Search Climate Insights Directory

The playbook offers a structured set of questions for advocates and regulators to use across pre-filing, planning, and ratemaking proceedings. It emphasizes the need to clarify who bears the cost of distribution investments, especially when load or distributed energy resource (DER) forecasts are inaccurate, and suggests the use of guardrails like cost caps and reconciliation rules to protect residential customers.

RMI's analysis of more than 200 utility PIMs reveals a strong preference for 'upside-only' reward structures over penalties, with Return on Equity (ROE) and shared savings being the most common and highest-paying designs. While utilities consistently achieve targets for percentage adder-based and equity-focused PIMs, the report suggests that targets may be set too low. Most PIMs are short-term experiments lasting two to three years, except for fuel cost-sharing and distributed energy resource mechanisms, which often lack end dates to provide regulatory certainty.

The report highlights a trend of massive infrastructure spending by both electric and gas utilities in the U.S., which is driving up consumer energy bills. While the electric sector has a 'full toolbox' of regulatory and technical solutions to manage costs, the author contends that gas utility solutions are 'more nascent and uncharted.' The document proposes the use of a gas system analysis (GSA) to provide the foundational technical information necessary for decision-makers to avoid investing in redundant or irrelevant long-lived assets.

The policy brief argues that gas utilities in the U.S. spend between $3.5 billion and $7 billion annually to replace aging service lines. It proposes a service line NPA framework where utilities offer customers financial incentives to electrify and disconnect from the gas system instead of replacing the pipe. This approach aims to reduce ratepayer costs, lower emissions, and avoid stranded assets. The brief highlights Con Edison's Energy Exchange Program as a developed example and discusses design considerations such as participant incentives, utility support, and customer outreach.

The briefing highlights a rising utility debt crisis in the US, where household debt grew to $23 billion by June 2025. It argues that targeted affordability programs—such as arrearage management plans, percentage-of-income payment plans, discount rates, and energy efficiency upgrades—benefit both vulnerable customers and the broader ratepayer base by reducing bad debt, collection costs, and service instability.

Small EV customers, including multi-family housing residents and small fleet operators, face significant barriers to grid connection, such as unpredictable costs, long timelines, and a lack of technical expertise. To address this, RMI and its partners developed a roadmap focusing on four key areas: enhancing customer educational resources, increasing utility process transparency, collaborating with local governments and industry to streamline permitting and workforce development, and maintaining post-energization customer relationships.

The policy brief argues that while performance incentive mechanisms (PIMs) can drive regulatory outcomes and affordability, they require intentional evaluation to ensure benefits outweigh costs. RMI recommends that PUCs implement recurring and transparent evaluations via web-based dashboards, assess PIMs as a holistic portfolio rather than in silos, create informal stakeholder dialogue spaces to reduce administrative burdens, and utilize existing design guidelines to standardize retrospective evaluations.

The document analyzes the impact of the Ghana cedi's 24.5% appreciation against the U.S. dollar in early 2025 on electricity costs. While macroeconomic indicators have improved, the power sector remains burdened by 80 billion cedis in debt, high transmission and distribution losses of 35.26%, and a projected US$2.23 billion financing gap. The brief examines potential outcomes for the September 2025 tariff review, including modest reductions, tariff freezes, performance-linked adjustments, or debt-for-efficiency swaps, arguing that currency strength alone cannot resolve deep-rooted structural weaknesses.

The document examines how governors in at least 14 US states have addressed rising electricity costs, which have increased by an average of 23% over the last decade. It identifies key cost drivers, such as grid modernization and natural gas volatility, and evaluates specific state-level interventions including regulatory reforms, energy efficiency programs, and the removal of coal plant subsidies.

The document examines the financial mechanisms of utility regulation, specifically the gap between the allowed return on equity (ROE) and the cost of equity (COE). It argues that current ROEs are excessively high, creating a 'capex bias' that incentivizes expensive capital projects over cost-effective solutions like energy efficiency. By analyzing price-to-book ratios and applying discounted cash flow models, the authors estimate that the required return for investors is significantly lower than currently approved rates. The guide provides a framework for stakeholders to challenge inflated COE estimates by correcting flawed model assumptions regarding interest rates, growth rates, and historical means. It further dismisses common industry claims that lower ROEs would limit access to capital or increase customer costs via credit rating downgrades.

