>> we are looking at the reliably of the electric grid, with state utility were presented to us. you are watching live coverage on cspan 3.

>> my heart is full of gratitude. that is the thought right now. to all of you, to my colleagues, to the staff, being the chairman of the house and conference committee, is the ultimate thing in congress. this is been the best. >> we have a whole other year ahead of us. >> thank you for your service. >> [ applause ]. >> we have a lot of work to do. go ahead and get started.

state utility regulators have challenges. they have affordable electricity. >> they have this during this congress. they understand what drives the growing reliability crisis. this is from the entire electricity portfolio over an extended period of time. they have different retail choices. we are relying more on

transitional organizations. this is due to environmental growing regulations and agencies. fans will be on foster fuel generation, and market distortions. these factors are contributing to premature retirement for most of our reliable and most dispatched resources. as of the increased connected grid, they have a much wider impact from ever before. they are trying to look at the increasingly unreliable grade.

they have a redundant transmission line. this system must be overbilled to make sure that there is power when the sun is down, and when the wind is blowing. several states and regions, are carrying on with her ideological objective. they have a false sense of security. their neighbors can continue to say that. it states like california and regions like new england, will have some of the most ambitious environmental goals. they have 50% of the total supply. this is about 15% of all business electricity from last year. the retail electricity rates are the highest rated where are they the highest? california and new england. even with all the warnings

about administration actions continuing the power plan, this threatens the regular reliable nes for existences. this will be on the reliability. many states choose to ignore this guidance, in favor of their and radical environmental policies. increasing the likelihood for blackouts. people know that when the lights went out, the state commissions and utilities were responsible. this is because of the changes and electricity landscape.

it is clear who is rolling the state utility commissions. we must listen to the state utility experts about the reliability actions. christmas learn what he must do to prevent further retirement of the reliable resources. keep the electricity affordable. >> in particular, i want to welcome my constituent. they have the senior policy office. they have worked since 2019. before he worked there, he worked at the colorado puc for 2020 to 21. we are advising the commissioners. senior director of policy. the he supervises staff working across several functional

areas. you should be here today to give us your wisdom. it also helps you regulate the electrical utilities are moving forward to the zone and businesses. moving forward, one of the biggest impacts from this reliability, is going to be the climate crisis. we need to be clear about the stakes. many of our colleagues have heard me say repeatedly, the climate crisis is existential. they have longer wildfire seasons, massive flooding, and colder temperatures throughout the window. on and on.

a key component to the response of the climate crisis, is going to be the transition to leaner energy sources. they have different policies that these agencies develop. the witnesses represent clean energy deployment. this is directly from the short- term, including all of our futures in the long-term. the bipartisan infrastructure law, which we enacted in 2021, they are looking at the renewable energy storage. this is about 10.1 reliability

and were flexible projects. president joe biden demonstration, have implemented carbon pollution standards for fossil fuel power plants. they are helping across the country. this includes powerline harboring -- hardening, which includes states like colorado. they are using this to try to insinuate that the transition to cleaner energy. this also means less reliable electricity. that is simply not the case. here is the reality. our current fossil fuel infrastructure has already proven its health incapable of extreme weather events. you can look at texas and other places. my home state of colorado is

proving that transitioning to cleaner forms of energy, does not mean that you have to compromise unreliability. colorado has been moving quickly in the direction of renewable energy. one of these utilities has received approval, to look at the new network, connecting with these resources. this is from 2040. they are looking at the

existing transitions. all of the new wind, energy, and solar powers created. states like colorado, are transitioning to a reliable, cleaner energy sources. i know the two things that are conjoined. all of you folks sitting here today, their massive response ability. a lot is being asked of you. a lot is expected of you. i want to thank you in advance for everything you are doing. i'm confident, giving the continual investments of these federal actions. we have the needs of the american people. we can all work together to have a smooth transition to cleaner energy. this does not sacrifice reliability. >> and trying to recognize the full committee.

>> we cannot say this enough. energy is foundational to everything we do. it heats our homes, powers our hospitals and businesses. we have driven technological innovation, and improved the well-being of all americans. we need to continue protecting and building on that legacy. they have regulatory restrictions. they have been driving up costs, and jeopardizing his legacy, and our grid reliability. we have seen base loads from sources being driven out or shuttered by radical policies across the country. these sources are being replaced by less reliable, more expensive, weather dependent generations. every day, americans are paying the price. in some places, people are paying nearly double the

nationwide's averages. in places like california, it has become such a problem, the states have increasing reliable power, including my home state of washington. balancing the grid when inconsistent resources like wind and solar, can't produce enough. they have different sources. they are trying to power people's homes during periods of severe weather. last winter, several state utilities have been able to get the power resources that they needed from neighboring states during a severe, cold event. resulting in widespread blackouts. this is during the holidays. the north american electrical reliability corporation, continues to include the reinforced aggravations. people need us most. we have real risks and impacts.

this is before the committee last summer. we heard the same warnings from grid operators during the hearing last fall. there warnings were clear. while renewable energy from sources like wind and solar absolutely play a role in america's energy mix, they cannot replace reliable baseload sources. they are accelerating the retirement of baseload sources, without adequate replacements. they will only increase the risk of these life-threatening blackouts, and will continue driving up the costs. today, it is important to hear an important perspective. they are trying to get reportable, reliable state commissions. they have long been held responsible for ensuring reliable delivery of power at affordable rates. they will review the general resource planning to be sure that power will be available.

they have reviewed decisions to build electrical transmissions, to determine whether it is necessary. the approval or disapproval of rate increases that can be part of the electric and protector. more and more, utility commissions are confronting policies from their own state legislators. trying to retire baseload generations, with no long-term strategy to replace it. i have seen this in my own state of washington. commissions have to contend with president joe biden's administration, and the top- down policies that seem to force a premature retirement, driving up costs, and putting more people at risk. we have a lot of questions today, regarding how these policies are threatening the reliability of our grid. this is so foundational to our economy, and our way of life. rather than a radical energy transition, we must expand our energy resources through all of the above strategies.

these are currently paying more, while getting less, when it comes to electricity. we are trying to ensure that families don't have to worry about rationing energy. this is from the summer of winter months. having to make tough choices about whether to pay the electric bill, trying to pay for their families. i look forward to your testimony. we have lots of questions. thank you. are you back. >> i recognize the committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm not going to repeat what i said. i think most of you heard that already. i have to say that i am not happy about her leaving. i know that i can't do much about it. maybe i would just like to say that you are the perfect example of what most people

realize as a colleague. you can disagree about the policy. at the same time, you really like the person who is your colleague. you have that level of integrity that they have around here. we are going to work together to get things done the rest of the year. i will leave it at that. today, we are ensuring that americans have the power to light and heat their homes. this is from the responsibility of the subcommittee. we are ensuring the electric grid reliability, knowing that it has changed medically. for most of a century, we relied on monopoly utilities that were responsible for every step of the electricity delivery chain. that will begin to change 25 years ago, which was part of the competition to the electricity markets across the nation. they have promoted new

competitions. they have lower wholesale energy prices. they have reduced greenhouse emissions. all ensuring reliability. we can build reliable energy. we can't continue to rely on polluting fossil fuel plans, or pursuing the climate crisis. instead, we must reduce greenhouse emissions. reducing emissions of particular matters. this includes other pollutants. we know that these pollutants have devastating health impact on the communities, in which they are submitting these power plants. we simply can't allow these plans to continue to be unabated. real technologies exist. these new technologies, are going to be critical as we continue the clean energy transition. particularly looking at the reliable challenges and fossil fuel and researchers. late 2022, we have dangerous winter conditions. over 6 million customers, they

have power outages from the storm. they were freezing from natural gas power plants. they have the inability to deliver gas to freezing conditions. after conducting a review of the outages, this is from the chair. they must fill the regulatory gaps that exist from reliability. they are trying to create reliability standards from electricity. even though, many electric systems are basing the reliability. they have different transmissions and generations. they have no mandatory reliable requirements for the system. we cannot allow this double standard to continue. many systems are only as reliable as their most unreliable component. the infrastructure that the power system relies upon, is reliable. that has serious consequences for electric reliability.

democrats delivered it. they have $25 billion to support reliability. they have announced over $7 billion in grants. they have capacity contracts. the electric and researcher have not been seen since rectification has been part of the new deal. these investments will greatly enhance reliability throughout the nation. this was all about the energy efficiency. $5.5 billion from the bipartisan and researcher law. we have 9 billion from the inflation reduction act. all of them today, know that we never have to use that. we have represented a huge, potential source of reliability, especially as patient rates increase two to patient resilience is.

this is going to be cost- effective. we separate everything. they can be from grid enhancing technologies, linking together but the previously separated grids. we must consider these elements. frankly, i find it disappointing that so far, the republican majority has been willing to engage in this conversation. i yield back the balance of my time. >> i will conclude the opening statements. they are trying to be made part of the record. i wish everyone a happy valentine's day. happy ash wednesday. i want to thank you all for being here. we have time for the subcommittee. each witness will have another opportunity to give another statement, following the questions from the members. they are going to be in front of you. pretty self-explanatory. green, yellow, red read red,

your time is expired. yellow, you need to wrap up. i will introduce them. the georgia public service commission, you pronounce that. houston. thank you. chairman of the regulatory commission. director of policy, colorado energy office. they admire the arizona corporation commission. thank you. i yield my five minutes. >> thank you for the invitation to speak today. we are looking at the energy climate and good security. the commerce community chair, i want to thank her for her leadership. i'm a commissioner.

elected statewide, to maintain a safe, reliable, utility system, and one of the fastest- growing states in the nation. electricity generation and transmission are paramount to georgia. we operate in a shared operation and shared transmission format, to look at 41 electric co-ops. we have 49 musical providers. this shared system, provides a great economy of sale and other customers. this is mutually owned. transmission is interconnected without cost redundancy across companies. the region is directly interconnected 25 neighboring regions. we are not an island. we have used every dollar to provide a more reliable system. in 2024, has had a critical juncture for more clean energy sources, experiencing asked oracle lucy's historical actions.

technology acceptance, and new manufacturers from overseas, georgia has more of a power needed than ever before. we have the authority to instruct utilities, to construct generation and building transmissions, and the state of georgia holds a compact with the integrated utility. this is generous when our state consumes. this is similar to other southeastern states, looking at their utilities. our georgia system gives the regulators all the transparency without the necessary bureaucracy. we are not looking at the short- term gimmicks. this includes the transmission projects. georgia still has the rate 10% below the national average. today, we take a highly diversified approach. they are providing the baseload, which operates 24/7, 300 625. they are providing electricity when the sun shining with battery backup. natural gas, has dispensable energy. all generations are operating

from the summer and winter reserve margin. georgia has become the number four state in the nation. they have a generated portfolio. it has never been more clear or accessible to customers. the proposed rule, puts all of this thoughtful strategy and implementation at great risk. they have the obligation to serve. they were trying to look at a healthy utility system. epa 111, puts the regulators in a possible position. penalizing utilities for generation facilities. this doesn't lie. they open the pandora's box for third parties to these utilities. the epa is looking at the control states. state agencies and officials, have deep expertise. they have research capabilities, analyzing planning for healthy systems. consider this from utilities point of view.

