Siting for a Cleaner, More Equitable Grid in Massachusetts

The analysis reveals that over 80% of existing polluting electricity generating units and nearly 70% of substations in Massachusetts are located in or near environmental justice (EJ) neighborhoods. It warns that current trends in proposed infrastructure, including a new fossil-fuel peaker plant and several substations, continue to overburden these communities. The authors recommend integrating cumulative impact assessments, expanding the Energy Facilities Siting Board to include EJ and Indigenous representation, and prioritizing public health and climate targets in siting decisions.

• Existing siting processes have led to a high concentration of polluting power plants in environmental justice (EJ) areas. While EJ neighborhoods make up approximately 50% of the state's neighborhoods, more than 80% of existing polluting electricity generating units are located within or one mile of these areas.
• Electricity substations are also disproportionately sited in EJ communities, with nearly 70% of the state's 419 substations located within or within one mile of an EJ neighborhood.
• Current trends in proposed large-scale projects (35 MW or greater) indicate continued burdens on EJ communities. The only proposed polluting project—a gas and diesel peaker plant—is sited in an EJ neighborhood, and one-third of proposed battery energy storage projects are also located in EJ neighborhoods.
• Proposed new substations appear to follow historical patterns of overconcentration in low-income and minority communities. Of 11 proposed substations that could be mapped due to limited utility data transparency, 7 are located within EJ neighborhoods.
• To achieve a just transition, the authors recommend that the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) be expanded to include two public members representing Indigenous and EJ community perspectives, as the board currently only represents labor, energy, and environmental issues.
• The document argues for the adoption of cumulative impacts assessments in siting decisions to account for the historical burdens of pollution already borne by vulnerable communities, citing a 2020 New Jersey law as a potential model.

APA

Union of Concerned Scientists (2024). Siting for a Cleaner, More Equitable Grid in Massachusetts. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2024-03/MA-infrastructure-fact-sheet-3-21.pdf

Chicago

Union of Concerned Scientists. Siting for a Cleaner, More Equitable Grid in Massachusetts. 2024. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2024-03/MA-infrastructure-fact-sheet-3-21.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Union of Concerned Scientists |title=Siting for a Cleaner, More Equitable Grid in Massachusetts |date=March 2024 |url=https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2024-03/MA-infrastructure-fact-sheet-3-21.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{unionofconcernedscientists2024siting, author = {{Union of Concerned Scientists}}, title = {{Siting for a Cleaner, More Equitable Grid in Massachusetts}}, institution = {Union of Concerned Scientists}, year = {2024}, month = mar, url = {https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2024-03/MA-infrastructure-fact-sheet-3-21.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }