Possible factors in Massachusetts include: uncertainty about changes in solar incentives; caps in some parts of the state on new net metering credits; and concern over a new charge on solar users imposed by Eversource. The report prompted a coalition of pro-solar groups to send a letter to Governor Charlie Baker, seeking his assistance in supporting the industry.
opposing oil drilling now authorized by the Trump admin.
In case there’s any question: Yes, I want a “thumb on the scale” for clean energy — and not just a thumb, but an elbow, a knee, an anvil. And I’m absolutely positive we can make that a win-win situation for the vast majority of Massachusetts residents. Baker takes the so-called “balanced approach” — and causes MA residents to lose their jobs while committing us to despoiled air and contributing to a climate catastrophe.
Our friend and State Rep candidate Tommy Vitolo has a breakdown in listicle format – Eleven, count ’em, eleven big ideas!
Renewable portfolio standard (RPS) requirement is upped from 1 percent growth per year to 3 percent per year. [baaaamm!] Municipal electric utilities (~15 percent of Massachusetts sales) to be phased into RPS.
Climate mitigation: Regional dam and seawall funding, nature-based solutions, and impacted communities are granted stronger intervention rights in DPU proceedings.
The two-year legislative session will draw to a close in July, leaving just over five months to pass needed new clean energy laws. As a member of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy, I’ve been a vocal advocate for three initiatives that deserve legislative support. They have strong backing from the public, will create jobs, and will make meaningful progress in addressing climate concerns. These measures will particularly benefit MetroWest, where the renewable energy economy has a significant presence.
Nice! If Governor Baker truly wants to “take a back seat to no one” in renewable energy and climate adaptation, the gauntlet has been well and truly thrown down by the Senate and our AG.
Healey should’ve just run for Governor rather than sit this one out. I know she is betting on an open seat in 2022, but sometimes, fortune favors the bold rather than the cautious. She is bold in her day job, she needs to be bold to take her next job. She would mop the current primary floor and hold Baker to an even match for 2018.
We’ve seen that movie and know how it ends. I am super excited for her re-election, but would not be for a gubernatorial run.
Healey is far from Martha Coakley redux. One was a cautious, centrist, career politician without a strong agenda to run on and the other is a fighting progressive populist Attorney General willing to take on the sacred cows and connected.
Well, I didn’t single out Coakley, who was just the most recent of a string of AGs to reach for the Corner Office and fall short. Besides, I don’t think Healey wants to be Governor. The only reason she’s in politics at all is that she was in the AG’s office and wanted the internal promotion, and election is how you get there in this state. Plus I like her right where she is and I don’t usually get excited about re-elections (EW is the other exception), and for that matter I’ve already picked a gubernatorial candidate. Also, the first deadline has passed and we’re at peak signature season.
As long as Healey continues to stone wall on the Farak case, I’m not in favor of her being elected to anything.
Just a little nervous about a proposal to prohibit “natural gas ‘pipeline tax’ on electric ratepayers.” Why? It’s already prohibited, recently reaffirmed by the SJC.
So this feels a little like a law extending the right to vote to women. What happens if it fails? What happens if it is watered down, and passes?
If DeLeo blocks it, he must be removed as Speaker.