the obligations are here to serve. trying to look at generation assets. they are being sued by environmentalists to look at the federal government. the stories is being made at a critical pinch period, where solar is failing. demand is surging. the alternative is going to be forcing blackouts, and forcing themselves up for other actions. now, consider this from a customer's point of view. 78% of georgia's customer bills, or to force epa complaints today. if they choose to uphold their legal obligations to serve, they are generating in ways that the action doesn't define any of that. this is all subject to legal action. this is all subject for legal

actions. they are suffering three blackout. they have all of these other refrigerators. potentially, their life is at risk. they have to be dependent upon electric city. it includes dialysis. customers are getting hurt by these regulations. they are getting stuck with a bill. reality-based relief outs, are not long-term reliability solutions either. customers have already been charged for these assets. regulators and utilities know their systems better than federal agencies. this is from any proposed federal relief. i thank you for your time. i thank you for your intention. thank you for your willingness to listen, and consider your state regulators protected -- perspective. >> thank you. we will go to your opening statement. >> can you hear me okay? >> good morning, chair rogers. thank you for the ranking

members. members of the committee, i would like to do a special shout out to these congressmen's from the great state of indiana. take you for the privilege to appear before you this morning, providing indiana's energy landscape, and how the indiana commission is responding to challenges presented by policy decisions, as part of the energy transition, and the provision of safe, reliable service, and adjusted reasonable rates. like other states, indiana has experienced its own energy transition over the past 20 years. traditionally, call services a significant source in indiana. until the early 2000's, this accounted for 95% of indiana's generation. today, it makes up around 45% of our field mix. natural gas, nuclear, wind, and other fuels, account for the rest. as indiana's leading states in transition, we are the second

biggest wind state east of the mississippi river, and the seven fastest-growing solar state in the nation. this transition from goal, -- cole, looking at residuals, nitrous oxide, sulfur dioxide, and eog regulations. for decades, they included some of the lowest rates in the country. this is part of indiana's access to affordable coal. continuing environmental regulations have been looking at these reduce facilities and utilities looking to reduce of impacted indiana's price ce of ranking which went from being in the top five of the country of affordable rates to now in the 2029th in the country. with this rise of customer rates, indiana enacted a

framework before the indiana commission to consider when making electric rate making decisions, commonly referred to in indiana as the five pillars. which are reliability, affordability, resiliency, stability, and environmental sustainability. indiana also passed a law that our electric utilities must have suitable generation secured and do not rely too much on the wholesale market, limiting capacity auction purchases to 15% of their needs. while management of the electric grid requires teamwork, indiana was to ensure that utilities are doing their part to be self-sufficient. on customer choice, indiana protected them by allowing them to choose natural gas. the indiana commission also submitted joint comments with our agency partners idem on the

oucc, the consumer counselors office and setting new standards for greenhouse gas commissions for greenhouse generating units. are concerns included a focus on the proposed rules unrealistic timing, particularly end up context of the utility's state sanctioned and integrator reviewed resource plans. it is not obvious that the proposed environmental benefits outweigh the other pillar considerations that state regulators must consider to ensure safe reliable service at affordable rates. regarding reliability and in the spirit of cooperative federalism we offered a general administrative order a couple years ago encouraging miso and pjm 's input into the commission. for example, indiana believes

that stakeholders must find ways to stream the interconnection processes while promoting market signals for capacity, dispatchable characteristics and ancillary services, and scarcity pricing. indiana supports the option of these rto efforts and supports reliability and resiliency. ultimately, this all highlights the policy should lance they commission management of 20 year planning horizons. effective policy and regulation should allow us to be nimble, flexible, and adaptive on emerging energy issues that impact our state. thank you for the opportunity to testify today and thank you for your service to this country. i will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you, mr. houston.

mr. hayes is recognized for five minutes. >> i'm keith hayes, the senior director at the colorado energy office and i want to thank you for the opportunity of how we are working to provide reliable, affordable electricity for all coloradans and how federal action can further support a low carbon reliable grid. to get the story already of the start of colorado's deep, deep carbonization of our electrical grid, in part that position has been enabled by a dramatic decline in the cost of wind, solar, and batteries. the increasing skill and experience of our utilities and effectively integrating renewables in a supportive policy environment. pursuant to statutory planning requirements, colorado's utilities are projected to reduce greenhouse gas pollution by 84 to 87% by 2030. our last coal plant in the state will retire by the end of 2030. we have managed this transition while keeping electric rates below the national average, in part by partnering with our utilities and focusing on the three pillars of a portability, reliability, and pollution

reductions. as we look past 2030, the energy office is preparing to release a study that violates pathways to deeper decarbonization of colorado's electric grid. results are both business as usual and are zero carbon scenarios are instructive. our modeling shows that under the business as usual approach which is the lowest cost scenario to meet the 2040 road of 40% they can achieve a 94% reduction in greenhouse gas pollution. it does this by adding significant amounts of wind, solar, and batteries while adding a fleet approximately the size of today's. overtime, the level of dispatch of the gas units declined dramatically but they continue to play an important role in reliability. by 2032 only one unit approaches the 20% capacity factor and by 2040 gas units apply just 2% of colorado's electricity. the decline in the use of gases driven by the cost of gas

compared to the lower cost of renewable energy and storage. the study also finds that across all of the scenarios, most of colorado's electricity comes reliably from wind, solar, and storage, between 70% and 100%. energy efficiency plays a key role in helping to meet those targets applying roughly 9% of the state's energy needs in 2040. as a result of all this, colorado will need to triple its wind capacity and quintuplets overcapacity between now and 2040. the study also shows that the lowest-cost pathway to full decarbonization includes flexible, firm, and dispatchable researchers with clean hydrogen among the lowest- cost resources as a result of the incentives under the inflation reduction act. new forms of geothermal electricity also play an important role. what is key here today is that our analysis demonstrates no

negative impacts on the reliability of colorado's electric grid for the epa's proposed clean power regulations. instead, it shows that the technologies proposed including the carbon capture and especially clean hydrogen will be important to achieving a lower-cost pathway to deep, deep decarbonization. while it is not the result of the study, the analysis strongly indicates that expanded transmission capacity, both in state and into regional, which will enable reaching regions with higher renewable potential and allowing access to energy from across diverse geographic areas will be important to reliably meeting colorado's electric needs. colorado's clean energy transition highlights not only the opportunity for states to improve reliability and resilience by switching to lower cost renewables but it also demonstrates the important role for the federal government in supporting states with this transition. including permanent reform, colorado, as i said, will need

to triple its wind and controllable solar and to work on this we are working on streamlining state proposals and policies for transmission. we believe similar action at the federal level will be important. colorado will support federal support for categorical exclusion for geothermal. we support the big wires act which will enable the expansion of transmission that is necessary for clean energy development and we support continued investment in building sufficiency through rebates, tax credits, and support for advanced building codes. i thank you for the opportunity to testify here today and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, mr. myers. mr. hay. mr. myers, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you ranking member and members of the subcommittee. as with ms. pridemore i too am a state-wide electric commissioner at the arizona commission. we are a bit unique in that only 13 states only elect their

commissioners. the acc and its responsibilities are also constitutionally established. in arizona, we have a truly diverse topography and climate. most of us think of us as a desert the reality of us is that we have 78,000 feet of elevation, lush green forest, multiple seasons, and regular snow. this makes a one size fits all approach almost impossible if we are being true to our constitutional obligations to ensure utilities provide reliable and affordable service. while i cannot speak on behalf of the commission and the views i express are my own, i can tell you that the current views tend to favor and all of the above approach to electricity generation. we have approved almost 2000 megawatts of solar plus battery connections in the last year while at the same time approving hundreds of megawatts of thermal generation. many of the challenges we face moving forward with regard to reliable generation center around early forced retirement of coal plants without adequate

replacement. personally, it pains me to have to prove accelerated cost recovery for early shutdown of coal plants while at the same time authorizing recovery on new purchase power agreements and then because the utilities are ultimately responsible for keeping the lights on, we also have to approve the building of reliable dispatchable generation in the form of natural gas. that means our ratepayers are paying three times for the same energy generation that could be had by simply keeping our existing generation online until natural retirement or even better beyond that. some of the problems we face are early burdensome regulations in the form of early forced retirement and reliable generation, roadblock after roadblock with regard to transmission construction and interference with vegetation management. a perfect example is the sunz project. the project began 16 years ago and is still not do all the red tape and lawsuits. another example is renewable

energy mandates which force our utilities to invest in premature technology at long- term contracts and cost our ratepayers four times with the energy is worth on the competitive market. and it will get worse over the next 15 to 20 years as the price of solar continues to drop. other problems are delayed development and commercialization of new technologies such as small modular reactors, micro-, nuclear, and hydrogen, which are simply in their infancy. finally, we lack the infrastructure to supply natural gas. we cannot allocate much more to turbines needed to complement the intermittent renewable resources we are adding however we do have options. while they will not appear overnight or even in the next decade, we are moving fast and furious onto new hydroponic basins. we are actively engaging in discussion to use salt caverns that are primed for natural gas storage and possibly hydrogen

storage. this type of storage has the ability to provide buffering for the entire west coast and parts of mexico. we are also working with morgan to help their endeavor of getting more and larger pipelines built from texas all the way to california. while this is not a perfect solution, large pipelines allow for line packing that also act as a buffer. additionally, we have also been very active in day ahead markets. it appears we have less interest for many other reasons you heard back in september of last year regarding the governance issues. however, i have personally been very active in the markets plus tara development plus advocacy and resources for natural gas. a day ahead market has shown that in almost all simulations with or without the inclusion of washington and california, result in savings for the utility customers. a day ahead market is being viewed as a possible stepping- stone for a full-fledged rto. it will also help us determine appropriate transmission. while arizona has many transmission lines in

development, it is important to work with our neighbors to determine what is best in regard to long-term transmission suitable for our region. thank you again for allowing me to testify today and i look forward to answering all of your questions. >> thank you, mr. myers. i think all of the witnesses for your testimony. we will now move into the question and answer portion of the testimony. i will recognize myself and then a ranking member. we will go back and forth that way on each side until we have exhausted all the members. i will recognize myself for five minutes for questions. commissioner pridemore, nuclear energy as one of the most reliable sources of energy, and also one of the most impactful ways to reduce emissions, can you talk about how the vertically integrated model in your state supports the integrated resource planning and the new reactors? >> yes, sir. thank you for the question. plant vocal, once unit 4 is

fully actualized, will become the largest electricity generating plant in the nation. there are currently four nuclear reactors there they'll be just under 446 megawatts of power. it is splitting adams next step is to connect it to the grid. we get an enormous amount of long-term benefit from 24/7 carbon free power as well as our two nuclear units at plant hatch. it allows us to provide baseload energy that we can marry with renewables. we can marry with natural gas generation to be able to help us manage our extort and reload growth. we also have the great benefit from a transmission standpoint, from where we put nuclear we build less transmission. and there is a cost consideration for that for customers. it is immeasurable when you look at the 20 year planning process that we go through in georgia. we have a comprehensive integrated resource plan for how we generate and how we

transmit. when you consider vocal edits a60 to a80 lifespan, it will be around long after i am gone. >> some of the most affordable and reliable electricity. do you think this model better supports long-term affordability and can you explain why? >> yes, sir. i appreciate my colleagues in states that are part of a rto or iso. in georgia, we are not. our integrated system allows us to get the economy to scale to work with the 41 co-ops as well as the 49 municipal so that we have a system that works together. we are not building transmission lines or even generation. when you consider the integrated approach that we have taken, it has allowed us to get the economy to scale and survey large load base. i am very proud of the fact that our market structure has stood the test of time. it allows us to not only

generated what is needed in the state, but to interconnect with the five neighboring regions to help them when they need assistance. >> yeah. thank you for that. mr. houston, coal and gas to adopt clients' technologies would have dire impacts and reliability and affordability. you mentioned that in indiana. you mention the impact to reliability from a proposed agency action like epa's clean powerplant 2.0. the grid act would ensure federal agencies cannot penalize before assessments. how can the grid act help promote reliability and protect against generation retirement? >> well, the way i understand it, it makes sense to have the economic regulator have a window into what the environmental regulator is doing simply from the standpoint of accountability.

it is all the federal government. and getting the kind of exposure from both perspectives i think makes sense for ratepayers, as tricia just mentioned. in integrated resource planning, utilities have either engaged in a 20 year horizon look at the way the future will unfold and then developed a preferred portfolio for which then they may seek certificates of public convenience for new generation to replace retiring generation. the way that the epa is doing things at this moment in time, and this is the reason why we express reservations about the greenhouse gas role, is because it turns that on its side. it both causes environmental compliance problems, it causes the 20-your integrity of the planning process, significant problems, and if it winds up having generation assets that are already in the ground to make additional investments that ratepayers have to pay, it

is a triple whammy. so i think that the concept -- while i am not an elected official and i am appointed by the governor's -- the suggestion that you make it sound like common sense to me. >> thank you so much. can you talk about pre-mature retirement of baseload resources and makes the system less reliable? >> all right. yes. as i mentioned in my opening statements, ratepayers are paying three times for the same generation and retiring reliable generation for unreliable -- you know -- and reliable of unfavorable is just bad. i mean it is common sense that you have to have a backup plan. so you have to create more dispatchable generation but since they are idled, you know, so that you can use it whenever the sun goes down the wind does not blow.

we don't have a lot of wind in arizona but you have to have generation available online. >> yeah. that wind starts at zero every day and ends at zero. i will now recognize the ranking member for five minutes. >> thank you so much, mr. chairman. we will be hearing an undercurrent of the myth that if you are going to move to renewable energy that you are going to have to sacrifice resiliency and reliability. so mr. hey, i want to ask you just very briefly, have you and your study found that to be true and how can we maintain the utmost in reliability and resiliency while still transitioning to these various ambitious goals that our state is doing? >> thank you, representative degette. no. we required all our scenarios to reliability standards, and what we found is across the board all of the scenarios actually met those reliability standards. >> how do they do that?

