⚠️ Among the Most Expensive Electricity in the Continental U.S.
MA residential rate: 30.48¢/kWh — national average: 18.16¢ (EIA Aug 2026)
Where that ranks: —
Your bill includes hidden costs: $1.62B RGGI carbon tax, RPS compliance, offshore wind contracts
H.5175 passed House 128-27 on Feb 26, 2026 — a 107-page Ways and Means rewrite, voted 48 hours after release with no hearing of its own
Vineyard Wind blade failure (July 2024) — debris across Nantucket beaches; turbine maker GE Vernova paid Nantucket a $10.5M settlement (July 2025)
As AG, Healey’s 2015 study found no new gas pipeline capacity was needed; in 2016 the SJC barred utilities from charging electric customers for pipeline contracts (ENGIE v. DPU)
State spent $534K fighting records requests that exposed zero compliance with its own climate rules
The Policy-to-Price Pipeline
MA Residential Rate
30.48¢
Per kWh (EIA Aug 2026)
National Average
18.16¢
Per kWh
Annual Overpayment
$887
Per household vs US avg
H.5175 Relief
~—
Per year — — of gap
FL Rate
14.99¢
Per kWh — half of MA
2025 Annual Avg Premium
+76%
30.41¢ MA vs 17.23¢ US — full-year EIA
Residential Electricity Rates — MA vs. Selected States (¢/kWh)
Source: EIA Electric Power Monthly Table 5.6.A, August 2026
MA Rate Premium Over National Average — Historical
Source: EIA, annual residential average rates —
📋 Why Is Massachusetts Electricity So Expensive?
Massachusetts electricity costs are driven by a combination of policy decisions: the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requiring 40% Class I renewable supply by 2030, RGGI — a cap-and-trade carbon tax that has extracted $1.62 billion from MA ratepayers since 2008, legally guaranteed full cost recovery for offshore wind contracts meaning ratepayers absorb all costs, blocking natural gas pipeline capacity (constraining supply), and building electrification policies (opt-in stretch codes and a fossil-free new-construction pilot) that increase demand while constraining supply. Each adds layers of cost that appear as line items on your bill.
Electricity Rate Deep Dive
⚠️ What's Actually On Your Bill
Supply (Basic Service, 17.323¢/kWh): 46.0% of the bill. Renewable-portfolio and clean-energy compliance costs are inside this price, not broken out
Distribution (9.837¢/kWh): 26.1%. It also carries residential-assistance, long-term renewable contract and solar program adjustments that the bill does not list
Transmission (4.673¢/kWh): 12.4%
Policy line items (3.663¢/kWh): 9.7%. Mass Save energy efficiency 2.292, net metering recovery 0.625, SMART solar 0.583, EV program 0.104, Renewable Energy Charge (statutory, funds MassCEC) 0.050, provisional system planning 0.008, grid modernization plan 0.001. A floor: the policy items inside distribution and supply are not counted
Customer charge ($10/month) and other delivery: 5.7%. The transition charge from deregulation is now a small credit (−0.077¢)
RGGI costs: $1.62B in carbon auction costs since 2008 — passed to ratepayers
One Residential Bill, Line by Line (Eversource R-1, 600 kWh/month)
Source: Eversource (NSTAR Electric) filed rates, Rate R-1, Greater Boston: delivery rates effective 1 Sep 2026; Basic Service fixed price 17.323¢/kWh from 1 Aug 2026 (M.D.P.U. No. 1-26-E). One utility, not a statewide average. Bill at 600 kWh: $225.75/month.
MA vs. National Rate Gap Over Time
Source: EIA Electric Power Monthly, —
New England Electricity Rates — All Among the Highest (EIA Aug 2026)
| State | Rate (¢/kWh) | vs. National | Annual Cost (600 kWh/mo) | Extra vs. US Avg |
|---|
| Massachusetts | 30.48 | +68% | $2,195 | +$887 |
| Rhode Island | 28.18 | +55% | $2,029 | +$721 |
| Connecticut | 24.51 | +35% | $1,765 | +$457 |
| New York | 28.65 | +58% | $2,063 | +$755 |
| US Average | 18.16 | — | $1,308 | — |
| Florida | 14.99 | -17% | $1,079 | -$228 |
| Texas | 15.91 | -12% | $1,146 | -$162 |
Source: EIA Electric Power Monthly, Table 5.6.A, August 2026.
🏭 The Statistic Nobody Talks About: MA Industrial Rates Are +108% Above National Average
MA industrial rate: 20.03¢/kWh — national average: 9.64¢ (EIA Aug 2026)
MA commercial rate: 24.11¢/kWh vs US avg 14.47¢ — +67% above national
Industrial customers pay more than double the national average and commercial customers two-thirds more — a direct driver of job and business flight
5 of the 10 most expensive states for residential electricity are in New England — Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and Connecticut (EIA, Aug 2026)
MA Electricity Rates by Sector vs. National Average (EIA Aug 2026)
| Sector | MA Rate (¢/kWh) | US Average (¢/kWh) | MA Premium | Impact |
|---|
| Residential | 30.48 | 18.16 | +68% | /yr per household extra |
| Commercial | 24.11 | 14.47 | +67% | Higher operating costs for small businesses |
| Industrial | 20.03 | 9.64 | +108% | Double national avg — drives manufacturing exodus |
| All Sectors | 26.42 | 14.87 | +78% | Broadest measure of MA's mandate premium |
Source: EIA Electric Power Monthly Table 5.6.A, August 2026 — the newest month EIA publishes (it releases at month+2). Retrieved 2026-10-29 from the EIA API v2 retail-sales series. The whole table reads one month.
Legislation — H.5175 & S.3143
⚖️ Status — in conference committee, not law
Both chambers have passed their own version and neither text is in force. H.5175 (H.5151 as amended on the House floor) passed the House 128–27 on February 26, 2026; the Senate passed its own text, S.3143 (as amended, reprinted as S.3166), 32–8 on July 1, 2026. A House–Senate conference committee named July 16, 2026 (Reps. Cusack, Michlewitz and Jones; Sens. Barrett, Creem and Tarr) is reconciling them, and under legislative rules those talks may run through 2026. The two differ materially — the House bill cuts roughly $1B from Mass Save across 2025–2027, while the Senate bill phases out the Gas System Enhancement Plan by 2030 — so the savings claims audited below are claims about competing drafts, not about enacted law. Whatever emerges from conference is what will actually reach ratepayers.
H.5175 — The $9 Billion Illusion
⚠️ Passed House 128-27 on Feb 26, 2026 — H.5151 as amended, reprinted as H.5175
107 pages reported by Ways & Means, dated Tuesday Feb 24. CommonWealth Beacon reported members had 45 minutes to vote.
126 amendments filed by 5pm Wednesday. Floor vote Thursday past 10pm.
Claims $9B in savings over 10 years. Reality: about —/yr per household (— of gap).
The $1B+ Mass Save cut was due for filing by July 1, 2026 — the bill is still not law, so zero relief this winter.
Sets procurement targets of at least 10 GW offshore wind and about 10 GW solar by 2040, with contracts of up to 30 years.
Lobbying cost recovery ban stripped. GSEP pipe spending untouched.
Annual Impact Per Household
Source: EIA Aug 2026, bill text analysis.