RMI proposes a strategic framework to mitigate rising utility costs driven by infrastructure spending, fossil fuel reliance, and outdated regulatory incentives. The framework offers seven core strategies—ranging from improved planning and coordinated gas-electric regulation to leveraging competition and lowering financing costs—to ensure grid reliability and customer affordability.

The document identifies smart grids as 'safe bets' for Canada's energy transition, capable of increasing efficiency and reducing costs by managing peak demand through supply-side solutions like battery storage and demand-side tools like virtual power plants. While provinces such as British Columbia, Quebec, and Ontario have implemented various smart grid applications, widespread adoption is hindered by regulatory barriers, outdated utility incentives, and consumer hesitancy. The author argues that provincial policymakers and regulators must update legislation and incentives to accelerate the deployment of digital grid infrastructure to meet growing electricity demand.

The document outlines a four-step process for utility climate risk planning: identification, quantitative assessment, mitigation, and risk distribution. It emphasizes the need for utilities to move beyond siloed resilience plans by incorporating both physical risks (e.g., extreme weather) and transition risks (e.g., carbon taxes, policy changes) into core planning documents like Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs). The authors advocate for the use of high-resolution, long-term climate datasets (30+ years) to accurately model extreme events and argue that clean energy portfolios reduce financial volatility for residential customers compared to fossil-heavy portfolios. Finally, it provides actionable recommendations for regulators to mandate risk assessments, create financial incentives for transitioning away from fossil assets, and explore self-insurance funds to protect low- and middle-income customers from catastrophic costs.

The Canadian Climate Institute asserts that continuing the expansion of gas infrastructure for building heating creates financial risks for ratepayers and hinders climate targets. It advocates for an incremental transition to electric heat pumps and updated regulatory frameworks that consider alternatives to gas expansion, arguing that low-carbon gases like hydrogen and biomethane cannot realistically replace fossil gas for building heat due to cost and supply constraints.

The document introduces performance-based regulation (PBR) as a modern alternative to early 20th-century utility regulatory frameworks, which are currently challenged by the rise of renewable energy, distributed energy resources, and electrification. PBR is presented as a mechanism to align utility incentives with policy outcomes such as reduced emissions and improved social equity.

The report finds that U.S. residential electricity rates have generally kept pace with economy-wide inflation since 2010, and that states with high clean energy growth often see rates rise slower than inflation. Instead, the report identifies natural gas price volatility, wildfire mitigation and liability costs, aging coal plant investments, and rising transmission and distribution costs as the primary drivers of rate spikes. It further argues that the regulated utility business model incentivizes capital-heavy investments over more cost-effective operational solutions, which compounds these costs for consumers.

The document argues that achieving cost-effective net-zero emissions in Canada's building sector requires a significant shift toward electrification and a cessation of gas network expansion. It highlights a misalignment between current utility regulations—which continue to incentivize gas infrastructure growth—and the necessary transition to clean energy. The briefing recommends that provincial governments legally mandate net-zero targets for regulators, prioritize electrification over gas for new developments, and develop managed contraction plans for existing gas networks to avoid stranded assets and protect taxpayers.

The report argues that achieving cost-optimal carbon neutrality in Canada's building sector requires a massive shift toward electrification, primarily through heat pumps, and a significant reduction in gas network reliance. It warns that current regulatory inertia and the continued expansion of gas infrastructure create risks of 'stranded assets' and higher costs for taxpayers. The authors recommend that provincial governments provide clear long-term strategic guidance, mandate net-zero targets, and empower regulators to prioritize electrification over gas expansion to protect long-term affordability and reliability.

The document outlines the necessity of shifting Canada's building heat from gas to electricity to meet net-zero targets cost-effectively. It warns that continued expansion of gas networks risks creating stranded assets and higher costs for ratepayers. The author argues that current utility regulation is insufficient for the energy transition and recommends that provincial governments legislate net-zero targets, prioritize electrification over gas expansion, and implement managed contractions of gas networks while centering equity in policy design.

The report finds that a cost-optimal path to net zero in Canada requires a massive shift toward electrification of building heat, with electricity powering 78% to 91% of annual space heating demand by 2050. It argues that continued expansion of gas networks is inconsistent with these goals and risks creating stranded assets. The analysis highlights a critical gap in provincial policy leadership, noting that current utility regulation—which incentivizes infrastructure growth—is ill-suited for the energy transition. To mitigate risks, the report recommends that provincial governments legislate net zero targets, mandate electrification for new buildings, and equip regulators to manage the gradual contraction of gas networks while investing in electricity capacity and peak demand management.