the chairman just said the sun goes down at night and mr. myers just said we do not have a lot of wind in arizona. so especially when you're looking nationwide at different states with different sources, how do you do that? >> representative, i would agree with my colleagues on the panel but the planning is the key. and colorado like these other states has a robust resource planning process for our commission and demonstrate how they are going to both the carbonized and keep rates affordable, and it is through that process and today wind and solar actually in colorado are less expensive than our coal units. they found that retiring two of our older coal units, 1 and 2 imply bro, could result in as much as to $2 $400 million in

savings $2 customers as a result for china's units and replacing them with lower costs. >> but i am going $2 assume that you would not be telling ms. pridemore or mr. houston or mr. myers that the exact mix that we are using and colorado would work in their states. >> absolutely not. that is why we modeled all the scenarios that we did. one was wind and solar batteries only and one involve small modular reactors. one is just what is the most cost-effective basket of resources and in that scenario it was actually clean hydrogen as i said in my opening remarks as a result of the tax credits. so there are multiple pathways to help the carbonized a grid and i would encourage my colleagues to look at those opportunities and pathways. >> and just so you know, at least from the democratic side of the aisle, mr. myers, you'll be happy to know this, we are not talking about a national one size fits all where we are mandating what people need to do to get to zero carbon emissions by 2040 or whatever

the date is. what we are trying to do is incentivize folks to come up with their own plans like colorado has. and so, mr. hay, i know you have been involved for a long time in this field. do you talk to your colleagues in other states and our other states developing these kinds of planes and what kind of advice can you give to them? >> well, thank you representative. i agree. colorado does not enforce particular resources on any one utility. we really have an outcome- focused policy framework in the state of colorado where we have partnered with different utilities to give them different opportunities. i do talk to my colleagues across the country and some of them are planning for decolonizing their grades and utilization of new electricity buildings and some are not. but i would encourage all of them to really look at the

possibility of shifting to lower-cost renewables. >> right. and one last thing. you raised something that is really critical as we move towards decarbonization, and that is permitting or firm. because we have to be able to get the transition that we need and we have to be able to locate the sources. i only have a little bit of time left so let me just make a commercial announcement for my colleague mr. peters, because mr. peters is going for a bipartisan effort towards reform and i think it would be great if we could work on legislation and try to pass this congress because that will really enable us to get to a carbon free future but also grid reliability and resiliency , and with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thanks for holding today's

hearing at this to our witnesses for being with us today. i know members of this committee say that northern ohio make it about everything from steel to glass to engine blocks to tires and you name it. we make it. we consume a lot of energy to do that. we have 86,000 manufacturing jobs. when i go back to 2014 with the vortex that we had, it was pretty close that people were concerned across the state that they were going to go to blackouts and brownouts but we had none. every power station was up and generating at that time. today though we have got a situation where i'm not sure we could do that policing these power generation stations going off-line. i have a lot of questions in my last four minutes or so. i would like to ask as many as i possibly can. commissioner pridemore, first question, do we need more power

less power? >> more power, sir. >> thank you. and when you're talking about your demands in energy, and this is coming up frequently though from the data center, are we going to need more power less when we have these data centers coming online? >> more power. >> because i saw statistics probably doubling that what we have right now. you also mention your testimony about it on the solar side and we are a firm believer and the energy policy and having everything in the mix out there but i am just kind of curious. in your testimony you're talking about battery backup. how much power do you have in backup from the batteries? >> in georgia we have a prescribed 80 megawatts of battery storage. we have more before us right now for review in a case. but, sir, our challenge with batteries has been supply chain issues, and accessibility of the batteries have been a big issue for us and not to mention the cost. your friend mentioned hydrogen.

they are very young. and with that comes an ex- ordinary cost that comes with that. >> and i just ask on that? pardon me for interrupting. the timeline on that though. how much time would that be? 10 hours? 12 hours? how many hours do you think it would be for the power needs? >> that depends on the overall storage needs of the battery itself. you can see five hours. you can see 24 hours. it depends upon the actual battery. >> well, thank you. can i also ask you, do we need more power or less power? >> more. >> you mention in your testimony that the state was in the top five affordable, and now your 29th in 2022. what about business development? do they look at that? businesses stay in the states? the manufacturing side? is that up to your state on my

western side? and the question is are you seeing a change out there with manufacturers looking at the power? >> not to impugn the state of ohio as our next-door neighbor -- >> be careful. >> but we are the highest manufacturing employer by percent of population in the country and like ohio have enormous steel production in northwest indiana and steel production elsewhere in the state. manufacturing and melting metals and moving metals requires a tremendous amount of energy. and from an economic development standpoint, that is important to have grid stability along with reliability and resiliency to maintain a manufacturing base.

you are moving the later with 40 tons of molten level. you do not want that energy supply interrupted. it is the same kind of thing that would happen with chip manufacturing. they need significant amounts of energy that is on interrupted. and so that is where grid stability or quality -- >> sorry to interrupt. let me ask this real quick. when you're talking about our meeting with pgm, are they telling you you need more power or less power right now? >> more. >> okay. thank you. commissioner myers, we have only got about 33 second. do we need more power less power? >> definitely more. >> you also mentioned about your data centers. will account for 75% of your energy growth in your state. will you need more power because of that? >> we will need much more power. >> in my last 15 seconds, can you tell me real briefly, how is this issue permitting? is it good, bad, indifferent? >> i think i covered that in the opening statements. ,16 just for permitting is ridiculous. >> real quick. when you're looking at 16 years

of that how much more cost went into those 16 years? >> that is to be determined but a lot. >> i yield back. >> i will go to mr. peters for five minutes. >> thanks, mr. chairman. thanks, mr. witness. i would say it is ridiculous and inexcusable and i would love to work with you and everyone here. that regional transition line is something i want to talk about today. i agree with my republican colleagues on one thing. we need to get serious about the resource adequacy problem facing this country. we have recognized unprecedented growth from ev's, a.i., manufacturing, and as well as actual population growth in both urban and rural areas. so in talking about a long-term energy while we reduce emissions, the committee needs to finally to talk about transmission and the grid and our generation mix. and what combination of approaches work best. me i congratulate you on the work you have done in colorado.

multiple analyses from m.i.t. and columbia have shown that the big wires act which i and senator hickenlooper introduced would save customers hundreds of millions of dollars while keeping the lights on during natural disasters and other challenges. these costs and reliability benefits are driven by the ability of high demand we just use energy from other regions that do not need it at that time. so that means communities across the country using inexpensive iowa wind, arizona solar, or whatever access generation folks are willing to buy and sell. i also want to emphasize that electrons are resource neutral. all types of generation whether fossil or renewable need transition to connect to the grid and connect to customers. so a lot of you have said, and i think this is understandable, that you want to have enough in- state generation to serve your load without relying on other regions for your energy needs. but right now while we have winter storms and energy events with the lights keep going out,

study after study keep saying if we had a little bit more transmission capacity we could have kept the lights on while saving money for the customers and in some cases even saving lives. mr. houston, i understand that indiana is a member of two regional reliability entities. i was happy to see the organization of pgm states a redoubling of efforts for inter- regional transmission planning. did you see that letter? >> yeah. >> you agree that more interregional transmission would better protect your customers from blackouts and otherwise support the five pillars that guide policy? >> i think regional planning makes a lot of sense. >> yeah. >> ms. pridemore, i understand that we need to build more generation to meet energy demand but in the medium to long-term with the growth that georgia is seeing -- congratulations -- are you going to be able to have 100% of your energy demand all the

time because you said you have five connections to other regions? >> yes, mr. peters. we connect to five other regions but the compact holds with our vertically integrated utilities that we generate what we consume inside the city of georgia. you mentioned blackouts and forced outages earlier. you can look at the last three winter storm incidents and the number of blackouts and outages we had were so minimal. it was just those that were caused by downed trees and localized events. >> do not believe we will need to invest in transmission generation storage to meet demand? >> we already do. >> you call for permitting reform for pipelines in your testimony but not for transmission. are you satisfied with the federal transmission planning process? >> yes. i am satisfied with what georgia does. i am satisfied with the conditions by which georgia manages transmission. >> mr. myers, you are obviously not satisfied with what has happened with your line.

can you tell me how long it has taken for that line to be built and what happens if you're unable to build it? >> well, i think it has been about 16 years since it was initially proposed and it is -- what happens is we don't get a path from new mexico over to arizona to transmit the majority which is wind power but it will be a d.c. line that transmits power across state lines there. what happens there is -- is probably not too much for arizona because a lot of that power is going to california. it is destined for california. but is a transmission between states. >> it is frustrating you. right? >> it is because we have multiple commissions that have had to go through this commissions process over and over again and it keeps changing because the federal law is changing or whatever the case may be.

lawsuits. tribal lawsuit is one. that is the latest. >> well, i would say that for me when you look at the conclusions of m.i.t., the big wires that produce electricity how keeps the light on for millions of families. i am hoping that we can pursue it as well as permit for it and do more interregional transmission. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> i now go to the committee chair for five minutes. >> my home state of washington is blessed with abundant, clean, affordable, reliable, dispatchable hydropower. and, yet, today, we have secret deals by the biden administration that aim to breach some of the dams that are in my district which is only going to further limit this abundant source of clean energy. commissioner myers, your testimony mentions that as more utilities turned to the market for electricity, there's less available for everyone else to meet their needs.

you also talk about the loss of reliable resources like coal and a limited supply of natural gas in arizona. from your perspective as a public utility commission how important is generation to meet growing electricity demand and adapting to changing demand patterns and would you agree that we need more, not less, reliable generation like what comes from the river dams? >> 100%. and i will add that arizona does rely a lot on hydropower and some of it comes from the pacific northwest. you know? down to california of course with that stipulation. >> yes. and sometimes california tries to it from us in that process. moving on, how can commissioners work to protect existing infrastructure to make sure there is enough dispatchable generation? >> how can we protect? well, we are doing it right now. we are coming to you saying we cannot have these roles that take away hydropower. we need to ease up on epa

restrictions. that is how we protect our energy grid by saying making sure our grid does not go away without reliable replacement. >> mr. houston and mr. myers, assuring fair and affordable rates is central to your jobs and state public utility commissioners, as state legislators and federal policies press to increase intermittent renewable resources over more reliable base loads, what are the impacts that you are seeing on your responsibilities and authorities, and who ultimately pays for these policies? ms. pridemore? >> thank you, ma'am. i would like to start with who pays for it. americans pay for at. customers pay for it. this especially hurts low to moderate income folks. this especially hurts senior citizens. this redundant generation and additional transmission that is being built to supply low-cost

solar rays in rural areas and to be able to move that power back to, you know, major power- producing centers, that is extraordinarily expensive. and considering it is a time when americans are hit with inflation, it is just too much. we are asking too much right now. we are getting to cleaner sources. i think sometimes we spend a lot of time spiting about the speed by which we get there. >> thank you. mr. houston? >> well, i echo what commissioner pridemore has said. it is the ratepayers that ultimately pay and i would add to it that in every field hearing that we do when there is a case before us, the overwhelming message is exactly what she just said about low and moderate income families. they are the ones that are most hit by any basic utility increase. they are living on fixed

incomes. they don't have the ability to deviate from those fixed incomes with discretionary income the way that maybe people who are more well off -- >> thank you. >> so we are very, very sensitive about what washington does and how it may impact those ratepayers. >> mr. myers, i am actually going to ask you another question. the electric system in the west is becoming more interconnected and what happens in washington state or california may affect arizona's ability to supply reliable and affordable power. can you briefly explain the governance issues with california, the grid operator, and how they harm grid operators in races like arizona or washington state and should western states rely on california to govern the grid? >> my personal opinion is we cannot. there is not a big appetite for allowing california to run in the day ahead market. california has supremacy clauses in their legislation or

privacy. so everything else has to be centered around california. if we have a problem they will make a change only if it benefits california. and that is a huge problem for us. we also do not believe in their governance structure. that they can regulate power. i mean just look at how much of a bang up job they have done keeping their own lights on. there are not too many lights are happy to hand over control of their power grid to that. >> okay. thank you. my time is expired. i will yield back. >> i now recognize the ranking member of the committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. hay, i want to address a discrepancy we have her between colorado's view on the epa rules and some of the other state represented here. i first wanted to touch on the epa's proposed powerplant emissions roll. in your testimony, you state that the head of colorado's

energy office provided comments to the epa that said even absent the rule, colorado for sees its utilities will be in compliance with proposed standards. for a state like colorado that is already on its way to meeting its own energy goals, can you talk about some of the benefits that colorado expects to see from the proposed epa rule? >> thank you, representative pallone. i think one of the biggest things that will benefit colorado this morning is more support for clean energy and carbon capture which again in our modeling other kinds of resources that will help us get further down that path to decarbonization and for us that technology support and driver in the epa rule, which, you know, as that comes into effect will help reduce the cost of those technologies is really a big benefit to the state. >> that i wanted to touch on your statement that colorado is well on the weight to touching energy targets without needing

the epa's roll. how do they show that even a business as usual situation sees a massive increase due to the cheaper cost of renewals relative to natural gas. >> thank you, representative. you know, the first step in that process has really been getting all of our utility to get to at least a 80% emissions reduction by 2030. they are all on track. they will get to about 86% renewable as they meet that pollution reduction requirement. so that study is really taking that next step from that high 80% range and looking out towards full decarbonization. and sell what we did in the model and as we looked at different scenarios and different pathways, but that business as usual case is really fascinating because we did not anticipate the result. what we got back from the modeling was that if we simply take what we are doing today and allow our existing gas fleet to transition to newer technologies for gas, put out

some older plans and bring on some newer plants, that that process gets us to about a 97% emissions reduction in state and a overall reduction of around 94%. so, really, the system that we have can help move us forward to get to those system requirements. >> i went to highlight a part of your testimony where you mentioned that colorado is convincing some of its utilities to participate in regional and what are the benefits if colorado utilities were to participate in these markets? >> thank you. and, yes. we do have a statutory requirement in colorado law called transmission utilities have to be organized in a wholesale market by 2030 unless there are findings that it is not in the public interest.