Where the "Savings" Actually Come From — $/yr Per Household
Method: each item averaged over the same 10 years as the House’s $9B claim. Mass Save: H.5175 §69 orders at least $1B cut, which the House put entirely in 2027; residential and income-eligible programs are 74.7% of the 2027 plan (EEAC 2025 Annual Report data tables). Over 2.83M households (ACS 2024) that is a one-time ~$264, electric and gas bills combined. ACP: §7 returns 70% of alternative compliance payments until July 1, 2029, when §8 makes it conditional; 3 years counted. 2023 ACPs were $189.2M on 43.3M MWh of load (DOER 2023 Annual Compliance Report), applied to 7,200 kWh a year. Net metering: $380M over 10 years is the Healey administration’s 2025 estimate for the same credit change (policy brief); no House estimate found. Same per-kWh spread. The bill’s added costs (10 GW wind, 10 GW solar) are not priced here: no contracts exist yet.
Annual MA Overpayment
$887
30.48¢ vs 18.16¢ × 600 kWh/mo
Their Claim / HH / Year
$318
House claim: $9B ÷ 2.83M households ÷ 10 yrs
Realistic Relief
~—
Mass Save + ACP + net metering; 10-yr average, same basis as the claim
An Eversource R-1 bill at 600 kWh is —/mo on the filed tariff (breakdown on the Rates tab). H.5175’s three relief items come to about —/mo per household over 10 years, split across electric and gas bills. The Massachusetts bar in the chart below is lower because EIA’s statewide average price includes municipal light plants and competitive supply; this figure is one Eversource Basic Service customer.
State Comparison — Monthly Bill at 600 kWh
Source: EIA Aug 2026 rates × 600 kWh/month
NEW COSTS H.5175 ADDS TO FUTURE BILLS:
10 GW offshore wind — long-term contracts recovered through ratepayer tariffs
10 GW solar procurement — same cost recovery mechanism
Central Procurement Fund — tariff-funded for 30-year contracts
State offshore wind co-investment — ratepayer $ to "accelerate" developers
Inclusive Utility Investment — participants repay upgrades on their own bills, but program costs go into base rates paid by everyone
Data center renewable energy mandate — added during 10pm session
"Somebody who's getting a bill today, tomorrow, next month — what are they going to see for relief? It's a lot more down the road."House Minority Leader Brad Jones (R) — as quoted by CommonWealth Beacon, Feb 2026
This isn't reform. It's a remodel of the same machine.
You save about —/month, averaged over the same 10 years as the House’s claim. Most of it is a one-time — Mass Save cut in 2027. Every new mandate becomes tomorrow's line item.
S.3143 — The Senate's $14.9 Billion Claim, Audited
⚠️ Released June 24, 2026 — Passed the Senate on July 1, 2026
Senate claims more than $14B in ratepayer savings over 10 years (its 15 itemized claims total $14.9B to $15.2B) — while MA rates sit at —, — above national average
Winter 2024–25 gas bills rose 25–30% for Eversource and 11–13% for National Grid customers after the DPU approved seasonal rates on Oct 31, 2024 (as reported) — none of the claimed savings offsets increases like these
The bill's largest single claim — $7.1B securitization — restructures utility debt, it does not eliminate it. Ratepayers still pay every dollar.
S.3143 slows the RPS to 1%/yr through 2030, then raises it to 3%/yr for 2031–33 and 2%/yr for 2034–36, and counts the near-term slowdown as "$213M savings" — they created the cost; they are deferring it and claiming credit
Sen. Barrett, the bill's author, did not describe how much a typical ratepayer would save or when they would first see relief on their monthly bill (State House News Service, June 24, 2026)
Mass Save has ballooned from $154M (2008) to $1.21B spent in 2025, with $1.5B a year budgeted for 2025–2027 and $13.2B spent since 2008. The bill caps admin at 5% but does not claw back approved budgets
Total Claimed Savings
$14.9B
Over 10 years — 15 itemized claims ($14.9B–$15.2B); Senate says “more than $14B”
Verified / Documented
$2.2B
Competitive supplier + GSEP reform + geothermal
Speculative / Accounting
$8.3B
Securitization, investigations, mandate trims
Gap Closed vs US Avg
~—
Realistic ~—/yr of —/yr overpayment
MA Rate Right Now
—
EIA — — —
Passed Senate
32–8
Jul 1, 2026 — as amended, reprinted as S.3166; in conference since Jul 16
The $14.9B Claim — Credibility Breakdown
Source: S.3143 fact sheet (June 24, 2026); @DuncanBurnsMA analysis. Green = documented AGO/DPU data; Amber = plausible, partial; Red = debt restructuring, investigation authorizations, mandate rollbacks.
Savings Claims by Category — $M Over 10 Years
Source: S.3143 Senate fact sheet. Color = credibility tier: green = documented, amber = plausible/partial, red = speculative or accounting fiction.
Annual Per-Household Reality Check
Source: EIA —; S.3143 $14.9B ÷ 2.83M households (ACS 2024) ÷ 10 yrs = $528/yr claimed if every dollar went to households; realistic relief = ~—/yr (H.5175 items; method under the H.5175 savings chart). Even accepting the full claim, MA remains —.
What S.3143 Leaves in Place — $M per Year
RGGI: Massachusetts auction proceeds, 2025 (RGGI Inc.). RPS & clean peak: DOER’s low estimate of 2023 compliance cost, $806M (high $1,086M), 2023 Annual Compliance Report, Table 13; S.3143 slows RPS growth but keeps the standard. Mass Save: 2027 plan budget ($1,585M) minus 2025 ($1,415M), EEAC 2025 Annual Report data tables; not clawed back.
S.3143 Savings Claims — Line-by-Line Audit
| Provision | Senate Claim | Mechanism | Credibility | The Catch |
|---|
| Competitive Supplier Reform | $650M | Rein in predatory suppliers; enhanced AGO enforcement | ✅ Documented | AGO: residential competitive-supply customers paid $738.7M more than basic service over the past decade (as cited in the Senate fact sheet). Receipt exists. |
| GSEP Gas Line Reform | $1.46B | Narrow scope + phase out gas pipe program by 2030 | ✅ Documented | GSEP is 8–11% of monthly gas bills. AGO has flagged it for years. Credible and overdue. |
| Geothermal (Hospitals/Colleges) | $130M | Gas utilities own single-customer geothermal systems | ✅ Documented | Specific, targeted, aligns with existing multi-customer authority. Solid provision. |
| Distribution Planning Reform | $1.7B | Merge overlapping DPU planning proceedings | ⚠️ Plausible | Efficiency gain is real but $1.7B assumes maximum redundancy elimination — optimistic. |
| Reconciling Charge Reform | $750M | DPU review of usage-based peak charges | ⚠️ Plausible | Depends entirely on DPU action post-passage. No guaranteed outcome. |
| Seasonal Procurement Reform | $780M | Flexible procurement windows to dampen seasonal spikes | ⚠️ Plausible | Known fix for years. DPU already had authority to do this. Senate taking credit retroactively. |
| DOER Direct Procurement | $160M–$420M | Cut utility intermediary fee on energy contracts | ⚠️ Plausible | Wide range ($160M–$420M). Lower end is realistic; upper requires full program adoption. |
| Renewable Natural Gas | $230M | Utilities transport RNG to large industrial users | ⚠️ Plausible | Depends on RNG supply buildout and industrial uptake. Long-term play with uncertain timeline. |
| Third-Party Grid Investment | $130M | Outside investors fund distribution projects | ⚠️ Plausible | Requires a competitive investor market to develop. Unproven in MA regulatory context. |
| Net Metering Reduction | $75M | Cut credits for large standalone solar/wind facilities | ⚠️ Plausible | Shifts cost from large commercial facilities. Rooftop solar owners unaffected per bill text. |
| Basic Service Markup Investigation | $1B | DPU investigates the basic-service markup: customers paid an estimated $3.4B more than suppliers paid generators, 2015–2024 (Senate estimate) | ❌ Speculative | This is an authorization to investigate, not a guaranteed outcome. Counting an inquiry as a savings projection. |
| Securitization | $7.1B | Utilities refinance grid/storm/gas transition debt at lower rates | ❌ Accounting | Ratepayers still pay every dollar of the debt — just at a lower interest rate. This is relative-to-worst-case math, not bill reduction. |
| RPS "Right-Sizing" | $213M | RPS growth held to 1%/yr through 2030, then 3%/yr 2031–33 and 2%/yr 2034–36 | ❌ Mandate Rollback | The legislature created this cost. Deferring a target they set and calling the delta "savings" is circular logic. |
| On-Bill Equipment Financing | $540M | Utilities offer on-bill payment for efficient home equipment | ⚠️ Plausible | The Senate says “depending on uptake.” Omitted from this table until Oct 29, 2026. |
| SMART REC Cost Reduction | $26M | Lower utility compliance costs for SMART solar RECs | ⚠️ Plausible | Small, specific line. Omitted from this table until Oct 29, 2026. |
Sources: S.3143 Senate fact sheet (June 24, 2026); AGO Competitive Electric Supply Annual Report (March 2026); EIA; DPU; RGGI Inc.; WBUR; Commonwealth Beacon; WWLP.
