Reliable Electricity Is at Risk in Connecticut

By Ron Brisé

As a former utility regulator, I understand the desire by public officials to do everything they can to keep water, gas and electric bills as low as possible. All Americans know that the cost of living in this country is going up too fast, putting many families under severe economic strain.

But Connecticut’s utilities are in the news lately. At the end of 2024, credit rating agencies downgraded several utilities that serve Connecticut. For example, S&P Global reduced Eversource’s credit rating from A- to BBB+. Four other utilities in the state, including water and natural gas companies, were also downgraded by S&P. Following suit, another credit rating agency, Moody’s, also downgrading utilities in Connecticut.

Credit downgrades are typically in response to poor performance or bad business decisions made by corporate leadership. But in this case, things are a little different. Here is a quote from an analyst at Moody’s about the downgraded utilities. “The rate outcome is evidence of a challenged regulatory environment, where the disparity between filed rate requests and ultimate rate orders has become considerable. Absent a return to more constructive political and regulatory decisions, both utilities could see further credit deterioration over the next two years.”

In other words, these credit downgrades are in response to a challenging regulatory environment with the Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Agency. 

What do these credit downgrades mean for the average person in Connecticut who relies on water, electricity, and natural gas?  Ultimately it will mean higher utility bills for customers in Connecticut. This is because the credit downgrade means the cost for the utilities to borrow money from investors will increase because these ratings agencies see more risk in Connecticut. Worse, this will hamper investment in Connecticut’s critical infrastructure and the electric grid.

All of this is deeply concerning to me, because Connecticut is not immune to severe weather like winter storms and tropical systems, and the state should be making more investments in its critical infrastructure to make communities more resilient to challenging weather. As a former Florida regulatory commissioner, I learned first-hand that investing in these critical infrastructure projects before severe weather strikes is vital to reducing the time between when the storm strikes and services being fully restored. Thanks to the investments Florida has made into our critical infrastructure, we can weather a massive storm and have power, and many essential services restored in just a few days for most customers.

Another challenge for Connecticut, is that as the state’s electric needs go up – due to data centers, Artificial Intelligence and people plugging in their electric vehicles – the state is going to need investments in grid infrastructure to connect new sources of power like wind and solar. Those enhancements cost money, and now they are going to cost more money because borrowing costs just went up for two of the largest electric utilities operating in Connecticut.

Because those borrowing costs are rising for these electric companies, the utilities must make tough decisions about which critical infrastructure improvements to make, and which to hold off on because they now cost too much. A less reliable electric grid exposes people and business in Connecticut to more and longer blackouts.

Finally, Florida’s electric grid and utilities are resilient today, because our regulators worked with the state’s utilities to carefully balance their needs while ensuring Florida’s utility customers have fair bills and resilient services. My hope is that things can improve in Connecticut for the sake of customers and the state’s economy.

Ron Brisé is a former Chair of the Florida Public Service Commission and is an electricity regulatory expert.

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
5 12 votes
Article Rating
37 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
January 31, 2025 6:10 am

Continuing perverse incentives to add wind and solar, and drop dispatchable sources will lead to unreliablility.

Bryan A
Reply to  Tom Halla
January 31, 2025 6:53 am

It’s OK though as Manhattan (New York City) will need to have the entire Connecticut state razed to the ground to make room for ALL the Solar + Battery the city will need to totally electrify…
Transportation
Heating
Cooling
Cooking
Shipping
Back-up Battery recharging
Over ALL 24 hour periods during Winter. They might be able to use a little less in the summer when the Sun is more productive though AC demands generally increase Summer Peak
AND do it all with renewable Solar.

Reply to  Bryan A
January 31, 2025 10:17 am

Are all the tall buildings in NYC still lit up fully at night?

Bryan A
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 31, 2025 5:54 pm

Probably, the Hoi Polloi Janitorial Staff need to see well to clean properly

David Wojick
January 31, 2025 6:30 am

Sorry but “investments in grid infrastructure to connect new sources of power like wind and solar” is just going to make things worse.

Rick C
Reply to  David Wojick
January 31, 2025 12:22 pm

If I read between the lines correctly, at least part of the issue is utilities requesting rate increases to deal with rising costs (wind/solar/transmission perhaps) and being denied by the CPURC. Rising costs and inability to raise rates inevitably results in reduced profits and higher credit risks. The downward spiral is underway.

