Rhode Island Warned To Exit Net Zero Road

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity recently published a report: Freezing in the Dark: The Staggering Costs & Risks of RI’s Green Energy Policies. (https://rifreedom.org/2025/05/freezing-in-the-dark-costs/.) Energy policies in the state have been among the most aggressive in the nation, a status government officials are proud to proclaim.

The state mandates 100% renewable electricity by 2033, the earliest target in the United States, an example of aggressive state climate change policies. The legislation was signed in 2022 by Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee.

In his accompanying statement, McKee wrote: “Last year, I signed the Act on Climate, which sets mandatory, enforceable climate emissions reduction goals leading the state to achieve net-zero emissions economy-wide by 2050. Today’s historic legislation outlines a firm 10-year commitment to achieve our climate change mitigation goals, giving Rhode Island the most ambitious renewable energy standard in the nation. When it comes to clean energy innovation, Rhode Island has the momentum and the tools to build on it.”

One can justifiably question McKee’s final observation. The state has the climate momentum, but having the tools to meet its goal requires politicians to understand energy’s technical and economic aspects, especially electricity systems. In our opinion, they fail that test.

Rhode Island’s path to net zero reflects a commitment to electrifying everything – transportation and heating. This strategy will result in a significant increase in electricity demand. Because electricity is an instantaneous business, a sufficient power supply must be developed to match the demand growth. As the report notes, all the parties responsible for Rhode Island’s power admit that the technology to achieve a renewables-only grid does not exist, certainly on the timetable the political plan maintains.

On the demand issue, Rhode Island is a CARB (California Air Resources Board) coalition member. Membership means committing to following California’s emissions-reduction mandates for vehicles. California has tailpipe emission restrictions and Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) fleet percentage targets. Following these rules will result in the total ban on internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle sales by 2035. Only electric-powered vehicles can be sold, although you can still own and purchase used gasoline-powered cars. This policy ignores the issue of whether an electric vehicle is appropriate for a family’s needs. Families will no longer be able to purchase a new ICE vehicle. For the grid, a rapid phase-in of electric vehicles with heavy charging demand will accelerate the growth in Rhode Island’s power needs and challenge the grid’s supply.

Politicians and bureaucrats lack an understanding that their plan to decarbonize Rhode Island’s electricity system relies on energy sources that create a greater risk of blackouts and brownouts, along with being expensive. These characteristics violate two of the three qualities of our electricity system, which the public demands and is entitled to. Those qualities are cleanliness, reliability, and affordability. To achieve all three qualities at once requires a compromise. However, Rhode Island politicians have focused on one quality – cleanliness – at the risk of failing to deliver the other attributes.

Share Energy Musings

By failing to do their homework on the technical aspects of the state’s electricity system, Rhode Island politicians are putting the public at risk of freezing in the dark. As the report highlights, an investigation by the Mackinac Center, Grading the Grid, shows how the renewable energy sources that Rhode Island is basing its decarbonization plan on receive failing grades.

Renewables rank at the bottom of energy performance.

Wind and solar receive the lowest scores for the five measures the Mackinac Center evaluated. As a result, it concluded:

“Unlike conventional energy sources, wind turbines and solar panels are subject to the vagaries of weather patterns and diurnal cycles. On cloudy, windless days, electricity generation from this pair can drop to near zero (or zero), challenging grid reliability. The transition to wind and solar also entails significant infrastructure changes in a grid designed for the steady output of traditional baseload power plants. But we are now assured that the grid that has provided safe and reliable electricity for decades must be substantially altered to address the variable nature of renewable generation. Instead, we should ask if the variable nature of wind and solar is well-suited to pair with our time-tested and reliable grid. We should ask if these intermittent resources are ready to meet our energy needs.”

The politicians who decide to base Rhode Island’s electricity system on renewable energy must explain how the grid will not be at risk. Furthermore, residents should be assured that the reliance on renewable energy will not be more costly than building dispatchable fossil fuel-powered plants. And such a grid must be capable of meeting the changing performance standards projected to arise from the electrifying-everything plan.

Independent System Operator – New England, the region’s power grid operator, has stated that electrifying everything will shift the grid’s daily peak power demand from summer to winter. Moreover, the winter peak will occur twice a day – when people arise and begin their day, and then when they return in the evening for dinner – as opposed to a single summer day peak when air conditioning demand peaks in the late afternoon heat.

Winter peaks compound the demand on a renewable-only grid because solar power does not work in the dark, and wind power typically lulls toward evening and through the night. This means the grid needs backup power sources when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind fails to blow. Rhode Island families risk freezing in the dark without sufficient backup power. Global statistics confirm that more people die from cold temperatures than heat waves.

Is this the fate for Rhode Islanders from the state’s net-zero plan?

Additionally, given renewables’ low output, a grid must build multiples of generating capacity to reach the output required under normal operating conditions. This makes renewable-only grids very costly and family power bills high.

The Rhode Island politicians and bureaucrats are guilty of dereliction duty in not investigating the feasibility of their energy plan. They compounded their error by failing to examine their plan’s costs and benefits measured against the operational risks it inflicts on residents.

The Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity report recommends two immediate actions for legislators to minimize residents’ risks. First, the government should postpone all deadlines related to green energy policies. This would allow time to evaluate the current strategy’s costs, benefits, technical feasibility, and alternatives. Secondly, policymakers should promptly repeal the Rhode Island electric vehicle mandate, as this would mitigate risks to the grid from the anticipated surge in transportation power consumption.

The report lays out all the issues ignored by politicians when they established the state’s green energy plan and dismisses them today. The report’s message is like Paul Revere’s warning to the Boston colonists that danger was coming. In 1775, the threat was the British. In 2025, it will be blackouts, brownouts, and unaffordable power. People will freeze in the dark.