we have been participants in and helped conduct a number of studies. one partnership with the public utilities commission and one in partner with four other western states. all of the studies have suggested that there are hundreds of millions of dollars in financial benefits to customers from being able to share power across different parts of the western interconnect. those studies look at different footprints. and so really it starts with that financial benefit to customers. but secondarily it gives us the ability to access more renewable energy across the west and to share colorado's renewable energy was states that need it. >> all right. last thing. i wanted to ask about the grid resiliency funding that colorado received from the bipartisan infrastructure law. by my count, colorado utilities have received just over $25 million. can you talk about the importance of these awards to aid the work that colorado utilities are doing to mitigate the impact of wildfires and enhance reliability? >> i can and thank you again for the question. wildfires are an important part of what is happening in colorado. it is one of the leading things

that we are seeing as a significant impact on the climate crisis and so it is really important that our utilities be able to make investments really in three different areas. first of all, understanding what is the potential for wildfires and some of the funding will help them do things like advanced so monitoring and vegetation management. but also being able to respond more quickly on their system as wildfires are happening. so are they monitoring the grid and then are they able to actually move the electricity off that area of the grid onto another part so that we do not see outages? then the third piece is actually being able to put the grid back up into place as quickly as possible. colorado is a mountainous, rugged, rural state outside of the foot range. so the federal spore for our utilities has been really key. and i would like to highlight just one piece of that with holy cross energy who work with some of our rural electric cooperatives. those are often very small

electric utilities that serve very small areas. >> thank you so much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> we will now go to mr. guthrie. >> thank you, everybody, for being here. you know, the goal of all of this is to make sure that all of our constituents have sustainable, reliable, and importantly affordable access to energy. it completely changes the dynamics of people's lives and we have to make sure that it is there. it cannot just be dismissed how important it is for people to function. so for the epa's clean powerplant 2.0, it doubles down on the biden administration trust by requiring: gas generator to convert to hydrogen, reduce their operations, or even force premature retirement of those assets. it does things like hydrogen coal firing and strategies. these technologies are not commercially viable. so, could you talk about what measures your state, your

utility operators and power providers would have to do to comply with this rule and are you able to live with the timeline of the rules? so what would they have to do within the timeline? and what would this due to the cost of your repairs? >> thank you for the question. utilities in the state of georgia would be put between a rock and a hard place trying to determine whether or not they are going to serve customers at times when they are pinched for power. it is this dispatchable energy that is so necessary to ensuring we can provide continuous service. there's going to be a cost consideration of course to it, but then there is a long-term consideration to the reliability of the renewable resources. i recognize that hydrogen and battery storage systems are fine technologies, but they are very young. they are very new. they have not been tested. there has been a great deal of research. at the end of the day the

lights are on right now because the lights are on, not because research. so it is imperative to not just consider the cost implications of these decisions but also the long-term viability of the technologies explored. >> thank you. and chairman houston, you have a mile-wide river between most of us. so we have very much the same needs. and your growing energy needs. and what type of generation do you expect to be building your state over the next three years and why and can you talk about the risk and trade-off to customers for each type of generation you will consider? >> well, sure. the 20 year planning process for integrated resource plans gives us a window into what the utilities are looking at. and they model all resources. in fact, the general assembly passed a statute to include smrs as a clean energy resource but that is still a very technology and would not cost a very significant level at this point. think about modeling coal energy. they model nuclear. they model everything including

variations. refueling of existing power facilities. and as i stated, what we have done at the commission is try to maximize their look at optionality and flexibility. because the future is not known. we do not want science-fiction- type of aspirations to be part of it. we want facts. we won some technologies that are proven and can sustain, hopefully, a 20 year horizon and not have that depreciation schedules for shorter periods of time causing exploding rates. that is a long-winded answer for all of the above is what we try to encourage in ways that provide dispatchable, reliable, resilient, sustainable electricity into the future that meet our power needs and also is affordable. it is a very difficult

challenge. >> well, thank you. and you talk about these aspirational's. but when you put things into rules and so forth that are just not obtainable, an example is we just spent billions of dollars in the infrastructure bill or inflation reduction act on batteries, car batteries, to say all cars have to be electric -- acutely. two thirds of cars have to be electric by 2032 and that is just not doable. but they took the money so they did not really say that but now we are seeing that the battery complex is going to be about half of what it was supposed to be when they first took the money. and because you were just asking people to do things that were not possible, so commissioner pridemore, in your state, is your state widely affected by the decisions of other states? >> no. >> you are not affected by that at all? so you can do things to make your market structure more

secure? >> we are affected by the actions of the federal government and the state of georgia. >> so not the actions of other states around you. i yield back. >> the chairman yields back. we will now go to ms. fletcher for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. think to all of our witnesses for being here today. this is a really important hearing. i don't think i have to tell or explain to anyone here that texans know the importance of grid reliability all too well and we have our own set of challenges in texas from the devastating impacts of the winter storm a couple of years ago to record demand -- we had peak demand this summer that set new records. the reliability of our grid is critically important and people in our district across the state are worried about it. peak demand has now risen to -- i think it has risen by 5000 megawatt hours for each of the last three years and the rise and demand that we have seen over the last few years plus

the expected increase in demand going forward, especially as we see a lot of new things happening, it is just one of the greatest challenges for operators, i think, everywhere for ensuring reliability. tell in the last congress as mr. guthrie just mentioned, we did pass historic legislation that helps drive investment in all kinds of energy technologies and i am very much and all of the above energy person and i think we need to be doing all of these things in the inflation reduction act and chips and science act. we are investing in things that will lead to the developing of new technologies that can add to the energy mix. and we are seeing these developments. and new semiconductor manufacturing. industrial manufacturing. batteries. and battery storage. other energy components. and for the projects that are incentivized by these bills to succeed, we have to be able to power them. and i think one thing i would like to focus on with the time

is the greatest single impediment to bring a new generation online and that is the permitting process. we have heard a little bit about it already this morning from mr. myers, and at least my notes say that the average times that projects spent in the queue is a little less than that but has risen from 2.1 years to 3.7 years is between 2010 and 2021. so just in that decade. so in your testimony, you stated that your model shows a need for significant expansion of supply for a anticipated 40% increase in demand by 2040. under the current permitting structure, do you think that you will be able or that we will be able to deploy the needed generation given the permitting situation? >> thank you, representative fletcher. actually, that is one of the things in the colorado general assembly session that we are taking on. reform to state level. we want to make it easier for developers to come forward with

good, projects. to actually approve those projects. we think a similar streamlined process at the federal level would be really important to help make sure the pace and scale of development of wind and solar and other clean energy technologies is where we need it to be if we are going to come forward and really do a deep, deep decarbonization. >> thanks. i think that is an excellent point. i would love to hear from everybody on the panel. if you think there are things that we should be looking at at the federal level permitting reform ideas that congress should be looking at whether modeled on what you're doing in the state or elsewhere but that would be helpful for all of us. ms. pridemore? >> yes, ma'am. i would like to see meaningful pipeline permitting reform. access to natural gas is essential for my state's growth, and for industrial

customers, as well as residential customers who choose it for home heating. we continue to use gas as a dispatchable source on the electric side but accessible gas is essential for us and i would love to see more. >> right. mr. houston? and my next question was for you, too. maybe i can put them together. if you can talk about that and also answer this question because i have 54 seconds. you talked about the issues that the regulatory committee face for a carbon study in your testimony. and the difficulties in deploying new gas generation your transmission lines in your carbon storage generation. apart from granting privacy applications, how can epa approved the process in classic 6 permitting to make it easier for state utility regulatory commission to develop these plans and projects? so you have got kind of both and one question. >> let me start off the first question. indiana is in the intersection

of a whole lot of gas pipelines. we are blessed. we have got gas coming from texas. we have gas coming from louisiana. we have gas coming from you to come. we have the rocky mountain express gas line which now flows in different pipeline so access to gases not as acute a problem for either home use or for electric generation as it is elsewhere in the country. with respect to carbon capture and sequestration, is that what you're asking about -- we have one utility, duke energy, edwards port, which is the newest coal facility -- one of the newest in the country. it went operators shall in 2013. it actually rescinds death and burns gas at the same time. they did a study that came up with a prohibitive number. i don't know enough to be able to say exactly what we would need except for flexible tea. >> okay. i have gone over my time. if you have anything else to say i would love to submit it for the record and i will get

this question circulated to you all. thank you so much. >> yielding back. >> we recently slipped into law a sweeping climate package for our state really over lighting local control and all other things. and all the business people are extremely frustrated. it will accelerate retirements of baseload generation in favor of renewables with less capacity, seemingly ignoring concerns over reliability. now, the state government political somehow includes both moving to 100% clean electricity while also adding the demand of millions more ev's on our grid. trim in houston, identified

myself as one of the few regions at risk for resource shortfalls. demand for power is going up well generation is going down. we have all indicated we need more generation. how should states build in more flexibility for the electricity demand of the future? >> i think working together is one of the biggest ways to do that. there is a reason why we engage with my so directly now to that general administrative order that i mentioned. soliciting input, those guys are in charge of the grid from manitoba to the gulf of mexico. we are included in that and have states with different perspectives and different environmental goals but they need to move electrons around. and we need to understand as state commissioners exactly what is needed from them to do their job properly as well. we are not as independent as what tricia was talking about in georgia. we are interconnected and do rely on that connectivity. that is why we support

dispatchable characteristics being priced in ancillary services. that is why we look at scarcity pricing for delivering electrons when they are absolutely most needed. people talk about gas speaker plants and other kinds of peaking facilities as if they are not used because their utilization may only be 10% of the time but it is precisely at that point in time when you need it the most and you must have them. so and all of the above energy plan that includes the resources that has positive characteristics on the fuel side which is where nobles are, but dispatchable and spending on the reliable side is necessary to make sure that the grid does not go down per your observation. we want to make sure that we are a working partner in indiana and doing what we need to do, just as georgia is doing, in doing things ourselves and not over relying on the wholesale market, but

also where the wholesale market is capturing a pricing mechanism to deliver dispatchable electrons. >> i appreciate that. it is important. we have held hearings on this topic with fork and iso and now the public utility commission. with all these regulators, i think there's a false sense of security with everyone leaning on someone else. so to the whole panel briefly and succinctly, when the lights go out who really is at fault? my constituents want to know where the buck actually stops. ms. pridemore? >> number one, our utilities have an obligation -- number one, our utilities have an obligation to serve their customers. and so they are ultimately responsible but i will say we bring them twice year on winter

reliability and summary liability to make sure they have got the power needed and the resources needed to deliver peak load plus a reserve margin on a ongoing basis. >> i sure like ms. pridemore's answer. mr. hay? where does the buck stop? >> mr. representative, as everyone knows, i think people know i am not a regulator in the state of colorado but to our commission, they are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the system is reliable. >> okay. mr. myers? >> i am. >> okay. the book ends. i like that. we are now moving clean into the mix along with affordability and reliability. affordability. that is okay, that is generally environmental so the question i have, mr. houston, how do we, how do we make sure that we incorporate clean without damaging the other two? >> it is the obligation to serve customers.

and the companies have a responsibility to deliver it and we enforce that. we take it very seriously, that is why we do engagement on an ongoing basis and the reason our legislature has been at five pillars, three of which could be characterized as reliability, stability, resiliency, reliability, they all work together. >> my time has expired, but i certainly appreciate, ms. pridemore, it seems to be working. we are moving in that direction anyway, without the government mandating that. i yield back. >> i want to thank all of the witnesses for being here today. i think that we all agree that keeping the lights on is a huge priority. climate change is making that harder, with more intense and more extreme weather.

sacramento was battered by another atmospheric river that brought heavy rain and wind of over 65 miles per hour, and the storm knocked out power for thousands of my constituents. i really want to thank the local utilities companies who really worked quickly to restore power across the region, but moving forward, climate change will increase the likelihood of severe weather. more severe weather. mr. hey, how important is it for utilities and states to consider the impact of climate change when planning for the future? >> i would say it is absolutely essential, in two ways. in colorado we are already seeing changing weather as result of climate, and our winters are no longer as cold

as the used to be. our summer evenings are no longer as cool as they used to be and that is driving changes in the utility load. the second are the extreme weather events, whether it was the super storm a couple of years ago, our public utilities commission is requiring our utilities, as part of the process, to essentially stress test each of the different models they are running to make sure that our system is reliable, even under extreme situations. >> if the state utility ignores the impacts, and continues to operate as they have in the past, will that make the grid more reliable or less reliable? >> representative, i would say less reliable come the future is not going to be like the past. our utilities need to be planning differently. >> climate change is an emergency and we have to act like it is, that is why i am

calling on the epa to limit climate pollution. a strong national carbon pollution role is necessary for the transition to a clean energy economy. mr. hay, is that role feasible and can you explain how you expect utilities in the west to meet the proposed rule? >> in colorado we do not think that rule will have an impact in our state because we are already ahead. i think that colorado can provide a roadmap for a lot of western states, and how they can actually achieve decarbonizing . i would point to the model in colorado, where we set an emissions reduction target and we left it target neutral for trying to get there. i think that is largely what the epa rule does, if they want to look at the state level -- >> well, i am looking at my

utility, too, we have set the ambitious goal of being carbon zero by 2030. we could achieve that. innovation sometimes requires that we rethink how we have been approaching problems in the past. one response is using smart thermostats or managed charging of electric vehicles. mr. hay, can you explain how demand response can make the grid reliable while also saving the pairs more money we >> there is a moment in time where utilities need a resource. in some states, that is going to be a gas peak plant. to earlier comments, that unit of energy that you do not need to create is going to be your lowest unit available, that is what demand response provides, to rely on the customers, to reduce energy consumption and

be compensated for that. >> there are virtual powerplant technologies, with electric vehicles particularly being important, because they both use and store significant amounts of energy at different times. mr. hay, can you explain how that can provide energy to the grid without inconveniencing rate pairs? >> that is something that we are working on closely, with xcel energy, with coming down to the managed charging progress. you ensure that customers have the opportunity to basically tell the utilities how much of that battery needs to be there. the customer is then compensated for it. making sure that there is flexibility for the utility, but the decision-making needs to rest with the customer. >> i will go to mr. palmer.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. one of my main concerns is about , obviously, the grid, the liability. i was looking at a report from the midcontinent independent service operator and their concerns, despite importing, i want to say 3000 megawatts, still concerns about being able to adequately meet demand. mr. houston, do you have those concerns? >> as a matter of practice, they exchange electrons every day. sometimes in more acute situations than others. 6000, 6000 gigawatts being exchanged to support the needs of another rto. overall, as consumption and load grows, we need to make

sure that we have the proper resources in place and fulfill our responsibility that the grid itself is reliable. i do have concerns and that is the reason why we are soliciting direct input from the rto's on how they manage that and move those throughout the input. >> we have shut down so much of the hydrocarbon-based power and we are not replacing it at a fast enough rate. it reminds me of some of what might colleagues are advocating for, and taking down the power, in the state of washington, it comes from hydro. but when i ask them what they were going to replace it with, they could not give me an answer. it is like they think magically we are going to replace it, you cannot build anything in this country. >> three years at the bare

minimum to get something in the ground, you are right. >> permitting, lawsuits, and everything else, it sounds like they will be cooking over wood if they get rid of their dams. and the other issue, chairman brought it up, moving to nuclear and i know that georgia power, they have been building the vogel facility. i am a major proponent of small modular reactors i think that is the future of clean power. and it is also, one of the huge advantages is that you can recycle spent fuel. the director of our national nuclear laboratory was asked how long we could recycle spent fuel, he said over 100 years. i would like your response. because you have gone through what you have gone through, but

i really think the small modular units are really the future. >> thank you, for the question, sir. they show promise. but it is getting the first five to 10 bill. that is an area, as state regulators, we have looked at ways that the federal government could assist. >> on the permitting? >> just building the first five to 10 smrs, you will have the learning of the knowledge that comes from that construction. plant mobile, unit three, to get it to functional testing, we were able to take nine months out of the schedule, just to understand we were doing it the first time. that is an area where we could

assist. >> one of my major concerns is how grid liability is a national security issue. we talk about renewables, and with evs, and a reliance on batteries, mr. chairman, i did not, i did not bring this to the attention of the committee earlier, but if you look at battery manufacturing, china controls 69%, i tell people we do not make batteries, we assemble batteries so my concern here is, as we continue to shut down the power production and we try to move more to renewables we are creating a national security issue not only on our grid reliability. the single biggest threat is

changing the resource mix. how would you respond to that, mr. houston? >> as i tried to mention, having all of the above, which would include gas, which includes nuclear, which includes renewables, gives it diversification of the portfolio and a strength and a resiliency. the commodities, along with gas and coal, they fluctuate, and sometimes they trace each other, but if there is a problem with one, it would not necessarily be with another and that is where diversification comes in. the thought of having more nuclear, small module, coal, solar, gas, wind, all working together, probably strengthens us as a country. >> that figure about battery capacity, mr. chairman, that is for 2027.

>> i will now go here for five minutes. >> we need to utilize every tool possible to ensure our electricity system is reliable and can be clean, which i believe is both possible and necessary. it sounds like colorado is a great model for this, proving that states can make tremendous progress, proving that states need robust, long-term plans. success will include permitting and siting of new renewables, building energy storage, and expanding into regional structures, and once you have a strategy often overlooked in these discussions, it is energy efficiency. according to the agency, efficiency could be responsible for 40% of the greenhouse gas

reductions needed by 2040. mr. hay, is energy efficiency an important strategy for the achievement of colorado's clean energy goals? >> it is absolutely essential. going forward, as our studies suggest, it can meet anywhere up to 9% of our energy needs. as we see energy usage increasing, we can bend the curve a little bit with efficiency. a really important component that does not get talked about sometimes is what it can mean for customers, helping them reduce the energy bills, it really is an affordability component as well. >> can you say a little bit more about how reducing energy demand will improve overall system reliability? >> we are seeing more cars coming onto our electrical grid. we see more homes coming onto our electrical grid. we need to really make sure that the utilities are able to

balance and manage that system. we are seeing more consistent use over the hours of the day and days of the year, that growth, that flattening out, results in a downward trend for rates. we have seen that from one of our electric planning facilities. >> we have heard many states are projecting a resurgence in electrical demands, in large part due to manufacturing incentives enacted during the biden administration. mr. hay, how can demand response programs integrate these energy users without compromising reliability? >> if i may, i would highlight a slightly different story. we have a steel mill powered by one of the largest solar facilities in the united states, helping to produce green steel. demand response is an essential component, especially for large

, industrial customers. in colorado, we do it in a way that gives flexibility to the customer and utility to work together to help manage that load and i think that is an important part of that. we are not telling producers and manufacturers that you cannot have power when you need it. it is about having a program that works for both. >> mr. hay, your testimony mentioned building energy codes. what are the benefits of these latest codes? >> this is something we have done a lot of work on in the colorado energy office and it has multiple layers of benefits, from a climate and energy perspective, we are avoiding having to build new power plants and customers are not having to pay for those power plants. for customers, it means they have lower energy costs overall and frequently more comfortable homes. again, there is a benefit to all of the other customers. advanced energy codes are very important, one of the big pieces is, you start with a building

that needs less energy and going forward, you are really avoiding carbon emissions over the long term of the building. >> the inflation reduction act included significant tax credits and rebates. some of those will be administered by state energy resource offices. how is the colorado energy office informing residents about these new opportunities? >> thank you, representative. we have a team in our office working with local jurisdictions to help get the word out through local building officials. through our network of contractors, we are producing a website to help customers understand all the rebates and incentives they are eligible for. they are using multiple channels to get the word out that there really are opportunities. >> finally, i know that a lot of things have been said. downward states like new york

feel the effects of unregulated pollution. i yield back. >> i will now go to mr. bush on for five minutes. >> i apologize, i have another hearing upstairs. we are upstairs, are we upstairs? downstairs. mr. houston, your testimony illustrates the effectiveness of the strategies. i firmly believe we should be pursuing all of these things. energy policies do not need to be a zero sum game. solar, wind, coal, natural gas are traditional sources. we need a mix for the foreseeable future to balance out each other. the wind does not always blow. the sun does not always shine. coal and nuclear power nearly doubled on the national grid during the 2021 winter storm, when needed source the weather -dependent sources like wind

and solar were unavailable. in fairness, there were challenges from poorly winterized national -- natural gas sources that need to be corrected. in a hearing, last year, the senior vp of market services, identified the retirement of fossil fuel resources due to resources, outpacing construction of new, renewable sources. and we know that it provided the grid with stability for maintaining capacity during peak demand. frequency regulations, voltage control, and buffering against energy sources and the list goes on. your testimony echoed this concern, highlighting what was being passed on to the rate payers, given the rapid changes occurring with the retirement of these resources such as coal and gas, exacerbated by policies

reiterated in this room, do you believe these transformations are enhancing the grid's resilience? are we getting ahead of ourselves, making the grid more vulnerable? >> as the adoption of renewables increases, it increases the need for us to have the resources available to make up for when they are not available. and, so, that is the reason our energy, our utilities, are required to do integrated resource planning that anticipates in a probable way, how the future may unfold. with additional renewables, whether wind, solar, and fulfilling their obligation to serve customers simultaneously, one of the messages we had loud and clear, do not compromise on

service reliability. that is the reason why they passed five pillars, reliability, resiliency, stability, and all under the same umbrella to make sure that, as we approach the future, as hoosiers, we are doing it in a way that meets the needs of the future for a reliable system. >> i would agree with that. does the vulnerability, caused by generational uncertainty, lead to any cyber security concerns? >> there has been some discussion about demand response and aggregation, in some ways. and we have invited the fbi, homeland security, both at the state and national levels to brief us on multiple occasions, including having our investor of utilities appear up here, before us. one of the concerns expressed is not only the criminal conduct through ransomware and

all of those kind of things, but state actors who may be involved. and how down chain manufacturers , who supply energy products are protected. cybersecurity is incredibly important to grid reliability. and that is the reason why we pursue that modality in our commission. >> it is definitely on the radar in washington. vertical infrastructure, for example, which includes the energy sector, needs to be protected from cyber security threats. i have a few seconds left, so, how do state commissions manage divergent conditional policies? maybe we will see what mr. myers has to say about that. because the states are different. >> states are different. we had a lot of transmission interconnects and that is part

of our integrated resource planning. that is pretty much how we managed it. >> fair enough. mr. hay? quickly. >> we partner, you know, with some of our states but we maintain a regular dialogue across the western states. >> fair enough. i am out of time, unfortunately. >> the gentleman's time has expired and i will now go to ms. castro for five minutes. >> my colleagues would have us believe that the only way to achieve grid reliability is with dirty fossil fuels. i think that is dangerous and it is costly. the new scientific analysis finds that gas plants are particularly vulnerable to extreme weather events like heat waves and cold snaps, which are growing in severity, and frequency, cold weather

presents particular challenges. we saw the harsh conditions from the winter storm in 2021, and again in 2022, where gas plant failures occurred at disproportionate rates, relative to cleaner energy sources. in one case, over 240 people in texas perished. and it left families without power in freezing temperatures and bills skyrocketed. what are the grid vulnerabilities associated with gas plants. highlight how clean energy sources like wind, solar, and batteries help resiliency? >> in colorado, during winter storm yuri, our system was operational when the wind was blowing because we had appropriately winterized the plant and the same was true for gas infrastructure in colorado.

we did not experience the problems that other states did. the first part of that is important and accurate planning. to the earlier conversation about changing weather and changing climate, i think utilities and utility regulators need to be looking forward at the impacts of what future weather may be, rather than looking backwards, expecting that will tell us what the weather will look like. those are certainly two big components of that. with respect to the role of renewables, in colorado, you know, they performed when they were needed and they provided a reliable asset to our utilities. it has really been about the integration and the planning, and it allows them to project and forecast, very closely in time, when those s.

