Georgia Power’s recent filing of its 20-year plan with state regulators has sparked controversy and concern among stakeholders in Georgia. The utility, which anticipates a surge in electricity demand from data centers, has proposed keeping several coal-fired power plants open beyond their scheduled closure dates. This decision has already garnered criticism from environmental groups, with the Sierra Club giving Georgia Power an “F” grade for its plan.
One of the major issues with Georgia Power’s plan is the lack of transparency regarding the types of power plants it intends to rely on to meet the increased demand for electricity by 2031. The utility estimates that it will need to add 9.5 gigawatts of new generation capacity, nearly half of its current total capacity. However, the integrated resource plan (IRP) submitted by Georgia Power provides few details about the energy sources it plans to utilize, leaving stakeholders in the dark about whether the utility will prioritize clean energy, batteries, or fossil-fueled power plants.
This lack of clarity has raised concerns among environmental and consumer advocates, as well as trade groups representing tech companies that are driving the demand for electricity in Georgia. These groups have long been advocating for Georgia Power to prioritize clean energy alternatives over fossil fuels. The secretive nature of Georgia Power’s IRP process has further fueled worries that the utility may be rushing through approval of a plan that heavily relies on gas-fired power plants.
By withholding information about its future energy mix until the last minute, Georgia Power is limiting public scrutiny and input into its decision-making process. This approach puts pressure on state utility regulators to approve the utility’s plans quickly to ensure grid reliability, potentially leaving little room for alternative proposals or environmental considerations.
Environmental groups like the Southern Environmental Law Center are calling for more transparency and accountability from Georgia Power regarding its future energy plans. At a recent Public Service Commission hearing, concerns were raised about the lack of details in the IRP and the utility’s reliance on a confidential “all-source RFP” process to secure additional resources.
As stakeholders continue to push for more information and involvement in Georgia Power’s decision-making process, the future of the state’s energy landscape remains uncertain. The utility’s secretive approach to planning new power plants has left many questioning whether Georgia Power’s priorities align with the clean energy goals of the state and its residents. The lack of transparency in Georgia Power’s Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) is raising concerns among stakeholders about the utility’s future energy mix. In a recent hearing, it was revealed that 95 percent of the capacity needed to fill Georgia’s energy demands in 2031 is not publicly available. This lack of information makes it difficult for stakeholders to effectively intervene and assess the economic implications of Georgia Power’s energy plans.
When questioned about the undisclosed resources, Jeffrey Grubb, Georgia Power’s director of resource planning, cited commission rules that prevent the disclosure of certain details to protect the integrity of the Request for Proposal (RFP) process. However, critics argue that some level of transparency is necessary for stakeholders to understand the composition of the energy resources being considered.
One major point of contention is the potential construction of gas-fired power plants by Georgia Power, which are not explicitly mentioned in the IRP. The utility recently applied for permits to build gas-fired turbines at the site of its coal-fired Plant Bowen, indicating a shift towards fossil fuel-based generation. Grubb acknowledged that the utility is considering these projects but declined to provide specific details.
Environmental advocates and stakeholders have called on the Public Service Commission to require Georgia Power to disclose more information about its energy projects, including fuel type, ownership, and size. However, the utility has been reluctant to share such details, citing the need to protect sensitive information that could impact negotiations and procurement processes.
The lack of transparency in Georgia Power’s energy planning process highlights regulatory blind spots that allow utilities to withhold critical information from the public. While some level of confidentiality is necessary to protect competitive bidding processes, the extent to which information is being withheld in this case is unprecedented.
The surge in demand for energy, driven by the growth of data centers in the region, has complicated Georgia Power’s resource planning efforts. The utility has significantly increased its electricity demand forecasts for the next decade, creating a need for new generation capacity. The all-source RFP process has become the primary mechanism for Georgia Power to procure the resources it needs by 2031, further underscoring the importance of transparency in energy planning decisions.
