Advocates warn committee that utility capital programs and data‑center demand are driving rate increases; urge PSC and legislative reforms
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Environmental and consumer advocates told the committee that utility capital spending, Scribe‑style incentives and multi‑year rate plans have raised delivery charges and that data‑center growth and PJM planning amplify rate risks; they urged stronger PSC oversight and targeted policies to protect ratepayers.
Representatives of Maryland League of Conservation Voters, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Sierra Club and Maryland PIRG urged the Environment and Transportation Committee on Jan. 28 to address delivery‑rate growth tied to utility capital spending and to limit new gas infrastructure where less expensive alternatives exist.
Rebecca Rear (Maryland LCV) framed clean energy deployment as a way to reduce household bills and public‑health costs, and she flagged a $1.5 billion transmission project in BGE territory as an example of large transmission costs that flow to ratepayers. Bridal Baker (Chesapeake Climate Action Network) urged caution on overbuilding and said about 1 GW of generation poised to exit the PJM queue could substitute for retiring fossil plants if paired with appropriate transmission.
Josh Tolkin (Sierra Club) emphasized demand‑side measures — efficiency, demand response and virtual power plants — as fast, low‑cost strategies to shave peaks and avoid expensive supply investments. Emily Skar (Maryland PIRG) criticized prior incentives (Scribe) and multi‑year rate plans for encouraging oversized capital spending. She said BGE’s plan could cost ratepayers tens of billions over time if projects are financed and recovered through rates (testimony referenced a $4,000,000,000 capital work estimate and a $19,500,000,000 payback figure for certain programs).
Advocates asked the committee to press the Public Service Commission on prudence review, to limit reconciliation mechanisms that shift risk to ratepayers, and to prioritize targeted repairs or relining for at‑risk gas mains rather than wholesale replacement when safety and cost‑effectiveness allow.
What lawmakers asked: Delegates raised questions about whether utilities already have authority to build generation, whether data centers should build only with non‑fossil off‑take, and whether pipeline replacement is always required. Advocates recommended closer PSC oversight and legislative guardrails on multi‑year plans and Scribe‑style incentives.
Next steps: The briefing closed with a recess and a reminder that a bill hearing and subcommittee were scheduled immediately after.