Jason Hayes of the Mackinac Center presented committee members a preview of a modeling study that examined Michigan paths to economy‑wide net‑zero and state statutory requirements in Public Act 235 of 2023.

Hayes summarized two modeled scenarios: a wind/solar/battery (WSB) pathway that retired all CO2‑emitting generation and replaced much capacity with wind, solar and batteries, and a lower‑cost decarbonization (LCD) pathway that relies on extending existing plants with carbon capture and adding nuclear capacity (including small modular reactors) while using limited storage.

Hayes said the WSB scenario’s modeled cost through 2050 was about $360,000,000,000 and that the run produced multiple capacity shortfalls, including modeled contiguous shortfalls as long as 61 hours in January. He told the committee the LCD option produced far fewer shortfalls and “about half” the total modeled system cost; Hayes characterized the lower‑cost option as relying primarily on nuclear with a portion of fossil generation paired with carbon capture. On average over the study period, Hayes said the model produced customer bill increases of about $230 for WSB and about $125 for the LCD pathway.

Hayes cited statements from the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), FERC and other grid operators warning that retiring dispatchable resources and replacing them with weather‑dependent generation raises reliability risks. He pointed to recent, real‑world examples — rolling blackouts ordered in parts of the U.S., and outages in other regions — to illustrate that risk.

Hayes also raised supply‑chain and environmental questions about large‑scale wind, solar and battery deployment, including raw‑material impacts, foreign manufacturing practices and mining labor issues cited in published reports. He concluded by urging policymakers to consider options that balance emission goals with affordability and grid reliability.

Committee members questioned Hayes about market incentives, subsidies, and whether a middle ground (continued wind/solar build‑out with dispatchable gas and increased nuclear) could achieve emissions and reliability goals; Hayes said both modeled scenarios could achieve large emission reductions but that the LCD scenario produced fewer reliability risks and lower costs in his modeling. Several members pressed on policy trade‑offs and subsidy questions. The hearing record includes Hayes’s presentation followed by extended member questions; no committee action was taken on the presentation.