PacifiCorp’s long-term plans don’t include new renewables — advocates are fighting that, again

A petition by clean energy advocates to require PacifiCorp to accelerate renewable energy developments failed. Now, the group is trying again, attempting to push the company toward resources that it says could save Utah ratepayers about $10 billion. 

What changed? PacifiCorp has submitted its long-term roadmap for resource procurement, and according to Utah Clean Energy, the utility isn’t doing enough to keep electricity bills low because it is letting time-sensitive federal tax incentive opportunities expire without a comprehensive study, the organization’s filing says.

“The total system cost of the 2025 (Integrated Resource Plan) Update (without tax-advantaged resources) is approximately $10 billion more expensive than the 2025 (plan), with approximately $6 billion of that added expense due to lost tax credits,” the advocates wrote.

In October the Utah Public Service Commission denied Utah Clean Energy’s petition to fast-track renewable energy procurement to take advantage of clean energy tax credits expiring under congressional Republicans’ spending package, widely known as the “big, beautiful bill.” 

Commissioners argued that they didn’t have the authority to direct PacifiCorp, and its subsidiary Rocky Mountain Power, to solicit a specific generation resource. But they said they’d be evaluating whether the utility has been acting reasonably on any limited-time opportunities in future rate proceedings. 

Also, the commission directed Rocky Mountain Power to include a detailed report of analysis and actions the utility has taken to evaluate and pursue the expiring tax credits in its long-term plan update. 

Utah advocates’ petition to fast-track clean energy is denied, but they still see it as a win

But, according to Utah Clean Energy, when the company filed the plan in late March, it contained an only two-page appendix with “no modeling results or meaningful analysis of whether any limited-time opportunities exist for procuring necessary resources at a lower cost.”

However, PacifiCorp says the company has already fulfilled the commission’s orders and that financial analysis of resources is more nuanced than what Utah Clean Energy argues.

The confidential analysis already included in the long-term plan demonstrates “that actual bid prices — even where tax credits were expected to be available — were higher than the proxy resource costs used in the (Integrated Resource Plan),” PacifiCorp said in a response.

“PacifiCorp has substantial visibility into current market conditions and participants. In other words, PacifiCorp has active solicitations for resources that can interconnect to PacifiCorp’s system (including Utah), with actual bid prices from developers,” the company wrote, adding that they have not seen the type of resources Utah Clean Energy claims exists.

The Colorado portfolio

Utah Clean Energy criticized that PacifiCorp’s latest long-term plan doesn’t include any new solar, wind or geothermal resources aimed at benefiting Utah customers. New generation proposals include gas-powered units in the mid-2030s and a nuclear demonstration project in 2032.

“Based on the (Integrated Resource Plan), it appears the utility is cherry‑picking energy resources and data that do not reflect the reality of Utah’s energy market. We have a ready pipeline of cost-effective, shovel‑ready clean energy projects. By omitting them from proper analysis, the utility is backing Utahns into a more expensive, more volatile energy mix,” said Logan Mitchell, climate scientist and energy analyst at Utah Clean Energy. 

And, according to others supporting the petition, there’s an opportunity to pursue other cleaner energy sources.

Interwest Energy Alliance, a regional trade association representing renewable energy developers, said in a news release that “if Rocky Mountain Power initiated a request for proposal right away, it is very likely that selected projects could meet the tax-credit deadlines, and Utah ratepayers would benefit from the reduced costs.”

The Public Service Company of Colorado’s 2025 near-term plan, the alliance said, “provides an instructive example of what a responsible and prudent evaluation of the time-limited tax credit opportunity looks like.” The Colorado process, the organization said, attracted clean energy bids that surpassed the solicited capacity by nearly 10 times, and represented about $4.97 billion in savings for ratepayers. 

“The Colorado experience is directly relevant here. It demonstrates that competitive, taxadvantaged renewable energy projects are available in the regional marketplace today, and that a utility willing to proactively solicit and model them can expect to achieve substantial savings for its customers,” the organization said.

But, PacifiCorp said that suggesting that the Colorado experience would translate to Utah “is flawed and illogical,” particularly because of the differences in location and system characteristics.

Additionally, the developers that have started construction that could be interconnected with PacifiCorp’s system, the company said, may “have chosen to not participate in any company solicitation or otherwise communicate to the company.” 

“PacifiCorp is not aware of these projects and Interwest provides no evidence to support this claim,” the utility said. “As noted above, PacifiCorp encourages Interwest to direct any such purported developers to engage with the company directly.”