January 31, 2025 6:39 am

“the state is going to need investments in grid infrastructure to connect new sources of power like wind and solar”

Sorry, no expert in grid infrastructure would claim that investments in wind and solar would strengthen the grid.

Reply to  Barnes Moore
January 31, 2025 10:17 am

nailed it!

derbrix
January 31, 2025 6:39 am

Hurricane Michael sure did a number on the electrical infrastructure in Jackson County, FL in 2018, almost completely wiping it out. But with the help of everyone it was rebuilt in a month, or so. Even today, the electrical crews keep the lines clear of the encroaching vegetation that grows year round.

Reply to  derbrix
January 31, 2025 10:19 am

Must be a lot of work- I’ve seen photos of vines down there that grow extremely fast- and soon grow up poles and on the wires- it must be a constant battle.

derbrix
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 31, 2025 10:57 am

It is! The kudzu and other grows constantly.
Quite fun watching the boom mounted hydraulic circular saw cut through the tangles of vines & branches which fall to the ground and are then mulched by a rotary drum mulcher on a skidsteer.

MR166
January 31, 2025 6:46 am

CT. has either the 2nd or 3rd highest electric rates in the nation! The state mandated that some residents did not have to pay electric bills during Covid. Now all of the residents have to pay a surcharge on their bills for 6 months to pay for this. The charge is about $70/month for a small home depending on usage. If you have electric heat it is much more. The state makes the ratepayers subsidize wind and solar panels. A few years back utility companies were forced to subsidize the purchase of LED bulbs by consumers. To have some of the highest rates in the nation and fiscally unsound electric companies at the same time is a real tribute to Democrats that have run this state for decades.

oeman50
January 31, 2025 6:50 am

Unfortunately, people in Connecticut fight tooth-and-nail against new power plants, new electric transmission, and new natural gas pipelines. So, even if they can co-locate a power generator with a data center, they may find gas supply is constrained, especially in winter.

Reply to  oeman50
January 31, 2025 7:10 am

people in Connecticut fight tooth-and-nail against new power plants, new electric transmission, and new natural gas pipelines.”

This is a perfect example of the Banana Syndrome.

Build
Absolutely
Nothing
Anywhere
Near
Anything

Reply to  oeman50
January 31, 2025 10:21 am

There is a vast a mount of potentially frackable gas right near by in NY state- but neither state wants to develop that resource. Same problem only worse in Wokachusetts.

Bill Parsons
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 31, 2025 1:13 pm

Connecticut’s strange looking Rosa DeLauro claims she is in favor of “responsible” nat gas development. Don’t know what her take on piplelines is, but she says she:

supports the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act to require all companies that drill for natural gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use in the hydraulic fracturing process. She also supports the Keep American Natural Gas Here Act to reduce energy prices and create a new fuel for the next generation by ensuring that the natural gas recovered in America stays in America.

I would support that. If their fracking chemicals pollute, they should be responsible for clean-ups.

January 31, 2025 7:29 am

Reliable Electricity Is at Risk in Connecticut throughout the world

mnmon
January 31, 2025 7:40 am

Former CT resident now living in Florida. My net electric rate before moving was 27cents/kwH. From friends still there it is now over 30cent/kwH thanks to green generation costs, but also a flat extra cost added to everyone’s bill to cover people who can’t pay their own bills. My net cost here in Florida is 13cents/kwH. Add to that, we would randomly lose power at least twice a month and that doesn’t count the extra times when the wind would blow over 30mph. Average restoration was minimum 6 hours. Here we’ve lost power twice both due to hurricanes and restoration within 6-10 hours.

Reply to  mnmon
January 31, 2025 10:23 am

“people who can’t pay their own bills”

I bet many if not most are illegal aliens. I presume CT welcomes them just like the governor of Wokeachusetts.

Sparta Nova 4
January 31, 2025 7:58 am

The definition of a downward spiral.

strativarius
January 31, 2025 8:11 am

Before too long we’ll be saying “Reliable Electricity”…. I remember that.
The tension is palpable; a growing economy or the decline of net zero. Stay tuned.

