The biggest news this week came out of the N.C. House, which debated and ultimately passed Senate Bill 730, the Ratepayer Protection Act.
As you may recall from last week's update, S730 tied some welcome regulation of data centers to some unwelcome changes to state energy policy. Prior to Wednesday's House vote, negotiations between House Speaker Destin Hall and Democratic Reps. Pricey Harrison (District 61, Guilford County) and Maria Cervania (District 41, Wake) yielded an amendment from bill sponsor Rep. Dean Arp (R – District 69, Union) that more clearly defines data centers and establishes water use standards for them. It also moved responsibility for deciding who does a cost impact study of North Carolina’s 2050 carbon neutrality goal from the General Assembly’s legislative service officer to the North Carolina Collaboratory, which is more appropriate. The House adopted that amendment unanimously.
But the energy section we’ve discussed before – the key part is Section 10 of the bill – has actually gotten worse since our last update. It still forbids Duke Energy from retiring coal plants until new nuclear generation is approved by the N.C. Utilities Commission, but now that nuclear plant has to generate at least 1,000 megawatts.
That would mean a large nuclear facility, potentially like one of the new units at Plant Vogtle in Georgia, a two-unit project that took seven years longer to complete than planned, while costs doubled – ultimately coming in at $31 billion.
And remember: Since the North Carolina legislature passed Senate Bill 266 last year, ratepayers will be on the hook for "construction work in progress" – not just after the plant is complete and sending power to the grid, as used to be the rule in North Carolina. Ratepayers will be on the hook even if construction falters and is abandoned, as happened in 2017 in South Carolina with the VC Summer plant after $9 billion had been spent. A one-line amendment from Rep. Phil Rubin (D – District 40, Wake) that would have repealed SB266 was tabled by House Republicans.
Aging coal plants are getting more and more expensive to operate, even before you consider the health detriments and climate change impacts of burning coal to produce electricity. Nuclear reactors are massively expensive, as the Georgia and South Carolina examples show.
As Rep. Eric Ager (D – District 114, Buncombe) said during the House debate: "This section is going to raise power bills across the state."
We'd like to see Section 10 removed as the bill moves to the Senate. We don't need a state law forcing Duke Energy to build a new nuclear plant, and we don't believe this section is true to the intent expressed in the bill's title.
The House’s Republican majority rejected Democrats’ request to divide the bill to let lawmakers vote separately on the data center language and the energy section, prompting Minority Leader Robert Reives (District 54, Chatham/Randolph) to deliver an impassioned critique of how business is conducted under the legislature's current leadership. In fact, Republicans rejected multiple efforts from Democrats to amend and generally improve the bill, tabling Democratic amendments one after another to avoid voting on the issues they raised.
The bill now moves to the Senate, where we’ll be monitoring it closely as it either goes to committee, to the Senate floor, or nowhere at all. As the next steps become clearer, we’ll likely ask you to reach out to lawmakers and call on them to ensure this bill protects our 2050 carbon neutrality goal and ratepayers, too.
Your emails, calls, and in-person visits during our Wednesdays on Jones Street meetups are huge. We have absolutely gotten meetings with lawmakers on this bill that might not have happened without you demonstrating the Sierra Club’s grassroots power. Please sign up for upcoming Wednesdays now!
| Sign up for June 10 |
| Sign up for June 17 |
| Sign up for June 24 |
Other bills of interest this week:
- HB 369, Parking Lot Reform/Stormwater Control, was presented to the Senate Agriculture and Environment Committee this week for discussion only. It’s a bipartisan measure to keep local governments from requiring parking lot minimums, which will reduce impermeable surfaces and help control stormwater runoff. A compromise amendment was added with the sponsor’s blessing, so the new version will have another committee hearing for discussion before a vote. We hope the bill is voted out of committee next week.
- SB 445, Regulatory Reform Act of 2026, is the perennial legislation aimed at reducing red tape for the regulated community in the state. The year’s version had a concerning provision that would have allowed housing in industrial zoned areas, but that was amended to “light” industrial areas, which would protect residents from environmental contamination.