November 22, 2024
Utilities, Generators and Wind Developers Spend Big on Lobbying in Massachusetts
Utilities Lead Energy Industry Spending, Which Far Exceeds Environmental Movement Spending
The Massachusetts State House
The Massachusetts State House | The National Park Service
|
Lobbying data sheds light on the political influence, broad agreements, and simmering tensions that underlie Massachusetts climate and energy policy.

National Grid and Eversource, Massachusetts’ largest investor-owned gas and electric utility companies, were the highest-spending energy companies on lobbying in the state over the first half of this year, while Shell Oil, NextEra and several offshore wind developers also spent big.

The lobbying data sheds light on the political influence, broad agreements and simmering tensions that underlie Massachusetts’ climate and energy policy.

While industry, environmental and labor groups largely supported bills promoting offshore wind, the utilities lobbied against several bills aimed at phasing out the state’s natural gas infrastructure, which were supported by climate organizations. Meanwhile, the utilities supported legislation promoting hydrogen, renewable natural gas and renewable propane for heating, which faced opposition from environmental groups.

The state’s two largest utilities, National Grid and Eversource, spent about $285,000 and $180,000 on their respective lobbying operations, significantly more than any other energy industry stakeholder.

National Grid used its funds to lobby in favor of bills supporting offshore wind, large-scale solar and ending the practice of competitive electric supply in the state. The company also lobbied in favor of H.2938 (introduced by Rep. Jeff Roy (D), co-chair of the Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy Joint Committee) which would subsidize blending alternative fuels like hydrogen, renewable natural gas and renewable propane into the gas network. The state’s gas utilities have argued that blending these fuels into the gas system would be a cost-effective way to decarbonize while making use of existing infrastructure.

In contrast, lobbyists for climate organization Green Energy Consumers Alliance opposed the bill. Most of the state’s environmental organizations have strongly opposed a decarbonization-by-blending strategy for the heating sector, arguing that widespread electrification — accompanied by decommissioning the bulk of the state’s gas system — would be more viable and cheaper, plus better for residents’ health and safety. (See Mass. Stakeholders Debate the Scope of Clean Heat Standard.)

In keeping with this tension, National Grid lobbied against several bills supported by climate and environmental organizations, including the “Future of Clean Heat” bill, S.2105 and H.3203. The legislation aims to facilitate the managed retirement of the state’s gas system and transition to electrified heating and is supported by climate groups including Gas Transition Allies, HEET, Green Energy Consumers Alliance and the Environmental League of Massachusetts.

The American Petroleum Institute and Liberty Utilities also lobbied against the bill, while Eversource registered its lobbying activity on the bill as “neutral.” The company categorized nearly all its lobbying activity as “neutral,” in keeping with a trend from the company’s past lobbying disclosures.

Due to the state’s lobbying laws, the Secretary of the Commonwealth Lobbyist Division does not verify the accuracy of companies’ disclosures relating to specific legislation, nor does the law explicitly prohibit companies from registering all their lobbying activity as “neutral.” Eversource did not respond to requests for clarification on the company’s lobbying activity.

The American Petroleum Institute and National Grid also lobbied against H.3689, which would require the state to reach 100% clean electricity by 2035 and 100% clean energy in the buildings and transportation sectors by 2045. State law currently requires emissions reductions of 93% for electricity, 86% for transportation, and 95% for residential heating and cooling by the year 2050. The Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group, Environment America, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Sierra Club and Vote Solar lobbied in favor of the bill.

National Grid also opposed H.3137, which would increase community access to Department of Public Utilities (DPU) proceedings by requiring the DPU to accept intervenor applications by municipalities, legislators, relevant nonprofits and groups of more than 10 ratepayers. The legislation also would require utilities to provide information on gas infrastructure to municipalities upon request. The Sierra Club lobbied in favor of the bill, while Gas Transition Allies, a coalition of environmental groups in the state, considers the bill a top priority.

Other major lobbying spenders in the state from the energy industry included Shell Oil ($150,000); NextEra ($124,000), which owns and operates a natural gas plant in the state, as well as the Seabrook nuclear plant in New Hampshire; Covanta Energy ($100,000), which operates waste-to-energy facilities throughout the state; and Fusion for America ($100,000).

While there is little publicly available information on Fusion for America, Liesl Sheehan, listed as president of Fusion for America in the group’s initial lobbying registration, is a partner at Tremont Strategies, the sole lobbying firm employed by Fusion for America.

Sheehan and Tremont Strategies did not respond to repeated requests for comment on this story asking for basic information on the fusion advocacy group.

Overall, industry lobbying operations significantly outweighed those of the state’s environmental movement; the highest-spending environmental groups were the Sierra Club ($87,000, about $42,000 of which went to paying rent for the group’s Boston office), Mass Audubon ($80,000), Environment America ($49,000, the bulk of which went to door-to-door canvasing) and the Environmental League of Massachusetts ($35,000).

Several of the companies developing offshore wind projects in the region also spent major sums on their lobbying operations, including Vineyard Offshore and Vineyard Wind 1 ($132,000), Avangrid Renewables ($90,000), Equinor ($87,000) and Ørsted ($75,000).

Orsted lobbied in favor of H.3161, which directs the state’s electric utilities, in coordination with the Department of Energy Resources (DOER), to solicit 11,200 MW of offshore wind capacity by June of 2035, while authorizing DOER to make additional procurements after that date.

A wide range of organizations representing industry, environmental and labor interests also lobbied in favor of the bill, including National Grid, the Environmental League of Massachusetts, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Acadia Center and the North Atlantic States Regional Council of Carpenters.

Industry, environmental and labor groups also lobbied in favor of a separate bill that would direct utilities to contract for 12,000 MW of capacity by June of 2030 and 15,000 MW by June of 2025.

Some of the lobbying disclosures for lobbying entities hired by various clients still are unreleased, as the state processes the disclosures of clients and individual lobbyists first. The state’s legislative session ends Nov. 15.

Massachusetts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *