RALEIGH, N.C. — A bill that would roll back some of North Carolina’s climate goals and change the way Duke Energy can fund new power plants is swiftly advancing through the state legislature.
The Energy Security and Affordability Act proposes eliminating the mandate for Duke Energy to reduce carbon emissions by 70% by 2030, while maintaining a long-term goal of carbon neutrality by 2050.
The bill’s sponsors, which include Senate Majority Leader and former Duke Energy executive, Paul Newton (R-Cabarrus), argue that the legislation provides more flexibility to meet the 2050 carbon neutrality goal without rushing clean energy projects and passing costs onto customers.
Meanwhile opponents, like Justin Somelofske of the North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association, worry it could worsen the already high prices North Carolina households have been facing.
“Part of what that interim target was doing was putting some pressure on the utility to thoroughly examine more cost-effective resources that are already commercially available,” he said.
He also argued eliminating the 2030 interim deadline is unnecessary as the North Carolina Utilities Commission granted Duke Energy permission to delay meeting that goal until about 2035.
The bill would also allow Duke Energy to raise customer rates to cover construction costs of new baseload power plants before they are completed.
Somelofske expressed concerns about the terminology “baseload” which typically refers to types of power plants that can run fulltime like natural gas and nuclear. It also excludes intermittent projects like solar and wind or energy storage projects like pumped hydro and grid batteries.
Duke Energy’s current long-term plan includes the development of at least three new natural gas plants in the near term and a small modular reactor, a developing nuclear technology, by the mid 2030s.
Nuclear projects have historically run over budget and behind schedule and currently there are no operational small modular nuclear reactors available to utilities.
If this bill passes, Somelofske worries it could lead to ratepayers bearing the financial burden for research and development of a new SMR.
“We are putting our hope in facilities that have not been deployed in the United States at this time,” he said. “This seems like it puts rates more in question and shifts costs and shifts risks to ratepayers.”
Duke Energy stated that it supports policies that facilitate meeting energy needs and that, even if this bill passes, any cost increases would require regulatory approval.
In a statement, spokesman Garrett Poorman, explained the utility believes recouping construction costs earlier could help customers save money in the long-run.
“Policies that enable more timely recovery of investments in modern infrastructure like always-on nuclear power plants help keep overall costs down for customers and result in more predictable energy prices by avoiding sudden spikes. This process would be subject to regulatory oversight to ensure the protection of customers’ interests,” he said.
The bill passed its first committee and is now referred to the Senate Rules and Operations Committee for further consideration.
VIDEO: Charlotte adjusts city-wide climate goals as 2030 deadline approaches
©2025 Cox Media Group