the 2021 winter sto explicitly mention the importance of fuel resource adequacy as essential parts of responding to future reliability events. we had brownouts in north dakota during that storm. that storm went from the canadian border to the gulf of mexico. shouldn't resource adequacy the foundational and the single most important decision in this conversation? >> it is to us. >> i yield back to >> i will go with dr. scheier for five minutes. >> inc. you, chairman duncan, and to all of our witnesses. i want to say a special thank you to the committee chairwoman, she has announced her retirement and it has been a pleasure to work with her. i am really glad that the majority called a hearing on grid reliability. in the northwest, we enjoyed an abundance of hydropower.

in addition to extreme weather and catastrophic wildfire that we associate with climate change, there will also be impacts to hydropower in washington state. the hydropower system is deeply integrated with the water cycle, rain, flowing rivers in the winter and spring, it is the melting snow from the mountains that gives us the consistent flows during the dry, hot summer months when the demand for energy spikes. climate change brings more rain and less snowpack. over the last 70 years, we have seen that snowpack shrink by a third and this will likely affect reliability, particularly in the summer months during these next decades. this committee has been sharing a lot of concerns about introducing new considerations and a presumed need for more

baseload energy resources, specifically nuclear energy, so, mr. hay, i was intrigued to see as colorado plants had increased reliability demands, your research has determined that along with clean energy and geothermal, solar wind and battery storage will be the best, most reliable, most economical solution. that will comprise the majority of your portfolio so i had two questions, one, it is a social one. in washington state there is resistance to installing solar and wind farms in rural areas to meet the rest of the state's needs, much of which is in large cities. how are you managing what i presume are similar social struggles in colorado and how can agricultural rural interests work together to get a favorable outcome for everybody ? >> thank you, representative.

like washington, colorado has a large rural population and a large rural land area. that is where many of our best wind and solar resources are. our load centers are the big cities, denver, colorado springs, fort collins. you know? one of the things we have done in our energy office is partnered with the department of agriculture to look at a case program to really work with farmers to help them understand that it is not renewables or farming. it is really doing both on your land. there is a long-term benefit. the same is true of wind. really making sure that the land owners understand the benefits and being able to work and partner with them. that is the biggest part of it. >> thank you, i appreciate that answer. i was also intrigued by your discussion of the 100-hour air

batteries. another concern we have shared, traditional lithium batteries, we rely too much on china for materials. and that is a precarious state to be in. this emerging technology sounds very made in america. i was wondering if you could comment a little bit about that, if you know the technology and what else is required. i do not mean to put you on the spot at that is not your expertise. >> thank you, representative. i would have to get back to you. i am not a battery chemist. it is important that our largest utility is coming forward 100 h air batteries, the chemistry of that, i could not explain today. >> thank you. i did a quick google search, it sounds like the do not require commentary thing just wait five or six years from now, we will

have different technologies for batteries which i found ensuring as well. i have 30 seconds left. can you talk about the importance of interstate transmission, looking at the map of the u.s., there's a lot of benefit to regional plans. i know you are not representing rto or iso, but if you could speak to how that would help colorado. >> with a lot of studies looking at colorado in our market in the west, and there are a couple layers of benefit. one is economic and the other is the ability to move clean power that comes with climate. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you for being here. my first question is for mr. myers. in the coming years, states and utilities are expected to make substantial investments in energy infrastructure to ensure reliability. this is especially true in

states like ohio and your home state of arizona, seeing significant increase in demand for data centers and semiconductor manufacturing. some of these investments might be insufficient or unnecessary. as a state commissioner, how do you evaluate this project to make sure you can balance that with relying on the market? >> that's an excellent question. as a regulator, we go through a process. it's a 10 year forecast or outlook with a five- year action plan and we have them come in every three years. that is when we look at what is up coming and what we should be focusing on. right now it's difficult because as we have talked about are liable generations going away, there is no good reliable generation to replace it. we are active in market as you pointed out. we are actively

looking at these markets but as far as energy generation, we need to be able to cover that and that the resource adequacy requirement and everyone needs to make sure that they have their own generation, so we have to bring that to the table to join the market and it is a difficult decision. we are in that transition where we would love to see michael nuclear or hydrogen and they are too long at this point. >> would you like to follow up on that? >> i agree with mr. myers. there's a lot of options on the table and available to us in the future. what's important is the speed at which we them -- deploy those. so that we don't overly burden

customers. >> i am concerned that sometimes when we discussed new transmission development, certain regions, this is to pursue, to absorb costs and if they don't benefit from that transmission. it's a large radius, and at what cost? >> indiana,, the proximity of transmission is key to them and they have to be close to transmission. their competitiveness, they

would not be able to do it. that's the reason indiana gets a lot of solar or wind, because we do have a significant amount of transition. the concern is difference between rto's operating. if they are going to be repowering or reusing. if they're going to change their generation, and that is something that is being worked on currently. i'm not sure if that answers your question but i do have concerns about the processes. >> thank you. i will let mr. myers go first. do you have concerns with neighboring states creating a no stick renewals, portfolio standards, knowing they can

rely on resources from other states? >> that's a concern especially with our neighbor to the west and this goes back to the resource adequacy planning where we want to make sure that if we do join in market that all the resource adequacy calculations are consistent amongst the states to be counted the same. in our planning. >> mr. houston? >> our neighbor to the west has an ambitious goal, as well and it serves as an economic development incentive tool. we allow businesses to self generate any kind of way they want to. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you to all of you . for states that have set deliberate clean energy goals, public service commissions play a powerful role in advancing policies that foster sustainable and reliable energy. this is true in colorado and

it's certainly true in states like maryland in this market. marilyn has set some of the most aggressive were noble goals in the country but these will not be realized that a holistic and practice approached energy generation, storage, and transmission. they are slated to retire in the coming years. the brand ensures power plant located in my district and its operator announced it would shatter the plant in 2025, so that is coming, obviously very quickly. maryland is relying on the mid atlantic regional transmission officer for grid operation and management and the response to the news of disclosure has been to issue a reliability must run agreement while it works to complete nearly $800 million in transmission upgrades to compensate for the plants power.

as maryland's energy mix moves away from fossil fuels, ungrateful -- i am grateful that the public commission services pushing to consider options. i am very impressed by this study, the colorado energy office has been conducted to modify your seat -- state can be productive energy needs. could you share your main takeaways from that exercise, and i am particularly interested to learn more about what you have concluded with the role of batter infrastructure in your state as an addition to the renewable energy transmission about, batteries can be a key element of maintaining reliability in our state. >> thank you. i would say that the biggest take away is decarbonization, that there are multiple pathways to get there. it's important to us that the business usual approach then

gets as to a 94% emissions reduction and getting to a fully d carbonized electrical grid, the best way to do that according to our analysis, is set at target and in colorado, we use a resource planning process which requires them to do competitive procurement. we use that market to influence the overall cost of getting to that level of decarbonization. i do not want to miss the importance of energy efficiency, which we talked about. that's a key piece of benefiting not just the grid but customers and helping them lower and control their energy cost. it's a big piece of that affordability question. >> what about battery infrastructure in particular? >> every scenario we look at had a large investment in batteries and different types of batteries from two hours to 100 hour batteries. that's actually come forward in our most recent resource planning process with the

largest utility. we have every confidence that those batteries will be there when necessary. >> the study shows forethought of the kind i would like to see to maintain our grids reliability, for ratepayers for the upcoming retirement. as we make these transitions, we have to keep the average citizen first and foremost in our minds. this will be essential to minimizing costs and greater resilience. that is why we is so focused. thank you. i yield back. >> now we will go to mr. pflueger for five minutes. >> thank you.

we had a lot of discussions about the pillars. most important pillar, the single most important one you consider? >> reliability. >> we are not allowed to rank them, but three of the five are related to reliability. >> mr. hey? >> we don't rank them but certainly reliability is important. >> i was elected on a ranking and its reliability. >> this is rare, for us to have bipartisan agreement on these. i want to talk about that because resource adequacy is a national security level importance. you said there will be a 40% increase in demand for electricity. does anybody have a different, or about the same across the board? >> we do not have any forecast to indicate that kind of increase. i apologize, and giving you a

long answer, but even with electrification, that the great unknown. we have a lot of reliance on gas for home heating and that is what consumers choose the home heating would be one but we are not paying the shift in transportation. >> federal policies affect resource adequacy and the resources we will have to supply a 40% increase in colorado or in states that are represented. >> definitely. when you consider that the federal policies being proposed right now, such as those with the epa, they will dramatically limit my accessibility to have my utilities used dispatch of all energy sources like natural gas. that takes away those elements out of my diversified mix and definitely jeopardizes reliability. it almost certainly increases costs for customers. it >> one of the pillars you have

not mentioned and i would not expect you to is geopolitical. energy as a geopolitical tool of national security. the ministration has announced a ban at export which is an adequacy problem. what i want to talk about, do you agree when he said the renewable energy is not baseload capable? >> what i would say is that there really is a way to manage our system. the study demonstrates the least cost pathway at about 40%. >> colorado is lucky, it is windy. i do not use this word, i believe in best of the above, so i don't use this term. you should use wind.

in your testimony, you are going to a 2% by 2040 gas powered, gas driven electrical grid bid you're not reducing the capacity of your gas. i'm not following on, you are going to depend on 90% even though 66% is serviced by other than renewable energy. how are you going to get to 2% but keep that capacity? >> that's not actually state policy. that's the economics of gas compared to the high cost. the modeling says that when you look at the best pathway, you keep the past -- the gas unit, but there's so much more expensive. >> how do you avoid what germany has done, which is

going backwards? they thought they transition and realize they weren't. could you accomplish a plan without federal subsidies? >> that's why we did the planning we are doing. there are multiple pathways that demonstrate that we can have a d carbonized. bid we have business as usual, six different scenarios that look at a range of technology options. >> can you get there without federal subsidies? >> i don't know that any utility in the country is able to supply electricity to its customers with those subsidies. we subsidize the nobles, it's a

question of which subsidies we want going forward. >> the time has expired and categorically disagree with the statement made by one of my colleagues about what happened in texas. it was not a failure of gas, but decisions that led to subsequent reactions and effects that prevented gas infrastructure. i yield back. like if i may correct the record, the ministration has not announced a ban on these exports. >> the general recognize mr. griffith. >> that wasn't where i was going, but here we go. the gentle lady is correct. the administration did not announce a ban on these exports. the announce they would not allow any new permits, which in essence, shuts down all the potential because everybody's afraid to go forward with these products or projects, whether it be facilities to export

pipelines export, et cetera. the gentle lady is correct on one part, but future lng gas is coming to a quick cult because of the announcement and it's not actual policy yet and hopefully there will be a more refined statement to come. let me get back to where i was going. to chairman houston, commissioner myers, and commissioner pridemore, the powerplant 2.0 could retire many generating units permanently, or, excuse me, prematurely. would you agree that the increasing amounts of dispatch bowl generation and environmental regulations are making a request for powerplant operation waivers more and more likely, yes or no? >> yes. >> probably. >> okay. >> again, do you believe that the 90 day as needed waivers

are the best approach to ensuring reliability? >> no. >> now, the loaded question. what do you think is better for the 90 day waiver? >> no plan at all. >> take the rollback. >> take the rollback, get rid of the restrictions in the first place. >> i want to be fair, what do you think? >> as my comments say, representative, in colorado, we are already ahead of the curve but i think that the rule is one that colorado can certainly succeed under. >> but if there is a significant number of states that can, you recognize that create a problem for us in congress, trying to look out for the interest of the nation. would you not agree?

