Advocates ask regulators to reconsider Georgia Power expansion

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between WABE and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization. Environmental groups are asking state regulators to reconsider some of the Georgia Power expansion they approved late last year. In a meeting Thursday, the Georgia Public Service Commission added the request to its agenda for next week. Georgia […]

Environmental groups are asking state regulators to reconsider some of the Georgia Power expansion they approved late last year. John McCosh/Georgia Power

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between WABE and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization.

Environmental groups are asking state regulators to reconsider some of the Georgia Power expansion they approved late last year. In a meeting Thursday, the Georgia Public Service Commission added the request to its agenda for next week.

Georgia Power is predicting an enormous influx of energy demand in the next five years, mostly from data centers. To meet it, the commission in December approved nearly ten gigawatts of natural gas turbines, storage batteries, and other energy. Consumer and environmental advocates have raised concerns that ordinary customers could end up paying for that infrastructure despite controls designed to ensure data centers pay the costs. They have also criticized the plan for relying heavily on natural gas, which produces climate-warming greenhouse gases.

Now, a coalition of environmental groups are asking the commission to cancel some of the expansion.

Which groups are asking the PSC to scale back Georgia Power expansion?

Many analysts have argued the utility’s forecast is too high. But a petition before the commission argues that even accepting Georgia Power’s predictions, the expansion approved in December is too large. If the company builds everything that was approved, it says, the utility will be making even more energy than the forecast calls for.

Georgia Interfaith Power and Light, the Southface Institute, the Sierra Club and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy argue that violates the legal standard the commission operates under.

“To certify 100 percent of the resources, which is what the commission has done, the commission must find that by 2031, Georgia Power retail customers will need 100 percent of the resources requested by Georgia Power,” said Jennifer Whitfield of the Southern Environmental Law Center, which represents the petitioners, in Thursday’s meeting. “The commission’s order did not make this finding.”

Georgia Power interprets the standard differently, arguing there does not need to be a precise match between the amount of power demand and the utility’s capacity.

“That has never been the standard, ever, nor is that the reasonable interpretation of the law,” said Brandon Marzo, a lawyer for Georgia Power, in the hearing.

In addition to a broader reconsideration of December’s decision, the petitioners are specifically asking the commission to cancel a new gas-powered turbine at Plant McIntosh in southeast Georgia. They argue the turbine goes beyond what the utility will need and will be expensive.

Georgia Power maintains the McIntosh expansion is critical for reliability because that turbine will be able to deliver energy when other resources like batteries aren’t necessarily available. Without it, the utility “would be short in the winter of 2031,” Marzo said.

All of these issues, Marzo argued, were covered last fall before the commission voted, in the months-long process of hearings, expert testimony, and legal filings. He said the petitioners want to “re-argue everything that was litigated in this case.” The environmental groups denied that claim.

New commissioner urges colleagues to give petition due consideration

There has been a key change since the commission’s December vote: Two Democratic commissioners are now serving after unseating the Republican incumbents by wide margins in November. Some of the same groups now petitioning for reconsideration pushed unsuccessfully for the commission to delay last year’s decision in light of the election results. 

In Thursday’s meeting, one of the new commissioners, Alicia Johnson, urged her colleagues to give the current petition due consideration.

“Reconsideration is not delay for delay’s sake,” she said. “I think it is responsible governance, and it reflects our obligation to balance growth with stewardship.”

The commission added the petition to its agenda for Wednesday, Feb. 18. In that meeting, the commissioners could vote to deny or grant it. If they grant the motion, they would then need to decide how to proceed with it.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX