Rep. Callahan Op-Ed – Why Are Our Electric Bill Higher: Legislation Plays A Part

The Push for EVs Continues at the Expense of the Taxpayer with Another Rate Hike Likely

Here we go again. Backers of banning the sale of new gas-powered vehicles are getting a leg up in their efforts from the Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA). The agency has cleared the way for Eversource and UI to recoup the cost of building out electric vehicle charging infrastructure on the backs of all customers.

When you opened your July electric bill, you couldn’t help but notice the Public Benefits portion of the bill was significantly higher than it was the month before. That’s because PURA decided Eversource customers could be on the hook to cover expenses the utility incurred from a state-ordered shut-off moratorium and a 2017 Millstone power purchase agreement. That agreement and the costs of these hardship customers not paying their bills, and not having power shut off, is allowed to be passed on to all customers. Connecticut was the last state in the country to have a shut-off moratorium in still in effect from COVID-19, now resulting in rate shock.

We’re sounding the alarm that this Public Benefits increase isn’t the only one coming, and this time it’s because of the push for EVs.

There’s a saying in the halls of the Capitol building that no piece of legislation is ever really dead, and that seems to be the case with the push to have all EV sales in the state by 2035. We successfully pushed back, along with our colleagues in the Republican Caucus, against that mandated regulation proposal. We also argued against a council, whose make up was aligning in favor of California emissions standards, from being enacted.

But that hasn’t been enough. The EV mandate faction of state government is marching forward again, this time through a PURA draft decision. That plan would allow Eversource and UI to recover millions of dollars spent on the EV rebate program, from its inception in July 2021, more quickly through annual rate adjustments– aka higher rates on consumers– for the first time. The utilities were always allowed to seek reimbursement, but this decision would allow them to get that through a rate adjustment each year.

In its filing with PURA, Eversource noted it has about $7 million in carrying costs on money it borrowed to fund the rebate program. If you need incentives to push Connecticut drivers into EVs, that money has to come from somewhere and, in this case, it’s all ratepayers—even those who aren’t getting a rebate because they aren’t getting charging stations installed.

Imagine if or when the EV mandate goes through. How many more rebates will be passed out and eligible for reimbursement to Eversource from all ratepayers? This is like a reverse Robin Hood situation, because these vehicles are being subsidized and the state is subsidizing the grid, leaving the middle class and lower class to bear the brunt of the cost.

The draft decision would allow the utilities to recover costs through rates, beginning possibly as early as September, over 20 months. That’s almost two years of higher electric rates because certain elected officials want to dictate the type of vehicle you drive.

Connecticut already has one of the highest electric rates in the country. We want clean air and a healthy environment as much as anyone but trying to do this by mandating EVs is only moving the pollution problem from the tailpipe to the smokestack.

Even if installing all of the needed infrastructure didn’t come at the expense of ratepayers, the electric grid couldn’t handle the added burden. ISO New England would have to figure out how to bolster their infrastructure, which again, PURA would likely allow the utilities to recover those costs from the ratepayer too.

We will continue to fight for consumer choice, smart energy policy that leads to rate stability, and for the best economic interests of Connecticut residents.

State Representative Patrick Callahan (R-New Fairfield) is the ranking member of the General Assembly’s Environment Committee

State Representative Greg Howard (R-43) represents Ledyard, North Stonington, and Stonington