Georgia Power plan overbuilds capacity at cost to customers, advocates claim
Environmental advocates testified in front of the Georgia Public Service Commission Thursday, making their case as to why the regulators should reconsider their December approval of Georgia Power’s 10-gigawatt expansion.
The Southern Environmental Law Center, representing Georgia Interfaith Power and Light, Southface Institute, the Sierra Club and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, argued the utility’s own forecasts show the plan would leave the company with more generating capacity than needed, and that the plan depends on, in part, demand from large customers that have not yet signed contracts.
Both points fail to satisfy the state’s legal standard for demonstrating need, according to the SELC’s argument.
“We ask the commission to reconsider the evidence in light of the actual legal standard, which does not allow charging captive customers until there’s proof of need at the time of use,” said Jennifer Whitfield, senior attorney with the SELC.
Under Georgia law, once new power plants are approved, customers are required to pay for them through their utility bills — even if the electricity is never needed. SELC warned that approving excess capacity could leave residential and small-business customers covering long-term costs tied to projected industrial growth that may not materialize.
Advocates say Georgia Power overbuilt capacity
There is a 757-megawatt gap between projected winter 2031 demand and the capacity regulators approved, which is the size of the combined-cycle unit planned at Plant McIntosh, according to a chart Whitfield referenced from Georgia Power’s own testimony.
“The capacity resources that Georgia Power has requested… are 757 megawatts more than their projected need,” Whitfield said. “757 megawatts, that is the nominal capacity value, exactly, of the combined cycle unit requested at Plant McIntosh.”
The group asked regulators to deny certification of that unit and reconsider over 2,600 additional megawatts tied to large-load customers that have not yet signed contracts.
Georgia Power pushed back on the SELC’s claims, arguing that opponents are misreading both the numbers and the law, and that removing the McIntosh plant would put the grid at risk.
The company said the 757-megawatt figure reflects a baseline estimate, and does not account for the plant’s higher output during winter conditions, when electricity demand peaks and runs more efficiently.
“If you were to take McIntosh Unit 12 out of the resource mix, we would be short in the winter of 2031 and further short in the summer of 2031 as well,” said Brandon Marzo, an attorney with Troutman Pepper Locke representing Georgia Power.
The McIntosh unit would be among the most efficient gas plants in Georgia Power’s system, according to Marzo. Combined-cycle plants are needed to serve large industrial customers that operate around the clock — loads the company said cannot be reliably met with battery storage alone, Marzo said.
Georgia Power says cutting capacity would threaten reliability
The company also pushed back on the idea that regulators must approve new power plants only when projected demand and capacity line up exactly in a given year, saying that has never been how utilities plan for growth or extreme weather.
“Joint petitioners appear to hold the belief that the certification statute requires that the Commission match perfectly each given year load with each capacity resource,” Marzo said. “That has never been the standard ever, nor is that a reasonable standard, and it is not how resource planning has historically been done.”
But the SELC argued that approving capacity before the demand is certain undermines a legal safeguard meant to protect customers who have no choice in their electricity provider.
That legal safeguard, the certification standard, exists to prevent residential and small-business customers from paying for power plants that may not ultimately be needed, particularly when projected growth depends on large industrial users that have not yet committed to buying electricity from Georgia Power.
“Georgia Power’s approach here, that they’re asking (the PSC) to adopt, requires borrowing from the captive side of business, borrowing from captive customers, to pay for Georgia Power’s recruitment efforts on the competitive side of the business,” Whitfield said. “This outcome … violates the requirement that actual customers are charged only for resources for which there is need.”
Unlike residential customers, Whitfield said, large industrial users can shop for utilities and may never ultimately locate in Georgia or choose Georgia Power, leaving existing customers responsible for costs tied to capacity built in anticipation of that growth.
Once a plant is certified, customers pay for it over the full life of the asset — regardless of how often it is used, according to Whitfield.
“This isn’t a rounding error,” she said. “It’s a multi-billion-dollar decision, and the protections being discussed apply for a fraction of the time customers will be paying these costs.”
The commission did not take action on the motion Thursday. Commissioners will vote on Feb. 18, according to Tom Krause, PSC spokesperson.
Public Interest Advocacy staff with the commission recommended denying the motion for reconsideration.
The 10 gigawatt expansion was approved in December through a negotiated stipulation between Georgia Power and the commission’s Public Interest Advocacy staff, which regulators adopted. The agreement included a commitment by the utility to hold down average residential bills in the early years of the expansion.
The expansion is largely intended to meet projected demand from large load customers, including data centers.
Around 60% of the 10 gigawatts are planned to be met through natural gas, which produces methane as a byproduct.
“Georgia Power’s natural gas expansion is among the largest fossil fuel projects in the country,” said Dr. Frank Bove, a retired CDC environmental epidemiologist, during the public comment period. “As a retired public health researcher, I’m concerned about the health impacts of fossil fuel air pollution.
“Alongside greenhouse gasses, combustion of natural gas and coal generates harmful air pollutants, and these pollutants are strongly linked to cardiovascular disease, respiratory illness and adverse birth outcomes.”