As stakeholders continue to push for more information and transparency from Georgia Power, the utility faces mounting pressure to provide a clearer picture of its future energy mix. The outcome of this debate will have significant implications for Georgia’s energy landscape and the transition to a cleaner and more sustainable energy future. Georgia Power’s plans have expanded significantly from its initial goal of 500 MW to now filling a capacity of 9.5 GW through the all-source RFP process. This growth has raised concerns among environmentalists and consumer advocates about the utility’s reliance on fossil fuels and its impact on both the climate and customer rates.
The regulatory shell game that Georgia Power is playing has raised eyebrows, as the utility is contracting for the majority of its future energy needs outside the standard IRP process. This lack of transparency has left stakeholders in the dark about whether renewable alternatives are being properly considered in the decision-making process.
While Georgia Power has made progress in solar energy with about 3 GW of solar capacity, its slow contract signings with third-party owners have hindered its renewable energy growth. The utility’s 2025 IRP calls for an additional 3.5 GW of renewable energy by 2030, but this plan only makes up for previous cancellations of clean-power procurements.
Batteries could play a significant role in meeting Georgia Power’s capacity needs, especially in storing solar or grid power. The utility has been approved to add 500 MW of battery storage and plans to expand its energy storage capacity further. Pairing solar power with batteries could enhance its value to Georgia Power’s grid.
The utility’s commitment to fossil gas and coal, which made up nearly 60 percent of its capacity last year, has raised concerns about its impact on the climate. The Sierra Club estimates that Georgia Power’s proposed 2025 IRP would make it one of the top greenhouse gas emitters in the U.S. Additionally, utility customers have already seen rising rates due to the expansion of the Vogtle nuclear power plant.
Regulators must closely monitor Georgia Power’s resource selection process to ensure that decisions are not maximizing profits at the expense of customers. Consumer advocate Patty Durand fears that regulators may fail to challenge the utility’s assertions on cost-effective resource choices, potentially leading to a climate disaster.
In conclusion, the battle over Georgia Power’s expanding capacity highlights the need for a more transparent and renewable-focused approach to energy planning. Balancing the utility’s profit motives with the needs of customers and the environment is crucial for a sustainable energy future in Georgia. Utilities are holding back progress in the energy sector, particularly in states like Georgia where data center expansions are driving increased demand for electricity. Georgia Power, the state’s largest utility, has been criticized for consistently overestimating future electricity demand in order to justify investments in profit-earning assets.
One vocal critic of Georgia Power’s load-growth forecasts is Jennette Gayer, director of Environment Georgia. She has raised concerns that the utility’s projections are inaccurate and could lead to higher utility bills for consumers. Data centers, which are expanding rapidly in the state, are expected to further strain the grid and drive up costs for all customers.
Tech giants like Microsoft have also challenged Georgia Power on its modeling of clean energy resources and load growth forecasts. These companies, including Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, are planning major data center expansions while also striving to decarbonize their energy supplies. They have raised concerns that Georgia Power’s reliance on fossil fuels could hinder their efforts to reduce their carbon footprint.
The Clean Energy Buyers Association (CEBA) has also pushed back against Georgia Power, warning that the utility’s forecasted load growth may not materialize if it increases the carbon intensity of its resource mix. CEBA has supported Georgia Power’s Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) on the condition that the utility offers large industrial and commercial customers new options to bring more carbon-free resources onto the grid.
Georgia Power’s 2025 IRP includes a customer-identified resource proposal, allowing big customers to work with third-party developers to build solar, batteries, and other clean energy resources. However, the plan lacks transparency and certainty about how customer-proposed projects will be assessed and approved, frustrating CEBA members eager to pursue cleaner energy options.
Despite Georgia Power’s assurances that it is incorporating feedback from CEBA into its program designs, concerns remain about the lack of transparency in the process. The utility plans to announce winning bids for its all-source Request for Proposals (RFP) in July, the same month that state regulators are expected to take a final vote on the IRP.
As stakeholders continue to advocate for cleaner energy options and greater transparency in utility planning, the future of Georgia’s energy system hangs in the balance. It is crucial for utilities like Georgia Power to prioritize sustainability and collaboration with customers and stakeholders to ensure a more resilient and efficient energy grid for the future.