📋 What S.3143 Does NOT Address — The Structural Cost Drivers Remain
Pipeline blockade legacy: Rejecting Access Northeast constrained natural gas supply — the primary driver of winter price spikes. S.3143 is silent on this.
DPU-approved winter gas increases, 2024–25: Eversource +25–30%, National Grid +11–13% (as reported Oct 31, 2024). No provision claws back increases like these.
RGGI carbon tax: $1.62B extracted from MA ratepayers since 2008; $262M in 2026 alone through September, already a record. S.3143 does not touch RGGI.
RPS compliance costs: Bill rolls back targets for 3 years but extends the mandate framework. The long-term cost architecture stays fully intact.
Mass Save cost explosion: The 5% admin cap and removal of mandatory performance incentives are genuine reforms — but the 2025–27 plan still rises from $1,415M in 2025 to $1,585M in 2027 (EEAC plan data), and none of that is clawed back.
Offshore wind collapse: S.3143 acknowledges the federal attack on offshore wind and responds by reducing targets. That is managing decline, not solving the supply gap.
"While he forecast overall savings during a 10-year timeline, Barrett did not describe how much a typical ratepayer could expect to save or when they might first experience noticeable savings in their monthly bills."WWLP News — June 24, 2026
The Honest Version: "We're Trying to Slow the Growth of Bills We Helped Make This Expensive"
Two provisions — competitive supplier reform ($650M) and GSEP gas line reform ($1.46B) — are real, documented, and overdue. The rest is a mix of DPU reform authority they already had, debt restructuring framed as savings, mandate rollbacks they're calling consumer relief, and investigation authorizations counted as projected outcomes. S.3143 is better than H.5175. But the $14.9B headline is not a bill reduction. It's a press release.
Sources: S.3143 Senate fact sheet (June 24, 2026); EIA Electric Power Monthly (); AGO Competitive Electric Supply Annual Report (March 2026); DPU; RGGI Inc.; WBUR; Commonwealth Beacon; Fall River Reporter; WWLP (June 24, 2026).
What They Cut vs. What They Kept
They trimmed branches while fertilizing the root.
Cuts vs. Policy Charges Still on the Bill — $/yr Per Household
Green: H.5175 relief (method under the H.5175 savings chart). Red: policy costs on a 600 kWh Eversource R-1 bill. Efficiency, net metering and SMART charges are the filed tariff rates; RPS & clean peak is DOER’s low estimate, 1.86¢/kWh (2023 Annual Compliance Report; high 2.51¢); RGGI is Massachusetts’ 2025 auction proceeds ($200.4M) over 51.6M MWh of retail sales (EIA 2025). RPS and RGGI sit inside the supply price. The Mass Save cut comes partly out of the efficiency charge, partly out of gas bills.
✂️ What They Cut
Mass Save — $1B cutAt least $1B off the $4.49B 2025–27 plan, taken in 2027 (Rep. Cusack: “a one-year pause”). Not law
Net Metering — $380M / 10yrNew "supply rate" credits for large facilities
ACP Rebates — 70% returnedTEMPORARY — 3 years, then conditional triggers
Supplier Rules — TIGHTENED$5M bonds, no supplier sales to low-income customers, fines up to $100K per violation
Utility Audits — NEWDPU may order management audits no more than once every 5 yrs, plus targeted audits, paid for by the utility, not ratepayers.
🔒 Kept + Added
🔒 Net Zero by 2050The Global Warming Solutions Act mandate stays in force — UNTOUCHED
🔒 50% Emissions Cut by 2030Legally binding sublimit — UNTOUCHED
📈 10 GW Offshore Wind by 2040EXPANDED — ten years after the 2016 law, one Massachusetts project is built: Vineyard Wind 1, 806 MW, offshore construction finished March 2026
🆕 10 GW Solar by 2040NEW mandate — costs "shared collectively"
🏛️ New Procurement AgencyDiv. of Clean Energy Procurement — tariff funded
💰 Central Procurement FundRatepayer money for 30-year contracts
💰 Offshore Wind Co-InvestmentYOUR money to "accelerate" developers
💸 Inclusive Utility InvestmentParticipants repay upgrades on their own bills; the utility's program costs go into base rates paid by all customers
❌ Lobbying Ban — STRIPPEDHealey proposed banning utility lobbying cost recovery. House killed it.
❌ GSEP Pipe Spending — UNTOUCHEDGas utility pipe replacement costs soaring.
—/yr
Policy Costs on a 600 kWh Bill Today
The Speed Run — 107 Pages in Two Days
107
Pages, House W&M bill (H.5151)
vs
123
Pages, Governor's bill (H.4144)
REWRITTEN, NOT EXPANDED
2 DAYS
W&M text (Feb 24) to House floor vote (Feb 26, 2026)
vs
285 DAYS
Governor's bill in committee (H.4144, May 15, 2025 → Feb 24, 2026)
NO TIME TO READ
0
Hearings on the W&M rewrite
vs
1
Joint hearing on Governor's bill (June 25, 2025)
NO HEARING ON THE FINAL TEXT
Tue Feb 24
107-page bill dropped
Ways & Means releases text. Members get 45 minutes to vote it out. No public review.
Wed Feb 25
126 amendments — 5pm deadline
Reps get ~24 hours to read 107 pages.
Thu Feb 26
House vote — 128-27 → H.5175
Marathon session past 10pm. Uyterhoeven amendment fails 17-138. Published as H.5175.
Wed Jul 1
Senate vote — 32-8
Senate passes its own version (S.3143 language) as an amendment to H.5175. Keeps Mass Save; phases out GSEP instead. Claims $14B / 10 yr.
