William Worley is installing all energy-efficient bulbs to light his Raleigh County home. He also shuts off his HVAC unit when the weather is nice enough.
Worley and his wife are trying to reduce their energy consumption. Their power bill in January was nearly $700, and it rose to $760 for February.
Typically, Worley’s power bill has run about a couple of hundred dollars, possibly going as high as the mid-300s during peak heating and cooling periods as it did in December. But the leap in January was a surprise.
“We knew what the weather was, but it was just a shock to us,” he said. “We’ve lived here for over 20 years now, and it’s not ever hit this hard before.”
The Worleys are not alone. West Virginians across the state are struggling to keep up with the rising cost of electricity.
Lawmakers have said they want to help. But the key proposal they are moving toward passage won’t solve the ballooning power bills, and would likely make it worse.
A measure that doesn’t tackle the problem
Earlier this month, the Senate Energy Committee considered a bill aimed at addressing the reliability and affordability of electricity for West Virginians
It would require utility companies to demonstrate that changes to how they produce energy will still meet reliability needs at periods of peak energy demand. Otherwise, they would not be allowed to pass along the cost to customers.
The focus on reliability could discourage power companies from investing in renewable energy sources. Utilities would face a hard time recovering any costs associated with solar and wind power as they don’t continuously produce energy. This would force companies to bear the full cost of investments in renewables, while they could recoup costs from fossil fuels.
Backers of the bill, including the West Virginia Coal Association, have said that it will help encourage utility companies to run coal-fired power plants more frequently than they currently do.
But, utility companies say the high cost of electricity is caused by the cost of burning coal.
“The biggest driver on whether the plants run each day is the price of the fuel we put into those plants,” said Randall Short, director of regulatory services for Appalachian Power. “When the price of coal is cheaper than the overall energy price in the market, the plants run.”
During testimony earlier this month, Short told lawmakers that the average power bill for Appalachian Power customers has increased nearly $50 since 2019, and 60% of that hike was due to rising fuel costs.
The rise and fall of coal
For decades, West Virginia was home to some of the lowest power rates in the country, largely due to the coal mined in the state. But over the years, coal has been increasingly priced out as cheaper, alternative energy sources have emerged.
Now, a continued reliance on coal has contributed to the state’s soaring power costs as it’s unable to compete with natural gas and renewable energy.
Appalachian Power, which operates three coal-fired power plants in West Virginia, has faced growing scrutiny in recent years over how often it utilizes its power plants to generate energy. In fact, the West Virginia Public Service Commission previously charged the company in 2021 to operate its plants 69% of the time, despite criticism that it was not economically feasible to do so.
Just last week, the Sierra Club reached an agreement with the PSC over its directive. Under the proposed settlement, the regulatory agency has disavowed its 2021 order. But the PSC has maintained that while it’s not a requirement, it is a target for power companies.
More paperwork and higher costs
Under the bill the Senate Energy Committee considered earlier this month, the West Virginia PSC would be responsible for ensuring that utility companies comply with the rules, but its chairman, Charlotte Lane said it wouldn’t actually make a difference to what they’re already doing.
“This bill, I’m sure, has a really good intention, but to the extent that I’m supposed to understand it, it is very difficult to understand what it is trying to get at,” Lane told lawmakers in her voluntary testimony on the measure during the meeting on March 13.
Except for the “additional administrative burden” of more reports, the commission already does everything lined out in the bill, she added.
“So, you don’t believe this bill forces you to do anything new?” asked Sen. Ben Queen, R-Harrison.
“No, except review a bunch of more reports,” Lane replied.
While the bill wouldn’t change much for the PSC, the power companies in the state have said the measure could lead to higher costs for West Virginians.
Mon Power and Potomac Edison, subsidiaries of FirstEnergy, believe the bill could “significantly increase the administrative burden of utility rate cases in West Virginia and result in higher bills for customers,” said Will Boye, FirstEnergy spokesperson, in a statement.
“West Virginia’s current regulatory structure already provides strong oversight through the Public Service Commission and allows for transparent, effective utility planning,” he added.
Appalachian Power officials shared similar sentiments.
The bill “aims to change how we consider different electricity generation sources, focusing on factors beyond cost,” Aaron Walker, president and chief operating officer of Appalachian Power, said in a statement.
“If this is the path the legislature chooses, we will align with the state’s policy, but this change could lead to higher electricity bills for our customers.”
Walker also noted that the bill creates uncertainty that could make it “challenging to retain and attract business in West Virginia.”
Meanwhile, back in Raleigh County, Worley is looking to conserve power, especially as his utility provider — Appalachian Power — is seeking a rate increase from the PSC.
He said, “It seems like every turn we take here, it hits us in the pocketbook — the power, the food and who knows what else.”