>> what i would suggest to you, representative, is the study we conducted lays out multiple pathways for states to look at sets of resources that can help them achieve decarbonization but while there are some states today that have concerns that they cannot do it given the way they are doing planning, our modeling suggests that if you do plan incorrectly, you can achieve those targets. >> i have a concern over an economically stressed area on household income. i am above 400 out of 435 congressional districts in the united states. here's what happens when we start down this path toward all these new ideas. if you are living in the big city and you are in one of those are areas, maybe it's not that big a chunk of your budget. in my district, we are getting lots of letters

because this winter, the rates went up significantly and while the average might only be $35 a month, it's hurting folks because they don't have that $35 a month. when you are, your household, your average household for the district income is right at 50,000, $35 a month when you are trying to pay for everything else, that's very difficult. all of these policies have made our electric rate go up and there's no question about that. ms. pridemore, i see you nodding. do you agree? >> yes, sir. >> mr. houston? >> yes. >> mr. myers, thank you. i appreciate that. i'm getting close to the end of my time and i probably got on my high horse and am running out of time to ask significant questions. i appreciate you all being here, but sometimes people just have to say, you know, this may work

for rich folks but that's not who i represent. i yield back. >> thank you. i am glad that we are having this hearing, today. i think that all of you guys know that in texas, we are trying to figure out how we are going to maintain a safe, secure, reliable grid on the growth we are having. we are having unprecedented growth. i think i saw a report a couple weeks ago that said that texas is on pace, after the next census, to add six new congressional districts which means our state is growing more rapidly than any other area and it has been that way and as we've had gross, we've had extreme weather, like other places have that have not experienced growth in between record-setting heat, extreme cold, crypto, mining, calling

texas home, we are seeing a rapid increase in low growth and that is probably going to continue into the foreseeable future. we are lucky that this is paired with strong growth and renewable capacity. we've seen a 50% increase from 2018 until 2023. even so, we continue to push the grid to the brink of blackout. our failure to invest in grid infrastructure is a threat to our economic national security and everything we are trying to accomplish as we continue to add more people to our state. i have a question for all of you. recent studies indicate that the expanding and modernizing transmission grid in just the eastern u.s. would unleash about $7.8 trillion in investment and generate more than $6 million net new jobs. do you agree that the

transmission buildout creates domestic, good paying union jobs in the planning and engineering phase as well as construction and long-term operation and maintenance jobs? anyone can answer. >> yes, sir. i agree with your statement and as a state that just finished the largest -- the largest construction project in the country, there are 7000 folks on site and i can tell you that it's made a significant difference. i don't believe we should build transmission infrastructure just to create jobs. i believe we build transmission infrastructure to be able to transmit essential power to provide a more reliable system. >> i would agree. transmission by itself is not a reason to invest, it's to deliver electricity and the electrons necessary to make the system work on a 24 seven -- 24/7, 365

basis. >> the texas energy fund is the latest in a long line of changes in the wake of blackout and provides loans up to 60% of the total capital cost for new or extended power plants. what considerations would you give to existing natural gas generators as they work to implement the texas energy fund? does anyone want to -- >> thank you. i still clear of telling my fellow regulators how to run regulation in their states. >> texas is a very unique situation. they have 8% low growth per year and it's unusual. we look at 1% low growth generally gets offset by energy efficiency and $10 million, which is what that fund, i think a low interest loan

program is going to be, it would be almost half of our state budget. >> yeah. i have a question for everybody , the nations transmission grid is subject to thousands of sophisticated cyber attacks including from hostile foreign nations every day. what steps are your states taking to modernize and protect the grid and how much responsibility do you think the federal government bears for high-capacity transmission lines? i would love your thoughts on that. >> i would love to see the federal government more active in informing state and what they are doing to prevent cyber attacks from foreign enemies. when you look at the things outside of my control as a state regulator, that's one of them. >> when former vice president mike pence was governor of indiana, he initiated the governor's task force on cyber security. it's been perpetuated by the exceeding governor as well with the interest in not

just energy delivery, but all sectors. the fbi, the justice department, and other federal entities are the critical participants in all of exchange and to be able to exchange data about threat risks, whether they are criminal or state actors. >> thank you. >> time is expired. i will go to mr. allen for five minutes. >> let me get this thing on. there we go. thank you for allowing me to waive on this discussion. i want to say thank you to our witnesses, to commissioner brett moore, for testifying today. great to have a georgia commissioner here to discuss our public utility model, which is working very well and i am proud the state of georgia is leading the way in innovation for supplying constituents with affordable energy, not only that

, but that georgia has, for the past 11 or 12 years, been number one state to do business in that, and that requires a lot of resources, particularly, energy and affordable energy. to meet the need of our constituents and businesses, we got to support the above energy strategy. this means utilizing a diverse set of energy resources. commissioner, he talked about units three and four. these are the first units built in over 30 years. almost in the state of georgia and i believe it could come online very soon. can you explain why the georgia public commission supported,

it's been 30 years, so we want to build two new units and why it was important to the energy grid. >> thank you. good to see you. this represents a turning point for our state. it provides our state with energy security, it provides and sends a market signal to nations and other states and businesses looking to relocate. it tells the world that we put a premium on energy. carbon free, 24 seven -- 24/7, it sends a signal to the world that we are willing to take on hard and difficult tasks not only for the benefit of our state but for the benefit of our country. our nation has everything we need to be energy independent and energy secure. we continue to put barriers up

that preclude us from being able to have that reality and i welcome the opportunity to meet with you and share our point of view in georgia. we are proud of this work. we are now -- when i look at solar, each has its place in the portfolio, it's a 20 year ppa with a limited asset. i am still in the recent stages of figuring out my retirement policy for solar and how that is to be managed. there are so many factors to consider. >> what you do things, >> is there an equivalent to a 24/7 generation, that you are

going to be in operation? >> it costs once you get the capital cost to operate? that is some of the cleanest and most reliable, most efficient energy you can produce. >> yes. >> good. >> many states have chosen to deregulate their electric utilities. i am not here to question his choices, but from my vantage point, that's not the right choice for the states of georgia or in the southeast. the states that elected retail choice seem to be struggling the most when it comes to reliability. so, what is the value of utilities remaining vertically integrated and the risk of deregulation for customers in georgia? >> our vertically integrated system with 41 emcs, 49 municipal and one vertically

integrated utility provides us with little to no redundancy of that and we still have rates that are up to 10% below the national average. it gives us a scale that is unmatched in any rto or iso state. we also have the ability through the southeastern exchange market to be able to help export and help our neighbors and they need it and import when we need to help ourselves. >> right. great to see you, and thank you for what you are doing in georgia. i yield back. >> to mr. carter from georgia, five minutes. i thank you. i appreciate the opportunity . as you are well aware, and very proud of the state of georgia. i know you are one of many who wish you lived in the state of georgia, but nonetheless -- >> the gentleman's words need to be taken down.

>> i am especially, i appreciate all of you being here but i'm especially glad to see you, commissioner. i appreciate your work on the public service commission and i appreciate everything you all do. we've known each other many years and i appreciate all your work in the state of georgia. i'm very proud of the state of georgia and the fact that we are the number one state in which to do business for the 11th year in a row, and there's a reason for that. one of the reasons is because we've got reliable, affordable energy. we've done that but we are number six. we've got a lot to be prodded in georgia. we have a lot of sunshine and we take advantage of that. as you have been talking about with my colleague from the state of georgia, nuclear. the first nuclear reactors built in 30 years, right there in our state. this shows the kind of foresight that our commissioners have done such an outstanding job of. thank you.

that's one of the primary reasons we are able to be the number one state in which to do business but let me ask you. as you know, we got the single largest economic development project in the history of our state in my district, the $5.5 billion investment that will create 8100 jobs, probably that much more of an investment in the ancillary business and probably not much more jobs. we have to prepare for that. what can congress do, what can we do to help utilities plan for this kind of growth? >> congress can first rain in the epa. i think that's essential and i know we've talked about that for many hours, today. georgia, to your point, and it's always good to see you, mr. carter, we lead through innovation. we are very methodical, we are conservative in our approach, we are proud of what's

happening with sunday in the ev plant in your district. it represents an enormous opportunity not only for our state but for the electric vehicle market in our country. we are still in the position to route natural gas into pipeline expansions to give them the necessary infrastructure they need. it goes back to the all of the above approach that is essential and anything this congress can deal to help us build more gas, natural gas pipelines, and to rein in some of these policies coming out of the federal agencies that are limiting be there limiting my ability to generate. they are putting unnecessary burdens on the backs of ratepayers, and they are certainly limiting innovation. >> i got a number of letters from you about just that, the fact that we need more access to natural gas and the

restrictions that have been laid upon natural gas export, which i think are just awful, shortsighted for our economic development in this country, and for the environmental impact, worldwide, that it will have. we have clean, natural gas, cleaner natural gas than anywhere else. we should be doing the opposite of what we are doing. i often want to make sure that i mention that because i think that what you touched on was the regulatory process, the permitting process. i had the opportunity last year to travel to houston on three different occasions. every time i was there it was the same thing. regulations, permitting, crushing us. that is what we need to be doing. one more question, commissioner pridemore. do you feel like you understand the energy generation and transmission needs of citizens

in georgia more so than a bureaucrat in washington, d.c.? >> yes, sir, beyond a shadow of doubt. >> i agree. thank you for being here. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back and that will conclude the hearing. i want to thank all of our witnesses were being here, today. members may have additional questions. i know that ms. fletcher mentioned that, and for all of you i will remind members that they attend business days to submit additional questions and ask witnesses to do their best to submit responses within 10 business days upon receiving the questions. the documents are included on the staff hearing document list and without objection, that is the order and without objection, the subcommittee will stand adjourned. >> thank you.

>> i will see you in january. >> are you doing okay? >> i think so. >> how are you doing? >> thank you.

and it allows them to project and forecast, very closely in time, when those resources will be available. >> commissioner pridemore, your testimony caught my eye. and it, you claim, a utility, say in this case, georgia power, if they violate the law or an epa rule, quote, customers are left to pay for the fines and any resulting costs from legal actions. now, that strikes me as a

strange statement coming from a public utility commissioner. because the commission besides whether or not it is appropriate for georgians to pay those costs on their power bill. it is not something that is guaranteed. it is a choice that you and the utility commission would have to decide. why do you think it is appropriate for georgians to pay the cost of georgia power's lawsuits? why should the utility be able to challenge the law of using rate payer dollars and fund the lobbying and medical expenses? >> in the state of georgia, georgia power has the legal right to seek recovery of the cost of operating their business, including lawsuits and the related costs for lawsuits, especially those

brought up by unnecessary government actions. >> there have been a rash of scandals all across the country everyone in the utility business understand what has happened in ohio, with first energy, florida power & light, in my home state, they were funding political consultants to fund ghost candidates to challenge legislative critics. illinois, new york, national fuel, michigan. and now, in georgia, the parent company of georgia power has been actively engaged in lobbying against new transmission lines and other cleaner, cheaper energy sources. southern energy spent 101 $91 million from 2015 to 2020 alone far more than other utilities. has the georgia public service commission approved that for

other political activities? >> as much as i can see, from the issues that have happened, that is not the reality that i have found in georgia. >> did your commission approve those? answer for the record because i am running out of time. many people do not think that is fair. and it is costing -- causing electric bills to go sky high. >> your time has expired. >> i filed the ethics in energy act and i would like you to comment on the record with the follow-up cost. >> your time has expired. i will go to ms. blasko for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i really want to thank commissioner myers, from arizona, for coming here and representing our great state of

arizona and for all of your great work. i think it is very common sense work that you do, to benefit the arizona rate payers. i also want to recognize your daughter, zoe, sitting behind you. yay, zoe! it is great that you get to visit with your dad and learn about all of these great things and hopefully will see some sites in washington, d.c. and have a little bit of fun. mr. myers, in your written testimony, you said your priorities, in this order are grid reliability, rate payer affordability, and cleaner technologies. and i want to say that i totally agree with your priorities. the arizona corporation took steps to dialback some of the costly renewable energy standards and tariff roles that were going on since 2006, i think. hopefully this will be a model for other states to follow

because of our reasonable approaches in arizona, we have been a magnet for new businesses coming to our state. many of these businesses are fleeing california due to their single priority which is 100% renewable energy. california is actively against policies that are affordable and reliable. the average residential utility bill in arizona is $138 per month. we have very hot summers so our usage is much higher to keep people cool, however, if we had the same rates as california, the average bill would increase to $274 per month, doubling the cost. i am working on draft residence relations -- regulations, so i am interested in your views.