Thu Jul 16
Conference committee appointed
House non-concurs, Senate insists, rules suspended in both chambers. Six conferees now write the final text behind closed doors: Cusack · Michlewitz · Jones (House) and Barrett · Creem · Tarr (Senate). Jones and Tarr are the Republican minority leaders — 4D / 2R, standard practice. Bill carries an emergency preamble.
🤝 What They Already Agree On
The House and Senate versions differ sharply on Mass Save and GSEP — but both chambers passed the same new income-verification requirement for moderate-income customers (61–80% of state or area median income) living in the state's 21 designated equity communities. Those residents would need their landlord to document that at least half the building's units are rented to income-eligible households; the identical customer in any other community could keep self-attesting. Senate energy chair Michael Barrett: “Once you get beyond poor households… you need to verify incomes.” House energy chair Mark Cusack: “Verifying income is not and should not be a point of contention.” Both are now conferees. Lowell, Everett and Fall River already pay more into Mass Save than they receive back.
Sources: malegislature.gov H.5175 bill history; CommonWealth Beacon, Jul 16 2026.
New procurement bureaucracy
10 GW offshore wind mandate
10 GW solar by 2040
Central Procurement Fund
State wind co-investment
Inclusive Utility Investment
Solar licensing regime
DER provider licensing
V2G interconnection
Thermal energy labor rules
Highway transmission
Gas co. geothermal
Community solar (4 pgs)
Utility asset leasing
Flexible interconnection
Renewable natural gas
Gas just transition
Data center renewables req.
"By the time of the vote, there was not clarity among most legislators about what we were voting on."Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven (D-Somerville), who voted no — as quoted by WBUR, June 1, 2026
Michlewitz on the 2030 mandates: "The membership was not ready for that conversation today."
They know the mandates are the problem. They won't touch them.
Offshore Wind — Billions in Costs, Foreign Profits
Nantucket Blade Settlement
$10.5M
Paid by GE Vernova, July 2025
Plymouth Turbine
Blade Fell
Nov 7, 2025 — onshore turbine blade in cranberry bog
Contract Structure
Full Cost Recovery
Ratepayers absorb ALL costs
Developer Origins
🇪🇸 🇩🇰 🇵🇹 🇫🇷
Spain, Denmark, Portugal / France
⚠️ The Offshore Wind Failure Timeline
July 2024: Vineyard Wind turbine blade fails — debris across Nantucket beaches
July 2025: GE Vernova reaches $10.5M settlement with Nantucket
Nov 2025: Plymouth onshore wind turbine — a blade detaches into a cranberry bog; no injuries
2023: Commonwealth Wind and SouthCoast Wind cancel their contracts and pay termination fees; both re-bid, and no new contract is signed as of Oct 2026
Section 83C guarantees cost recovery of every contract payment, net of power and REC sales, + utilities get 2.25% of contract payments (2.75% on pre-2022 contracts)
H.5175 expands to 10 GW offshore wind + adds state co-investment with developers
Offshore Wind Projects — Who Gets Paid
| Project | Developer | Parent Company | Country | Status |
|---|
| Vineyard Wind 1 | Avangrid / CIP | Iberdrola 🇪🇸 / CIP 🇩🇰 | Spain / Denmark | Blade failure, operating |
| New England Wind 1 | Avangrid | Iberdrola 🇪🇸 | Spain | Development |
| New England Wind 2 | Avangrid | Iberdrola 🇪🇸 | Spain | Development |
| SouthCoast Wind | Ocean Winds | EDP Renewables 🇵🇹 / ENGIE 🇫🇷 | Portugal / France | Selected in 2024 re-bid; contract not signed |
Source: BOEM filings; developer public disclosures; state procurement records
📋 Full Cost Recovery: What It Means for You
Under Massachusetts law (Section 83C, Ch. 169, Acts of 2008 as amended by Ch. 188, Acts of 2016), a utility that signs an offshore wind contract is “entitled to cost recovery of payments made under a long-term contract”. In plain terms, that is full cost recovery. Utilities can pass 100% of contract costs to ratepayers. Developers are guaranteed revenue. Utilities pass the net contract cost to ratepayers and collect a 2.25% remuneration (up to 2.75% on older contracts). Prices are fixed per MWh, so ratepayers carry the price risk for 20 to 30 years, while developers carry construction cost overruns.
📜 The Balance Sheet Protection Clause — Buried in §83C
The same statute that mandates full cost recovery for ratepayers also gives utilities an explicit escape hatch for themselves. The exact language from Section 83C (Ch. 188, Acts of 2016):
"A distribution company may decline to pursue a proposal if the proposal's terms and conditions would require the contract obligation to place an unreasonable burden on the distribution company's balance sheet; provided, however, that the distribution company shall take all reasonable actions to structure the contracts... to prevent or mitigate an impact on the balance sheet or income statement of the distribution company or its parent company; provided further, that mitigation shall not increase costs to ratepayers."
Translation: Utilities can walk away from any contract that hurts their financials. Ratepayers cannot. Utilities must protect their own balance sheet — while ratepayers absorb 100% of whatever contracts do get signed. When Healey (as AG) called utility profits "outrageous" in 2019, her own office confirmed: "the utilities are guaranteed full cost recovery from their customers." Governor Baker signed Ch. 179 (2022), extending the framework. As governor, Healey signed St. 2024, c. 239, which applied it to 5,000 MW of storage contracts (§83E).
Source: Ch. 188, Acts of 2016, §12 (Section 83C); CommonWealth Beacon, April 2019; Ch. 179, Acts of 2022 (approved Aug 11, 2022); St. 2024, c. 239 (approved Nov 20, 2024)
The Mandate Stack — Policy Decisions Driving Your Bill
⚠️ Every Mandate Adds Cost
RPS: 40% Class I renewable by 2030 (30% in 2026), rising 1% a year after
RGGI: $1.62 billion extracted since 2008 — $262M in 2026 through September, a record
Net-Zero 2050: Economy-wide carbon neutrality
Building Electrification: New construction mandates increase demand
Pipeline Opposition: As AG, Healey’s 2015 study said no new pipeline capacity was needed
Energy Storage: 5,000 MW of contracts by July 31, 2030
The Legal Chain — How the Statutes Connect to Your Bill
Every charge on your bill traces back to a specific legislative vote. This is the unbroken chain from law to line item.
