CEAC-2022-06-June

Duke Energy Offers CO2 Cut Options
for NC by 2030, ’32, ’34
By Gary D. Robertson | Associated Press
RALEIGH. N.C. (AP) — Duke Energy Corp.’s electricity-generating
subsidiaries for North Carolina told regulators on
Monday how they can comply with a new state law demanding
significant greenhouse gas reductions by the end of the
decade.
The document filings with the North Carolina Utilities Commission
come seven months after Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper
signed bipartisan legislation that directed the utility to
lower carbon dioxide emissions 70 percent from 2005 levels
by 2030. Zero-net CO2 emissions would be met by 2050.
The law says the commission, which must rule on an energy
path by year’s end, can delay the target years in some circumstances,
and three of the four energy-portfolio alterations
offered by Charlotte-based Duke Energy extend the date to
2032 or 2034.
Those three portfolios would rely less on solar power and
energy-storing batteries and more on nuclear power and
offshore wind turbines for emissionless production. They also
would result in slightly lower average annual increases on retail
power bills for the 4.4 million North Carolina and South
Carolina customers through 2035 compared to reaching the
70 percent reduction in 2030, according to Duke Energy.
Company officials cautioned that the potential annual customer
bill increases, ranging from 1.9 percent to 2.7 percent,
could change and likely would be zero or minimal in the first
few years of any plan that regulators approve. Some businesses
and advocates for the poor opposed the final legislation
because they believed the cost to ratepayers would
be much more, or that the law lacked enough monetary
assistance for low-income residents.
The portfolio options address energy production shifts by
Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress, which
have power plants and serve customers in both states. But
the 70-percent reduction only applies to North Carolina
because the law requires it. The utilities will file the plan in
2023 with the Public Service Commission of South Carolina as
part of future planning there.
(Continued on pg. 26)
Volume 87 · Number 6 | 25