Statement from the Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter on Austin City Council's approval of Austin Energy's future energy investments
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MAY 26, 2026
For media inquiries, please contact:
Jordan Goodrich, Chapter Communications Manager
214-733-4874 | jordan.goodrich@sierraclub.org
AUSTIN, TX - Last week, the Austin City Council approved three investments for Austin Energy’s future energy resources, including two supported by the Sierra Club and one which we strongly opposed.
In accordance with the 2035 Austin Generation Resource and Climate Protection Plan, the Austin City Council unanimously approved a new investment in 100 MWs of 2-hour dispatchable energy storage batteries to be built by OCI Energy. The new battery storage agreement will bring Austin Energy’s total commitment to local utility-scale storage to more than 200 MWs, in addition to 40 MWs of distributed storage recently approved by Council. The OCI Storage contract is a direct result of an “all-of-the-above” local generation RFP that led to multiple responses from a variety of storage companies.
Austin City Council unanimously approved 299 MWs of additional power from wind from existing projects just West of Austin. Austin Energy's 299 MW wind contract is a 10-year Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Invenergy Renewables LLC to buy wholesale wind energy, beginning in mid-2026. With the addition of these resources to Austin Energy’s portfolio, Austin should be able to meet more than half of its energy demand from renewables, as part of its commitment to achieve 70% renewable energy by 2027. Even with the investment, Austin Energy will need to find additional renewable resources in 2027 to achieve this goal.
Finally, on a vote taken behind closed doors, Austin City Council approved an item to allow Austin Energy to directly negotiate with companies to procure up to 400 MWs of peakers to run on gas that would be located within Travis County. While the Generation Plan approved by Council does allow Austin Energy to invest in fast-acting peakers, Sierra Club opposed the item, and instead called for additional investigation into other dispatchable resources like long-duration storage, demand response, and geothermal energy. The actual vote and discussion was held behind closed doors as the gas investment was deemed a “competitive” matter, and the total cost of the investment was not revealed, although it is widely believed that 400 MWs could cost upwards of $1 billion.
“While we thank city leaders for the important new contracts on battery storage and additional investments in wind energy, City council acted too quickly in authorizing Austin Energy to negotiate, build and operate up to 400 MWs of peaker plants - which could cost north of $1 billion - without taking a good look at resources that don’t lead to higher levels of smog locally or cook our planet globally,” said Cyrus Reed, the Legislative and Conservation Director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club. Reed also serves on the city’s Electric Utility Commission, and was one of three commissioners that voted against the measure
Sierra Club thanks City Council members Mike Siegel, Ryan Alter, Jose Velazquez and Zo Qadri for asking tough questions of Austin Energy and putting forward some alternative strategies going forward. Those offices and others are bringing additional measures next week on a range of issues to help limit the pollution that may come from the peakers, make sure impacts of new peakers on local communities are mitigated, and that further investments in other technologies are explored. Those items will be taken up this Thursday at the next city council meeting on May 28th and are listed as items 98, 99, 100 and 101. Sierra Club is supporting those items.
“We understand the need Austin Energy has to invest in local generation, but this decision was premature when the cost of solar, batteries and geothermal is falling, while the cost of gas peakers and gas itself is only becoming more volatile,” said Bob Hendricks, chair of the local Sierra Club Austin group and co-chair of the Lone Star Chapter.
“Yes we need reliable power, but we also need a reliable climate, reliable clean air and reliable protections from air pollution,” noted Dr. Craig Nazor, conservation chair of both the Austin Group and the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, while decrying a 40-year investment in burning fossil fuels.
While Sierra Club opposed this fossil fuel investment, Reed said the Sierra Club will continue to engage to assure that the peakers have strict pollution controls, don’t overburden certain neighborhoods, and are only used as a last resort as cleaner non-polluting resources are prioritized.
“This vote on peakers by Council is a huge disappointment to so many in our community fighting for climate equity since it ties us to long term fossil fuel dependence, but that doesn’t stop our collaborative work to continue to work toward making Austin Energy a leader on clean, affordable and reliable energy.”
***