Ch. 298, Acts of 2008
Global Warming Solutions Act (Ch. 21N)
Enacted 2008 — House 155–0
M.G.L. c. 25A, §11F
Renewable Portfolio Standard — 40% Class I by 2030
Drives RPS compliance charges
St. 2016, c. 188 → c. 169, Acts of 2008, §83C
Offshore wind procurement (added to the Green Communities Act in 2016)
Amended Ch. 188/2016 & Ch. 179/2022
St. 2024, c. 239, §83E
2024 Climate Law (“...Protecting Ratepayers”): storage mandate
House: 128–17 · Senate: 38–2
YOUR BILL
30.48¢/kWh — —
$887/yr above national avg
Source: MA General Laws; Acts of the Legislature; EIA Aug 2026
Your Bill Line-by-Line — Each Charge Linked to Its Statute
The legislature writes the mandate. The statute creates the charge. You pay the bill. Here's the complete chain for every line item.
| Bill Line Item | % of Bill | Statutory Authority | What the Law Says |
|---|
| RPS compliance (inside supply) | Not broken out | M.G.L. c. 25A, §11F | RPS mandate — distribution companies must procure qualifying renewable energy and recover costs from customers |
| Energy Efficiency / Mass Save | 6.1% | M.G.L. c. 25, §21 | Requires distribution companies to fund energy efficiency programs — costs recovered through customer charges |
| Clean Energy / Offshore Wind | Inside distribution, not broken out | Ch. 169, Acts of 2008, §83C
(as amended St. 2016, c. 188, §12) | Statute: utilities “entitled to cost recovery of payments made under a long-term contract”. In effect, full cost recovery: all PPA costs pass through to ratepayers; utilities receive 2.25% remuneration (up to 2.75% on contracts approved before 2022) |
| RGGI Carbon Pass-Through | Inside supply, not broken out | M.G.L. c. 21A, §22 | Cap-and-trade carbon auction costs — $262M in 2026 through September, passed to ratepayers through supply charges |
| Transmission Charge | 12.4% | M.G.L. c. 164, §1 | ISO-NE grid fees and capacity market costs — constrained by blocked pipeline infrastructure |
| Distribution Charge | 26.1% | M.G.L. c. 164, §1A | DPU-regulated delivery charge — includes GSEP pipe replacement costs (untouched by H.5175) |
| Supply Charge | 46.0% | Market rate | Actual generation cost — elevated by pipeline constraints (ISO-NE confirms gas dependency drives winter spikes) |
Source: M.G.L. c. 25A §11F; M.G.L. c. 25 §21; Ch. 169/2008 §83C; Ch. 188/2016 §12; M.G.L. c. 21N; M.G.L. c. 164. Shares: the Eversource R-1 Greater Boston bill at 600 kWh/month on the Rates tab (filed rates, Sep 2026). The separate Renewable Energy Charge on the bill is 0.050¢/kWh under M.G.L. c. 25 §20 and funds MassCEC; it is not the RPS.
The Legislative Record — They Voted for This
Every mandate has a roll call. Near-unanimous passage means this wasn't accidental — it was architected. Only 19 legislators voted against the 2024 law, and 15 against the 2021 law.
| Law | Citation | What It Mandated | House Vote | Senate Vote | Result |
|---|
| Green Communities Act | Ch. 169, Acts of 2008 | Rewrote the RPS (c. 25A §11F); created §83 long-term renewable contracts and the RGGI auction (c. 21A §22) | 154–0 (June 26, 2008) | 36–0 (June 24, 2008) | Enacted — no recorded opposition |
| Global Warming Solutions Act | Ch. 298, Acts of 2008 (Ch. 21N) | Statewide emission limits (at least 80% below 1990 by 2050); market-based mechanisms. Net zero added in 2021 | 155–0 (July 30, 2008) | Tally not in the online record | Enacted — no recorded House opposition |
| Offshore Wind Expansion | St. 2016, c. 188 | 1,600 MW offshore wind; Section 83C cost recovery for utilities codified | 157–1 | No roll call | 1 recorded no vote |
| Climate Roadmap Act | St. 2021, c. 8 | Net zero 2050 legally binding; 2,400 MW more offshore wind (5,600 MW total); 2030 sublimits | 144–14 | 39–1 | Near-unanimous; 15 no votes total |
| 2024 Climate Law (“...Protecting Ratepayers”) | St. 2024, c. 239 (§83E) | 5,000 MW storage mandate with guaranteed cost pass-through to ratepayers | 128–17 | 38–2 | 19 total no votes — all Republican |
| H.5151 → H.5175 | 194th Session, 2026 | 10 GW wind + 10 GW solar targets; 30-yr contracts; central procurement fund | 128–27 | 32–8 (S.3166 text, Jul 1, 2026) | In conference committee since Jul 16, 2026 |
Source: MA Legislature roll call records; House Yea and Nay No. 201 and Senate Roll Call #250 (2024); Roll Call #19 (2021); MA General Laws
📜 The Title That Gaslights You
The 2024 storage mandate law (St. 2024, c. 239) is officially titled:
"An Act Promoting a Clean Energy Grid, Advancing Equity and Protecting Ratepayers"
Its core provision, Section 83E, says each utility is “entitled to cost recovery of payments made under a long-term contract” for storage. In plain terms: full cost recovery, passed directly to ratepayers. The law that mandates you pay is named after protecting you from paying. House: 128–17. Senate: 38–2.
Sen. Ryan Fattman (R), one of 2 Senate no votes, said at the time: "This bill will raise prices of utilities and electric bills for consumers and, in fact, NOT protect them."
Source: St. 2024, c. 239 (enrolled bill); MA Senate Roll Call #250 (Oct 24, 2024); House Yea and Nay No. 201 (Nov 14, 2024)
Massachusetts Energy Mandates & Their Cost Impact
| Mandate | Requirement | Cost Mechanism | Who Pays |
|---|
| Renewable Portfolio Standard | 40% Class I by 2030 | RPS compliance charges (M.G.L. c. 25A, §11F) | Ratepayers |
| RGGI Carbon Tax | $1.62B total ($262M in 2026 to date) | Auction costs passed through (M.G.L. c. 21N) | Ratepayers |
| Clean Energy Standard | 80% by 2050 | Additional procurement (310 CMR 7.75, DEP) | Ratepayers |
| Offshore Wind | 5,600 MW by 2027 (law); 10 GW by 2040 in H.5175, pending | Cost-recovery PPAs (§83C) | Ratepayers |
| Solar (proposed) | 10 GW by 2040 | Tariff-funded procurement (H.5175, in conference) | Ratepayers |
| Energy Storage | 5,000 MW by July 31, 2030 | Long-term contracts, cost recovery + 2.25% (St. 2024, c. 239, §83E) | Ratepayers |
| Building Electrification | Opt-in stretch code; fossil-free pilot, up to 10 towns | Higher electric demand (St. 2021, c. 8; St. 2022, c. 179, §84) | Ratepayers + Homeowners |
| Net-Zero 2050 | Economy-wide neutrality | No official cost estimate (target set in M.G.L. c. 21N, §3(b)) | Everyone |
Source: MA DOER; DPU filings; Climate Act (2021); Clean Energy and Climate Plan; H.5175 bill text
RGGI Total (2008–Sept 2026)
$1.62B
Carbon tax from MA ratepayers
2025 Alone
$200.4M
Up from $28M in 2008
Recent 5-Year Avg
$149.6M
2021–2025 average per year
MA Direct Bill Relief
0%
Of MA RGGI investments in 2024 (64% efficiency, 34% electrification). All RGGI states: 23%
RGGI Carbon Tax — MA Auction Proceeds by Year ($M)
Source: RGGI Inc., Massachusetts proceeds by auction, Auctions 1–73. *2026 = March, June and September auctions; December still to come. Total: $1.62 billion.
How RGGI Proceeds Are Spent (All RGGI States, 2024)
Source: RGGI Inc., The Investment of RGGI Proceeds in 2024 (published June 2026). Massachusetts alone: 64% efficiency, 34% beneficial electrification, no direct bill assistance.
📋 The Double-System Problem
Renewable energy is intermittent. Massachusetts ratepayers pay for the renewable generators AND for conventional backup plants that must stand ready. This "capacity cost" adds billions annually. You're paying for two parallel power systems.