MarkW
Reply to  strativarius
January 31, 2025 9:54 am

There’s the old joke:
Child: Mommy, what did they use for lighting before candles.
Mommy: Electricity

0perator
January 31, 2025 8:15 am

I had considered, briefly, to get into operations at a utility in Connecticut. Now I am glad I threw my hat in elsewhere. Sure it paid more, but the cost of living would have consumed the pay difference.

January 31, 2025 8:36 am

What the author is pointing out is that goofy regulators put their utilities between a rock and hard place, i.e., between recovering their costs, including the cost of capital, to provide and maintain ‘used and useful’ infrastructure, and placating the ‘green’ whims of an electorate that is severely challenged in terms of scientific and economic knowledge.

Since CT is specifically called out in the article, I wish there had been more information on the real issue here, which is the so-called ‘Public Benefits’ charge and the impacts of renewable energy mandates thereon.

MR166
January 31, 2025 8:57 am

If it was not for its proximity to Wall Street and NYC CT. would be a wasteland. Combine exorbitant business taxes with extremely high electric rates and you are jobless. Despite these taxes CT. is virtually bankrupt.

Reply to  MR166
January 31, 2025 9:38 am

’If it was not for its proximity to Wall Street and NYC CT. would be a wasteland.’

Maybe. There’s also the consideration that absent the luxury beliefs of wealthy Wall Street commuters and NY transplants, CT might be a lot less ‘progressive’.

Reply to  Frank from NoVA
January 31, 2025 10:28 am

but… just north of CT is Wokeachusetts which is even MORE “progressive” with far fewer wealthy commuters and transplants from NYC- I suggest one reason CT is in the progressive camp is that it feels it must follow the lead of Wokeachusetts

Wokeanecticut? 🙂

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 31, 2025 11:24 am

Well, we can certainly add proximity to Boston as an indicator of progressivism. Providence, as well.

sherro01
January 31, 2025 9:06 am

I cannot understand why any person would want to become a “regulator”. The world is awash with people paid to tell other people what they can and cannot do.
Come on Ron Brise, how do you justify preventing the natural flow of the spirit of free enterprise? Do you want to get even with somebody who took away your childhood comforter? Geoff S

Reply to  sherro01
January 31, 2025 10:31 am

Being a regulator is an easy job. In most states, forestry work is ruled by regulators called state “service foresters”- who accomplish little. I was so regulated for 50 years. If they had not existed it wouldn’t have made any difference. Every logging job had problems- every single one- yet, I and the loggers and owners solved the problems to our satisfaction with no harm to the environment. Of course the regulators who ruled me now have a far higher standard of living in retirement than I do. They got well paid to drive around and look at my work.

strativarius
January 31, 2025 9:30 am

Net zero update

AstraZeneca abandons £450m vaccine factory in blow to Reeves
Ministers aimed to pull £50m in public funding for the project in Liverpool

AstraZeneca has abandoned a £450m investment in a major UK vaccine plant just days after Rachel Reeves vowed to “kick-start economic growth
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/01/31/astrazeneca-abandons-vaccine-factory-investment-liverpool/

All going splendidly.

January 31, 2025 10:36 am

Energy Transformation Advisory Board (ETAB) Meeting 1/22/2025

in Wokeachusetts

2 hours of total bullshit- the board is a nest of Net Zero loving feminists – they talk about the grid, etc. They show zero awareness of Trump and his plans to wipe Net Zero fools off the face of the planet and no awareness of the very high electricity costs in the state.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
February 2, 2025 2:31 pm

@JoeZ

Wowza. 2 hours of plain ignorance.

Yeah that sounds racist, but WTF do they think they are talking about?
Abject stupidity on a topic does not resolve into advocating a sane policy.

January 31, 2025 1:12 pm

Story Tip

Pacific Gas & Electric said in a statement it had agreed with owners — including NRG Energy Inc. — to terminate its contracts with the Ivanpah plant.

Reply to  doonman
January 31, 2025 1:23 pm

Good. The sooner this avian death ray is shut down, the better.

Bob
January 31, 2025 1:15 pm

Admittedly I don’t know the particulars in the Connecticut case. I doubt very seriously that it is merely a rate issue. Even though there is no mention of renewables in the post my guess is that the regulators don’t want to face up to how expensive it will be to depend mostly on renewables for power. My suggestion is to remove renewables from the picture. Fire up all fossil fuel and nuclear generators, build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators and remove all wind and solar from the grid.

observa
January 31, 2025 5:47 pm