my first question for mr. myers is, the epa's powerplant proposal effectively requires carbon capture and storage for clean hydrogen, to commercially unproven technologies, to reduce carbon emissions by 90%. since these technologies are unproven, can you discuss the potential reliability problems the epa's proposal would create for arizona? >> absolutely. thank you for the question. one of our utilities used the words aspirational and unproven. that is exactly what it is. those technologies are so much in their infancy, they are extremely expensive. the timeline is extremely rushed . and there is no infrastructure in place to handle any of those technologies. we have power plants outside, they are kind of out in the

rural areas. you cannot pipe hydrogen long distances. you have to convert it to ammonia and then by the back. there is no infrastructure in place to handle any of that. it would absolutely increase costs, dramatically, to arizona utilities, if we had to do that. might accelerate the closure of certain plants because of these requirements. the dates on them, i believe, are carbon capture, it would have to be installed by 2030. and hydrogen blending would have to be 2032. those are extremely accelerated dates and it might end up changing the timeline of our reliable energy shutdown, so that ends up being a reliability problem for us. >> thank you very much for the answer. ms. pridemore, i believe that you wanted to talk about the last statement from my democratic colleague so i will give you the chance to do that. >> thank you, congresswoman

lesko. i do not want to correct any member of the committee. but the question was relative to the holding company. i regulate one of the operating companies. the activities are not regulated and certainly not being undermined, they are not under my authority. >> in the few seconds i have left, commissioner myers, can you discuss how the natural gas system contributes to the reliability over all of the energy system? >> natural gas is our dispatch able, reliable energy. without that, we have no backup and the sun does not shine. the batteries are simply not there. for as much battery storage as we have, it is only two to four hours, tops, we have one utility waiting. supply chain issue is a big deal. the only option that we have

right now is natural gas to our reliable backup. >> thank you very much. i yield back. >> i will now recognize representative tardiness. >> i appreciate these witnesses sharing their expertise and opinions on this matter, the importance and value of a reliable power grid is undeniable. every day, 340 million americans rely on you to keep the power on. and energy remains vertical. unfortunately, it is also undeniable that the energy system is facing complex, evolving challenges, putting reliability at risk. preserving access to reliable electricity should be a top priority for all of us. since we are seeing crisis -level heat waves, having reliable air conditioning can quickly become a matter of life

and death. multiple studies, including the national transmission needs study have indicated that within regions and interregional transmission capacity, there will be the largest benefit for reliability. mr. hay, you stated in your testimony that accelerating the buildout of interregional transmissions is key to minimizing costs and increasing the reliability and resiliency of the grid. can you expand my interregional transmission is necessary to ensure grid reliability, particularly throughout extreme weather events? >> one way to think about that, if you have a grid that is bigger than the weather system, then you have those renewable sources outside of that impacted area that are then able to supply those resources back into the community. building up that interregional

transmission, we can get to a grid, hopefully, that is better and bigger than the weather system. >> in my district, reliability is not the only priority. for environmental justice communities, it is also a public health imperative to reduce emissions that pollute our communities. luckily, reports have indicated that utilities already have the tools to both cut carbon pollution and maintain reliability. there is also evidence that transmission can help move fossil fuel plants out of environmental justice communities that are already overburdened by pollution. given that many aging plants are going off-line can you explain the role grid modernization will play in making it accessible to such communities? >> thank you, representative.

that is important to the state of colorado and partially why, in this legislation, we are working on both the distribution grid and the transmission grid. as we think about grid modernization, by getting a 21st century grid, we make it possible to build more renewable energy and clean energy. giving communities rooftop solar to what we call disproportionately impacted communities is something we are looking at. that is a statutory term in colorado and making sure that we have a robust distribution grid so that we can build out to where those renewable resources are. one of the things we did in colorado that could be a model, we have enabled one of our utilities to build a system, in advance of actually having a generator. we can hook up those renewables to match up with the timing we have for need looking at both the distribution and transmission system will be key . >> thank you. interregional transmission is an important opportunity to better support our communities,

so is supporting local clean energy products and micro grids. democrats delivered an historic $10.5 billion for resiliency, reliability, and flexibility projects. mr. hay, can you discuss how this funding will empower communities to develop micro grids and how it will promote reliability and resiliency? >> we are working to actually stand up a grant program for some of our cooperatives. it is helping them to actually develop an understanding of what micro grids are with effectively stealing the ground to build those micro grids. it allows the communities to have power with the larger grid is otherwise unavailable perhaps due to an extreme weather event. it allows us to continue to provide power within that community. >> our world dependent on

fossil fuels far too much when it comes to power and power generation. luckily, today, we have technology, as long as we have the will to integrate a better system that is more integrated with better sources of power. i think we could have a better world. with my time expired, i yield back. >> i now go to mr. pence for five minutes. >> thank you, witnesses, for being here today. i would like to welcome chairman houston of indiana's utility regulatory commission, who is actually the 6th district director in his life. he knows even more about my district than i do. chairman houston has served since being appointed by my brother, governor mike pence, and solving these reliable -- reliability issues. as chairman houston well knows, indiana is a state that works, we have a business-friendly

state government and state agencies who work prudently with industry to meet common goals of affordable, reliable, and safe energy for all users. importantly we have implemented framework for our energy policies that the chairman mentioned. the pillars are protect reliability, resilience, stability, and environmental sustainability. i have heard from my peers on the other side that the technology exists to do all of those things. i disagree. the many hearings have shown that the technology does not exist. it is merely theoretical. our approach has been inhibited by the onslaught of regulatory actions by the

biden administration. at every turn, this administration makes it harder to produce, distribute, and use our nation's energy resources. as i have stated in this committee many times before, our nation is on a path toward catastrophic failures in the energy industry. fortunately, the results of this misguided approach to the administration will be born onto the consumer with higher prices and fewer economic opportunities for business, as the chairman stated in his opening remarks. decisions and their impact on our grid are not overnight decisions. these affect long-term investments and could take years to fully realize. in richmond, indiana, our operation operates whitewater valley station, that you and i talked about a little early. it is in the pgm footprint, coming over to richmond, as well.

it only operates 10% of the year, they have previously received exemptions from guideline requirements. during the two-degree and 1 degree above zero, for about two weeks, it was fired up providing heat and electricity to the houses in my district. for whitewater valley station, running on slim margins, these exemptions are critically important. the epa is re-imposing these regulations. whitewater station's retirement timeline is being accelerated by a number of years. mr. houston, can you speak to the role of dispatcher will peak are plants, for reliability in our home state of indiana? >> thank you, congressman they have a reliable, substantial role in the delivery of

electricity. as you stated, in this facility, it might only be used 10% of the time. but it is the 10% of the time what it is most necessary. i think one of the other members talked about vulnerable population. weather in the winter or summer months, typically, peaker plants operate more in the summer months, you want those vulnerable populations to have the air conditioning that they need when power is at its scarcest. the systems that are built in our state and elsewhere, are billed to meet peak load and have reserve margins, those facilities are part of that matrix. it is important to have peaking facilities available, to meet those circumstances, whether it is in the winter or the summer, when they are most needed. >> thank you for that and i

appreciate you pointing that out. we have lots of windmills and solar panels in the district. >> close to richmond, indiana, there are abundantly rich windmills in randolph county and north in jade county as well, and they interconnect. they are all in that strike zone of northern indiana, with wind at 50' above grant is optimal. >> it would have been a catastrophe. >> that is exactly right, that is the role that peaking plants often play. as the grid changes, those peaking plants may be called upon more frequently than what they have been in the past. >> thank you, sir. i yield back in >> the gentleman's time has expired. i will go to ms. custer for five minutes. >> thank you for hosting this meeting. last month, 45 major companies,

best buy, ebay, general motors, and walmart wrote to the federal regulatory commission, urging the commission to finalize the pending regional transmission planning rulemaking to, quote, lower customer costs, modernize our grid to meet growing demand across the country, so that the united states is in a position to capture innovation, growth, and jobs. these electricity buyers know that our electricity system is literally the backbone of the economy in this nation. mr. hay, my first question is to you. do you believe that our electric transmissions system is keeping pace with the significant demand growth that we are seeing, from manufacturing in the united states, and the electrification of the trepidation and residential sectors? >> looking up from 2030 to 2040, thinking about the fact

that that will lead, in colorado , to something close to a 40% electricity need one of the things that we did, this year, legislatively, we are looking at building out the 21st century grid of the future. and to accelerated permitting and do permitting reform on the transmission grid. those are both places where the federal government can and should step in to support the states looking to do that. because we are all going need to invest in our transmission architecture to keep pace with manufacturing and the levels of electrification that are coming. >> i agree. turning now to energy markets, i am a proud capitalist. i believe competition improves quality and lowers prices. and that is why i was so surprised throughout the hearing beer some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle bemoan competition in

electricity markets. before we introduce competition into the electricity markets in the '90s and the 2000s, the electricity systems of states were regulated monopolies. this meant that consumers were forced to pay whatever the price was set by the utility and approved by the state regulators and we have been through this, in new hampshire, with very high costs. competitive markets, by the way were a bipartisan idea, have broken up these monopolies in many parts of the country, enabling electricity consumers to enjoy the benefits of competition, lower prices, more reliability and efficient investment. in monopoly markets, and i look to the state of georgia, consumers end up on the hook for supposedly prudent investments, even when there are significant cost overruns. the nuclear reactors three and four offer good examples.

after unprecedented delays, this year, the georgia public utility commission has approved nearly $10 million -- billion, in costs associated with the cost going into the georgia and electricity bills. electricity bills are going to be increasing $168 per year to pay for this construction. ms. pridemore, it is puzzling that your testimony complains about epa regulations but makes no mention of the price tag of plant vogtle, what price tag can you offer to other regulators, to learn from the vogtle experience and avoid similarly costly mistakes that will be taken on by consumers? >> i want to clarify the cost

considerations for vogtle. back in december, the commission approved a $7.7 billion final price of the project, and that was starting to appear in customer rates in the january bill and we are very proud of the 60-80-your asset that vogtle will be. >> what impact on consumers? >> we had a $3.17 per month impact from unit three and a total bill impact of just over $12. that include -- >> what happened with the cost overruns? >> we reached a stipulated agreement over exactly what the customer would pay and exactly what georgia power would cover in their costs. the shareholders of georgia power, they absorbed some of the costs as well. >> you know what the total cost overruns work?

>> i don't have it in front of me, we did vogtle construction monitoring in cases where we provided a very transparent, public format and everything happening on site with the project. earlier when i was asked about smrs, that is one of the pieces of advice i have two other states looking at nuclear. the importance of having a transparent, long scale process, monitoring the construction, not only from the time in scheduling standpoint, but also from cost considerations. >> from a state that had a nuclear project going on at the same time as plant vogtle, rate payers are still footing the bill for the cost overruns and the failure of that project without generating one single electron of power. the georgia folks are happy that plant vogtle is online, generating power and will be for 60-80 years.

in south carolina, we lost 2000 megawatts of power future. so, i will now go here. >> i feel like i start out every one of these hearings with a caveat. everything is cheaper if you give it a tax break or subsidy, not just renewable energy, everything is cheaper if you given a tax break or subsidy. i wish my colleague from california and florida were here to talk about cold weather energy production. it is something we know about in north dakota. we need to make sure that the heat comes on when it is 70 degrees below, windchill. we do not make wind turbines, because it is incredibly expensive to heat them. and why would they? the average lifespan of a wind turbine is 20 years. anybody have any idea what the average repower of a wind farm is? 10 years. anyone know why?

because that is when the repower tax credit kicks in. we create these policies. ms. pridemore, you said the responsibility ends with you. i just wish we didn't have to tie one hand behind your back all the time. 37.6% natural gas, 14.2% nuclear, 8.3% wind, 5% solar, that is today. when it is 70 below zero, there is none. no wind. coal and natural gas. mr. houston, when you talk about quality of energy, we do this so often and i will be the first one to admit, republicans were late to the game. we were late on carbon, climate change, we were late on all of those things. now we take on the buzzwords and the catchwords. the problem with all of the above, it only works if the pie chart stays within equilibrium, weather -dependent energy, when it is too big on the pie chart,

what happens? they go out of business, they have to make money every day. so, you were just talking about the peaker plants. they need to make money every day, otherwise they are not available when we need it. when it is 70 degrees below zero. i want to talk to you about testing, that should be riveting. however, it becomes very important. we are the greatest country in the history of the world. and let's just assume through all the renewable utopia that exists, we can power this entire country for 360 out of 365 days of the year on wind and solar, what do we do for the other five? does the state government subsidize coal plants, does the government subsidize those things? or does the greatest country in the history of the world go dark for those days. i hope it is not january in

north dakota, one of the goals for the office of electric reliability is to coordinate with rso's to facilitate electric reliability and security. mr. houston, i talk to you, because it is my zone appeared you are aware of the forecasting. can you explain, briefly, how this forecast has an impact on generating units? >> we are all concerned about load forecasting. because the future may be somewhat uncertain in what electric load looks like on the horizon. if there is a certain amount of adoption and transportation, in electrification, it could have a significant impact on load forecasting. that is not our experience in indiana. >> in my state, there have been concerns that they have been under forecasting load, at the expense of respectable regeneration. load forecast based on preferred political outcomes, rather than reliability, jeopardize the overall

reliability of the good. the sierra club and the national resource defense council, because these organizations claim that pgm is reducing the right kind of resources, also known as weather-dependent power supply. meanwhile, the north american electric reliability corporation has noted that rtos can face challenges in meeting the above-normal peak demand, if wind generation is lower than expected in the sierra club and the nrdc want lower load forecast to support the deployment of wind at the same time, the chief reliability valuator said it can make the grid more unreliable. in its after action report on