Mass Save: What Each Unit of Energy Saved Costs, 2019–2025
| Year | Program spending | Energy saved over measure lifetimes (MMBtu) | Cost per MMBtu saved | In 2025 dollars |
|---|
| 2019 | $901M | 109.4M | $8.24 | $10.37 |
| 2020 | $836M | 88.8M | $9.42 | $11.72 |
| 2021 | $992M | 93.4M | $10.61 | $12.61 |
| 2022 | $915M | 66.7M | $13.70 | $15.07 |
| 2023 | $1.13B | 69.5M | $16.23 | $17.15 |
| 2024 | $1.35B | 78.1M | $17.30 | $17.76 |
| 2025 | $1.21B | 53.8M | $22.42 | $22.42 |
Source: Program Administrators’ statewide data tables filed with the Energy Efficiency Advisory Council: 2019–2021 Term Report, 2022–2024 Term Report (Aug 2025) and 2025 Annual Report (June 1, 2026). Evaluated results, Statewide Electric plus Statewide Gas, all program administrators including Cape Light Compact. Spending is program cost excluding performance incentives. Savings are net lifetime savings across all fuels, including the 2025 electrification pool. 2025 dollars via BLS CPI-U.
📋 Spending Up, Savings Down
Mass Save spent $1.21B in 2025, 34% more than in 2019, and saved 51% less energy over the life of what it installed. After inflation, each unit of energy saved costs more than twice what it did in 2019: $22.42 against $10.37. Savings are counted across electricity, gas, oil and propane because heat pumps add to electric use; measured in electricity alone, the cost per MWh saved looks far worse, but that measure scores heat pumps as negative savings. The plan’s electricity conversion rate also changed between terms; holding it at the 2019 rate still leaves 2025 above $21.
Follow the Money — Who Benefits
⚠️ The Lobbying Loop
Wind and power companies in the table below reported $4.6M lobbying MA legislators, 2020–2025; foreign-owned wind developers account for $2.3M of it
Smith, Costello & Crawford collected $1.41M from Avangrid + Vistra, 2021–2025
Crawford personally gave $62,200 to 111 candidate committees, 2021–2025 (OCPF)
Rep. Cusack, Nov 2025: 30% of $8,450 raised came from National Grid staff and energy companies; most of the rest came from State House lobbyists (OCPF)
Eversource + National Grid: $4.0M lobbying 2020–2025, $515K in 2025 alone
H.5175 stripped Healey's proposal to ban utility lobbying cost recovery
Green Energy Lobbying Totals (MA Secretary of State Records)
| Entity | Country | Lobbying Total | Primary Firm |
|---|
| NextEra Energy | FL | $1.64M | Multiple firms |
| Ørsted | 🇩🇰 Denmark | $1.03M | BCB Government Relations |
| Avangrid/Iberdrola | 🇪🇸 Spain | $930K | Smith, Costello & Crawford |
| Vistra | TX | $649K | Smith, Costello & Crawford |
| SouthCoast Wind (Ocean Winds) | 🇵🇹🇫🇷 Portugal / France | $357K | Commonwealth/Dewey Square |
| TOTAL | | $4.61M | 50% foreign-owned |
Source: MA Secretary of State Lobbyist Public Search, client registrations and disclosures 2020–2025 (salaries paid plus reported expenses), checked Oct 29, 2026. A “REAL (trade group)” row was removed: no client by that name appears in the records.
The Funding Chain — Who Pushes the Mandates
| Entity | Type | Funding | What They Push |
|---|
| Acadia Center | Advocacy | Barr Foundation: $1.44M (2023), $1.25M (2026) | RPS increases, RGGI, electrification |
| Environmental League of MA | Advocacy | Barr Foundation: $265K (2025) | Net-zero mandates, offshore wind |
| Barr Foundation | Private Foundation | Co-founded by Amos Hostetter | $34.2M in climate grants in 2025 |
| Energy Foundation | Pass-through | Hewlett Foundation, among others | State-level clean energy policy |
Source: Barr Foundation grants database and trustees page (checked Oct 29, 2026); Hewlett Foundation grants database. Earlier funder names that rested only on press reports were removed.
📋 The Loop
Private foundations fund advocacy groups. Those groups lobby Beacon Hill for mandates. Legislators pass laws that guarantee full cost recovery on developers’ contracts. Foreign developers get guaranteed contracts. RGGI took $262M from Massachusetts ratepayers in the first nine months of 2026. Utilities pass all costs through. Everyone in the loop gets paid except you.
$534K to Hide Climate Non-Compliance
They mandate the rules, then don't follow them. Then spend your money hiding it.
Legal Fees to Fight Disclosure
$534K
Paid by EEA to Mintz Levin, April 2025 to January 2026 (CTHRU: $532,953). $416K came from “Climate Adaptation” funds. Payments continued: $1.32M through Aug 26, 2026. CTHRU does not name the matter.
Agency Compliance Reports Filed
ZERO
State agencies required to file annual emissions reports since 2019. Not a single report.
State Climate Resilience Estimate
$130B
Upper end of the ResilientMass Finance Strategy (Aug 2025) estimate of resilience investment through 2050: bridges, culverts, dams, water systems, heat relief. It is not a cost of emissions mandates. Fiscal Alliance Foundation puts climate costs at $400B+.
Records Request Response
NONE
Both DEP and the Comptroller claimed "no responsive records."
"While Massachusetts was accusing Exxon of climate deception, the state was fighting a records request that exposed its own failure to comply with one of its own climate rules."Paul Diego Craney, Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance — Boston Herald, March 2026
The Hypocrisy Chain
STATE SUES EXXON
For "climate deception"
→
EXXON REQUESTS RECORDS
On MA's own compliance
→
STATE FIGHTS DISCLOSURE
$534K in YOUR taxes
SWORN TESTIMONY
Zero reports since 2019
→
ZERO ENFORCEMENT
No inspections taken
→
SAME STATE: UP TO $130B
In climate resilience spending ahead
🚨 D.P.U. 25-200 — The State's Own Admission
On December 15, 2025, the Department of Public Utilities opened an investigation on its own motion — not in response to a complaint. The language of the order is a direct acknowledgment of every problem this dashboard documents.
Official Purpose of the Investigation
"Comprehensive review of gas and electric delivery rates and charges with the aims of containing customer costs, reducing utility bill volatility, and increasing utility bill transparency and accessibility."
DPU Order D.P.U. 25-200, December 15, 2025
Their Own Words on Urgency
"The Department initiated this investigation to provide relief to ratepayers as soon as possible."
DPU Order D.P.U. 25-200, December 15, 2025
What the Investigation Requires
Utilities (Eversource, National Grid, Unitil) must submit multiple years of detailed rate data
DPU ordered "research into historic rates" — implying lack of prior transparency
Investigation covers both electric and gas delivery: Berkshire Gas, Eversource, Liberty, National Grid, Unitil
Key word: the DPU opened this on its own motion — meaning the agency itself concluded action was necessary without a ratepayer complaint triggering it
The bottom line: The state regulatory body that approved every rate increase is now investigating whether those rates are too high. They are admitting — in an official order — that costs are out of control and bills lack transparency. This is the same DPU that has never once declined a utility rate request linked to a legislatively mandated charge.
