Your electric bill is getting to be a very crowded place to hide a price increase. On Power Bill: five states, five different mechanisms, and one fight over who gets handed the bill. We start in New York, where a plan called “rate stabilization” means something very different once it reaches your mailbox. If today's show was useful, follow us wherever you're listening — the next one will be waiting. This one's from Earthjustice:
Today, Alliance for a Green Economy (AGREE) joined hundreds of New Yorkers in raising concerns about National Grid’s proposed “rate stabilization” plan. Earthjustice submitted comments to the NYS Public Service Commission on behalf of AGREE to oppose National Grid’s proposal, which would hold gas rates artificially high, allow National Grid to spend more than a billion dollars to expand and reinforce the gas system, and lock customers into paying even higher utility bills in the future.
National Grid calls this a “Rate Stabilization Plan,” but it keeps gas bills high now and pushes new costs into 2028. Apparently, stabilization means your bill stays expensive on schedule. And it would skip the normal PSC rate-setting process while spending more than a billion dollars expanding gas infrastructure. That process exists because utilities routinely ask for more than regulators ultimately allow. Earthjustice says an alternative could remove $250 million in charges for nearly 2 million National Grid accounts. That’s roughly $125 per customer—real money hidden behind a word as soothing as “stabilization.” AARP says 1.3 million New Yorkers are already behind on gas or electric bills. So National Grid’s proposal is: hold today’s unaffordable rates in place, expand the gas system, then start collecting even more in 2028. What a generous arrangement—for National Grid. Conduit News Arkansas, with Ainsley Platt:
Lawmakers questioned Entergy officials Tuesday on the Arkansas data center projects it is powering, with several expressing concerns with the utility’s decision to recoup from ratepayers the costs of a solar and battery storage facility for a West Memphis project.
Entergy put $22.81 on Senator Mark Johnson’s own bill, and the chair of the Joint Energy Committee says he can’t figure out how it got there. That rider started collecting this summer while the solar-and-battery costs for a West Memphis data-center project are still being worked out in public. Twenty-two dollars and eighty-one cents is $273.72 over a year if it stays on the bill. The Generating Arkansas Jobs Act lets utilities recover new generation costs early. For a household, “early recovery” means paying before they can see the full project price. Entergy went to federal court to stop the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette from publishing details of its Google agreements; the judge rejected that bid. Lawmakers are asking the basic question: why should a family’s meter help finance the power supply for a tech giant? Hugo Rojas, writing in Government Computer News:
What makes this filing unusual is the scale of the offset sitting inside it. More than $529 million in federal tax credits are included in the rate plan and will directly benefit customers by reducing costs of new generation projects.
More than $529 million in federal tax credits are baked into this Washington rate plan, and the typical residential electric bill still jumps $28 a month in year one. Families get the tax-credit benefit, sure—after the utility has already shown them a much larger bill. For a household, $28 a month is $336 over the first year. The credit offset is real, and so is that extra $336. Regulators need to put both figures on the same page and show customers what the increase would have been without the $529 million. Eleven new power projects and upgraded wires may be needed. Fine. But a half-billion-dollar public subsidy should mean a visible break on the monthly bill—not just soften the landing while residential customers get handed another $28. National Grid’s preferred label was “stabilization.” This one’s simpler: check the first-year bill. It’s up $28 a month, even after the federal credits. From Hugo Rojas at Government Computer News:
Subject to approval by the PUC, the rate proposal would result in an average monthly bill increase for Colorado residential customers of $10.90 per month, or 8.8 percent. A $38 million customer refund is a core component of the rate proposal, and would help reduce the customer bill impact.
Black Hills wants $26.7 million more a year from Southern Colorado electric customers, starting in March 2027. For households, it’s $10.90 a month—8.8 percent—and that’s the figure the Colorado PUC needs to test in docket 26AL-0232E. They’re pairing the increase with a $38 million customer refund—money customers already paid toward renewable projects. So Black Hills gets to cite a refund while asking to put $184 million in grid and generation spending into customer bills. This serves just over 102,000 customers. A $26.7 million revenue request looks different when it’s spread across a customer base that size. The refund softens the proposal; it doesn’t erase the $10.90 monthly increase. Eight-point-eight percent is not a rounding error for somebody already choosing between the power bill and a prescription. Colorado regulators have until March to decide whether “reliable service” requires every dollar Black Hills put into this filing. From Charlotte Keith at 90.5 WESA:
The programs offer much-needed relief for the most vulnerable Pennsylvanians, lowering monthly bills and offering a path to debt forgiveness. But as energy costs increase, the price tag for the programs also rises, increasing the burden on residential ratepayers — most of whom don’t qualify for help. In 2024, residential electricity customers paid almost $90 on average toward the cost of the programs, state data show.
Pennsylvania households paid nearly $90 apiece for electric-assistance programs in 2024, and gas customers averaged another $47. Businesses and factories paid zero into those pools. The assistance itself matters—bill relief and debt forgiveness can keep service on. But the PUC has kept the funding on the same residential bills the program is trying to make affordable. In 2019, the commission encouraged utilities to spread the cost across customer classes, then declined to require it. That’s a very polite way to preserve the exemption for commercial and industrial customers. We just heard Arkansas lawmakers question who absorbs data-center costs. Pennsylvania has the reverse problem: residential customers alone fund a protection that rising energy prices make more expensive every year. Have feedback, a story idea, or a correction? Email us at powerbill at lantern podcasts dot com. Your notes help us make Power Bill sharper and more useful, so keep them coming.
On our watch list: Black Hills Energy is proposing new Colorado electric rates to take effect in March 2027, pending approval from the PUC. Links to every story are in the show notes, so take a look at the ones you want to dig into. Thanks for listening, and we’ll be back tomorrow. This is a Lantern Podcast.