climate and clean energy director with the Environmental Defense Fund.

The plan also reflects the federal government’s increasing hostility to renewable energy — and its unrelenting push to accelerate fossil-fuel use.

President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have in recent months slashed incentives and grant programs for clean-energy projects and, in some cases, moved to block in-progress installations.

At the same time, Trump has tried to prop up coal — the nation’s most expensive and polluting source of power — including via a Monday announcement of $625 million for the industry. As Duke notes in its plan, the administration has also relaxed other rules around carbon emissions and toxic ash from coal plants, although a future president could reverse course.

Duke is responding accordingly. The company now wants to keep 4.1 gigawatts of its coal fleet running longer than it previously planned, instead of investing in proven clean-energy technology, said Mikaela Curry, manager for Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign. ​“It’s just so frustrating,” she said.

“It’s clear that national political sentiment is making its way into this plan,” said Brooks. ​“I don’t know what else accounts for prolonging coal, because the economics are certainly not on its side.”

Before the rollback of the state climate law, cuts to federal incentives for renewables, and Trump’s particularly vicious attacks on wind energy, Duke had planned to add 13.2 gigawatts of solar and 4.5 gigawatts of onshore and offshore wind by 2035, according to the state’s nonpartisan customer advocate, Public Staff. Now, the utility envisions 9.2 gigawatts of solar — and no wind at all until at least 2040.

“That’s clearly a response to political winds and not our resource winds,” Brooks said. ​“In a rational world, we’re going to have wind development in North Carolina.”

The Oct. 1 blueprint from Duke is a first draft. Now, clean-energy advocates begin the arduous work of combing through the utility’s modeling assumptions and dozens of portfolios. They and other stakeholders have six months to offer written responses. The state’s Utilities Commission has until the end of next year to approve or amend Duke’s plan.

With increased reliance on gas and coal sure to hit customers’ pocketbooks, critics say they’ll put rate impacts front and center. ​“We’re very sensitive to any portfolio that leaves ratepayers exposed to unnecessary fuel volatility and supply risks,” said Brooks.