📊 ISO-NE Admits It: "Captive Demand" on a Constrained Grid
The ISO-NE Internal Market Monitor's official Wholesale Electricity Markets Primer (May 2025) — the grid operator's own publication — contains these admissions:
On Gas Dependency & Pipeline Constraints
"The region must import much of its fuel from outside sources... the region still relies on a network of interstate pipelines and liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports to fuel its significant natural gas-fired generation fleet. This reliance on natural gas drives increased electricity costs in the winter when demand for natural gas for use in heating greatly increases, and limited pipeline capacity becomes constrained."
ISO-NE Internal Market Monitor, Wholesale Electricity Markets Primer, May 2025
On Consumer "Captive Demand"
"Energy markets have a fundamental demand-side flaw because there is a lack of demand responsiveness to changes in price. Who looks up the price of electricity before deciding whether to turn on lights, the air conditioner, or other appliances? With such captive demand that does not respond to increasing prices, it is more likely that suppliers, at times, have market power."
ISO-NE Internal Market Monitor, Wholesale Electricity Markets Primer, May 2025
On "Missing Money" Capacity Payments
"In the energy market, suppliers are incented to sell their output at their marginal cost. However, marginal-cost bidding of energy ignores the fixed costs associated with building and running a power plant... By obtaining a CSO, suppliers have an opportunity to recover their fixed costs, or 'missing money,' through the capacity payments."
ISO-NE Internal Market Monitor, Wholesale Electricity Markets Primer, May 2025
💡 Why This Matters for MA Ratepayers
The grid operator officially confirms: (1) Pipeline constraints drive winter price spikes. (2) Ratepayers are captive demand with no price visibility. (3) Suppliers extract "missing money" capacity payments from consumers who can't opt out. Massachusetts ratepayers are paying for two parallel systems — renewable generators and the backup conventional plants that must run when wind and solar don't.
🔒 Massachusetts Transparency Failures
One police dept demanded $1.8 million for license-plate-reader records
In Lexington, a school employee discussed inflating production costs to deter requesters
MA has one of the weakest public records systems in the country
$416K of it came from "Climate Adaptation and Preparedness" funds (CTHRU)
They plan up to $130B in climate spending. They don't follow their own rules. They spend your money hiding it.
The $534K in legal fees could have funded actual compliance.
⚖️ The Equivalence — What It Would Take in Gasoline
The Gasoline Equivalence
Massachusetts' higher electricity and natural gas prices cost the average household —/yr more than the US average (the gas portion applies to gas-heated homes; policy charges are part of the gap, not all of it). To generate that same extra burden through gasoline alone (— gal/yr), prices would need to reach:
—
per gallon
— above today's MA price of —
— the all-time MA record of — (—)
PRICE GAUGE — $/GALLON · SCALE: $0–—
Price Comparison — What's Real vs. What Would Be Needed
Scale: $0–—/gal · Vertical line marks the 2022 all-time record (—)
The —/Gal Breakdown
Where each cent of the equivalence comes from
⚡ Electricity mandate premium
—
—
🔥 Natural gas pipeline/mandate premium
—
—
Total rise needed from today's —
—
Monthly Hidden Burden
—/mo extra — what it looks like in everyday terms
—
extra per month vs US avg
The Outrage Asymmetry
A 50¢/gal gasoline spike dominates headlines. The utility mandate premium is — the size of it — and generates almost no public reaction at all.
50¢ gas spike (gets headlines)—
MA utility mandate premium (silent)—
How the utility premium compounds over time
2010
MA extra burden: ~$353/yr
Electricity 26% above national avg. Gas pipeline intact.
2015–2017
Gas spike then crash — utility rates keep climbing
Gasoline fell from — to — and back. MA electricity dipped in 2016, then rose past its 2015 level by 2017.
2017
Pipeline blocked — natural gas premium widens
Access Northeast killed. MA nat gas supply constrained.
2022
Record gas prices — still can't match utility premium
MA gasoline peaked at —/gal, the highest week on record. Yet the utility mandate premium was already larger.
Gasoline would need to reach —/gal to impose the burden MA utility mandates already impose today.
—
🏙️ Boston's 2030 Climate Action Plan — The City-Level Mandate Machine
Released April 27, 2026, Wu's 110-page plan adds a new layer of mandates on top of the state policies already driving MA electricity to — — —. The same political party that created the cost crisis now claims to be solving it.
⚠️ The Core Contradiction
Wu claims plan will "lower energy costs" — while mandating building electrification that Eversource projects will increase electricity demand 33% by 2033
BCCE "saves $200/yr" — but only on supply (46.0% of an Eversource R-1 bill). The $887/yr mandate premium is untouched.
BERDO forces large buildings to net-zero by 2050 — compliance costs passed to tenants and ratepayers
Plan projects a 48% cut by 2030 only if existing programs, including BERDO, are fully implemented (actual cut through 2023: 22.4% below 2005), then adds new mandates anyway
16% of Boston's $148M in federal climate awards rescinded (about $24M), 22% still pending — who fills the gap? You do.
Studying congestion pricing — a new tax on driving into your own city
BCCE "Savings"
$200/yr
City average 2021–2024, supply charge only (under half the bill); about $265/yr at Aug 2026 rates
Mandate Premium
$887/yr
What policy actually costs you
Demand Increase
+33%
Eversource ESMP projection by 2033
BERDO Deadline
Net-Zero 2050
Large buildings — costs to tenants
Federal $ Lost
~$24M
16% of $148M awarded, rescinded; 22% still pending (2030 CAP)
The BCCE Illusion — What Wu Won't Tell You
What BCCE Actually Covers vs. Your Full Bill
Source: Eversource rate schedules; BCCE program data; DPU filings. BCCE only affects the supply portion.
BCCE "Savings" vs. Mandate Premium — Annual $
Source: BCCE program ($200/yr avg); EIA rate data ($887/yr overpayment vs US avg at 600 kWh/mo)
📋 How the BCCE Shell Game Works
Boston Community Choice Electricity (authorized under M.G.L. c. 164, § 134) is a municipal aggregation program. It replaces Eversource as your electricity supplier at a lower rate: $0.13644/kWh (BCCE Basic, fixed through Dec 2027) vs. $0.17323/kWh (Eversource Basic Service, residential, Aug 2026 to Jan 2027). That's real — about $265/yr at 600 kWh a month at current rates (the City reports about $200/yr on average, 2021–2024).
But here's what Wu leaves out: BCCE only affects the supply charge, which is 46.0% of an Eversource R-1 bill at 600 kWh. The other 54.0% — distribution, transmission, the policy line items (Mass Save efficiency, net metering, SMART solar) and the customer charge — is completely untouched. (RPS compliance and RGGI costs sit inside the supply price itself.) Those are the charges driven by the state mandate stack that Wu and Healey both championed. You "save" $200 on supply while paying $887 in mandate premiums. That's not a solution — it's a distraction.
The Legislation That's Actually Driving Your Bill
Wu's plan never mentions these laws. Every one was supported or signed by the same political party now claiming to lower your costs.
Massachusetts Laws Driving Energy Costs — Chapter & Section
| Law | Citation | What It Does | Cost to You | Wu/Healey Position |
|---|
| Global Warming Solutions Act | Ch. 298, Acts of 2008 → M.G.L. Ch. 21N | Mandates 50% emissions cut by 2030, 75% by 2040, net-zero 2050 | Authorizes ALL market-based pricing mechanisms on your bill | Both support — Wu mirrors at city level |
| Green Communities Act — Section 83C | Ch. 169, Acts of 2008, §83C | Offshore wind procurement mandate; utilities “entitled to cost recovery of payments made under a long-term contract” | Ratepayers absorb the net wind contract costs + 2.25% utility remuneration (2.75% on pre-2022 contracts) | Both support expanded wind mandates |
| Utility Remuneration (amended) | Ch. 179, Acts of 2022 | Reduced utility cut from 2.75% to 2.25% on wind contracts | Marginal reduction — core cost recovery untouched | Baker signed Aug 2022 |
| Renewable Portfolio Standard | M.G.L. Ch. 25A, §11F | 40% Class I renewable by 2030, increasing annually | RPS compliance costs built into the supply price (not broken out on the bill) | Both support increases |
| RGGI Participation | M.G.L. c. 21A, §22 | Cap-and-trade carbon auction — $1.62B extracted since 2008 | $262M in 2026 through Sept, a record — passed to ratepayers | Both support |
| 2024 Climate Law (“...Protecting Ratepayers”) | St. 2024, c. 239, §83E | 5,000 MW storage mandate with guaranteed cost pass-through | Full cost recovery — ratepayers pay for all storage contracts | Healey signed Nov 2024 |
| H.5151 → H.5175 | 194th Session, 2026 | 10 GW wind + 10 GW solar targets, 30-yr contract authority; in conference | New procurement costs, ratepayer-funded | Wu praised; Healey proposed |
| Municipal Aggregation | M.G.L. c. 164, § 134 | Authorizes BCCE — supply-only rate competition | Real but limited: ~$200/yr, supply only | Wu's signature program |
| BERDO (City Ordinance) | CBC Ch. VII, §7-2.2 | Large buildings must hit net-zero emissions by 2050 | Compliance costs passed to tenants via rent/fees | Passed Oct 2021 (Janey); Wu enforcing & expanding |
Source: MA General Laws; Acts of the Legislature; Boston Municipal Code (CBC Ch. VII, §7-2.2); DPU filings; MA Legislature roll calls
Wu's Plan — What It Actually Does vs. What She Claims
📢 What Wu Claims
"Fighting climate change provides a generational opportunity to create good-paying jobs, more affordable energy"Wu press release, April 27, 2026
"Energy savings and bold solutions to tackle climate change go hand-in-hand"Wu on BCCE, Dec 2025
"On track to reduce emissions by 48% by 2030 through full implementation of its existing programs and policies"Wu press release, April 27, 2026
"Lower energy costs for residents"Stated goal of plan strategies
"$260M saved via BCCE"2021–2024 cumulative claim
$200/yr
BCCE Supply Savings (Real)
🚨 What's Actually Happening
Eversource projects +33% electricity demandFrom mandated building electrification — on a grid already at 30.48¢/kWh
BERDO compliance: billions in building retrofitsOver 5,000 large buildings (5% of total, nearly 40% of emissions). Costs passed to tenants.
Congestion pricing study plannedNew fees/tolls for driving into Boston — hits working families hardest
About $24M in federal awards rescinded, 22% still pendingNo replacement source identified. City capital plan: $4.5B FY26-30.
Gas system decommissioning advocatedEliminating the cheaper energy option for heating
$887/yr
Mandate Premium — Untouched & Growing
The 33% Demand Increase Nobody Discusses
+33%
Eversource's own Electric Sector Modernization Plan projects Boston electricity demand rising 33% by 2033 — driven by the building electrification mandates in Wu's plan and Healey's state policies. More demand on a grid already at — — —. Who pays for the substation upgrades, new transmission, and distribution capacity? Ratepayers.
BERDO: The Hidden Rent Increase
5,000+
Large buildings (15+ units residential, 20K+ sq ft commercial) covered by BERDO must reach net-zero by 2050. Just 5% of Boston's buildings — but nearly 40% of its emissions. Compliance requires heat pump conversions, envelope upgrades, and electrification costing owners hundreds of thousands per property. Fines: up to $1,000/day for non-compliance. These costs get passed to tenants through rent increases and CAM charges. Wu's plan says owners will need “lower-cost capital and financing products” but offers no cost protection for tenants.
Gas System Decommissioning
🚫⛽
Wu's plan explicitly advocates for "strategic decommissioning of the gas system" (p.137). Natural gas is currently cheaper than electricity for heating. Eliminating it forces households onto the electric grid — at 30.48¢/kWh. National Grid's GSEP pipe replacement costs are already on your bill; now they want to abandon the pipes entirely.
Congestion Pricing: A New Tax
$$
The plan says the City will study “parking fees, tolls, and congestion charges” to discourage driving. Councilor Ed Flynn, as quoted by WROR (May 4, 2026): "Now is not the time for an expensive expansion of city regulations." This hits working families who commute by car because the MBTA is unreliable.
"Very similar to the Commonwealth and the nation, I think that we are going to be challenged to hit our goal."John Walkey, Waterfront Climate Justice Advocate — Boston Globe, April 27, 2026
"We have done most of the easy things already. And at this point, to make a real difference, it is about coming up with the new ideas."Mayor Michelle Wu — Climate Action Plan launch, April 27, 2026
⚠️ Translation: The "Easy Things" Were Spending Your Money
The "easy things" Wu references include: mandating building emissions standards (BERDO) that landlords pass to tenants, enrolling 65% of ratepayers in BCCE (supply-only savings), divesting city pension funds from fossil fuels, and implementing net-zero zoning for new construction. None of these addressed the structural cost drivers: Ch. 21N (Global Warming Solutions Act) mandating economy-wide carbon neutrality, §83C guaranteeing foreign wind developers full cost recovery, Ch. 25A, §11F (RPS) forcing 40% Class I renewable supply by 2030, or RGGI (M.G.L. c. 21A, §22) extracting $262M in carbon auction costs in 2026 through September. The "new ideas" — thermal energy networks, congestion pricing, gas system decommissioning — will add costs, not reduce them.
Boston's Emissions by Sector (2023 Inventory)
Source: City of Boston, 2023 community GHG inventory (boston.gov, Boston's Carbon Emissions)
What $200/yr in BCCE Savings Looks Like Against the Policy Costs on the Bill
Per household at 600 kWh/mo. Efficiency, net metering and SMART: Eversource R-1 filed tariff. RPS & clean peak: DOER low estimate, 1.86¢/kWh (2023 Annual Compliance Report). RGGI: 2025 MA auction proceeds over EIA 2025 retail sales. BCCE: City of Boston program data.
The Gaslighting Chain — State + City, Same Party, Same Playbook
HEALEY (AG)
2015 AG study: no new pipeline needed. SJC struck pipeline charges, 2016.
→
HEALEY (GOV)
Signed 2024 Climate Act. St. 2024, c. 239: 5,000 MW storage.
→
LEGISLATURE (D)
H.5175: 10 GW wind, 10 GW solar mandates.
WU (MAYOR)
BERDO mandate. Gas decommission.
→
RATES HIT 30.48¢
—. +68% above national avg.
→
SAME PEOPLE: "WE'LL FIX IT"
BCCE saves $200/yr on a $887/yr problem.
They created the mandate stack (Ch. 21N, §83C, Ch. 25A, RGGI, BERDO). They blocked the pipelines. They drove rates to 30.48¢. Now they offer you $200/yr on a $887/yr problem and call it progress.
Wu's plan adds city-level mandates on top of state mandates — same party, same playbook, same result: you pay.