The Senate Energy Industry and Mining Committee agreed to report committee substitutes for Senate Bills 48, 586 and 685 to the full Senate with recommendations that they pass, with double committee references as noted; actions were taken by voice vote and no numeric roll‑call tallies appear in the transcript.

The Senate Energy, Industry and Mining Committee agreed to committee substitutes for SB20, SB25, SB131 and SB424 and voted to report them to the full Senate, with SB131 and the others receiving secondary referrals as noted; SB25 would create a coal marketing program funded by DMV license-plate transfers and SB424 expands site identification for coke production and steelmaking.

A senator criticized federal permitting delays and asked a utility representative, Mr. McDonald, for an estimate of the direct costs attributable to the Section 106 review process on multistate projects and how those costs are passed to energy consumers. Mr. McDonald said his utility would gather information and provide a written estimate for the r

Senator highlights Katie Hereza's extensive experience in energy policy and infrastructure resilience.

Senators emphasize coal's role and clean energy resource allocation amid rising electricity demand.

Senate approves bill to create jobs in energy and technology sectors in West Virginia

West Virginia Energy Policy Bills Spark Debate Two energy policy bills, SB 505 and HB 2014, have been introduced in West Virginia's legislature, sparking debate about the state's energy future. These bills aim to address issues related to coal-fired power plants, data centers, and manufacturers. SB 505, a bill that has garnered significant attention, requires electric utilities with coal-fired power plants to operate at a minimum capacity factor of 69% when economically feasible. This provision also increases the stockpiles of coal from a 30-day supply to a 45-day supply. However, this provision has been criticized by Appalachian Power, which claims that it would have resulted in $240.4 million in additional fuel costs and potentially passed these costs on to customers. In contrast, HB 2014 aims to create an opportunity for data centers and manufacturers to locate in West Virginia. The bill includes provisions related to coal procurement and plant operations, as well as the Electronic Grid Stabilization and Security Fund, which is designed to support electric grid stability. Nevertheless, some critics have labeled this fund a "slush fund" for electric utilities. A key difference between the two bills lies in their impact on consumers. SB 505 has been criticized by Appalachian Power, while HB 2014 aims to create opportunities for economic growth through data centers and manufacturers. The outcome of these bills remains uncertain, with some arguing that they may have unintended consequences for consumers. Both bills highlight the complexities of West Virginia's energy policy landscape. As the state navigates its energy future, it is essential to carefully consider the implications of these bills on both the environment and consumers.

Reimagining West Virginia's Energy Future: A Golden Opportunity The surge in electricity demand can be attributed to the explosive growth of energy-intensive data centers and artificial intelligence systems. As these massive operations approach saturation in neighboring Virginia, it presents a unique opportunity for West Virginia to capitalize on its existing energy infrastructure. West Virginia is uniquely positioned to accommodate new growth due to its ability to generate more electricity than it consumes. The state boasts an abundance of resources, including land, water, and reliable power supplies. Large-scale data centers require these essential elements to operate efficiently. However, instead of leveraging the existing coal-powered plants, West Virginia officials are entertaining proposals from out-of-state developers seeking to build microgrids and new power systems at substantial costs to local residents. Meanwhile, in-state power plants are operating below optimal levels due to regulatory barriers and zero-carbon policies imposed by previous administrations. The time has come for West Virginia to recognize its assets: the largest, lowest-cost, and most reliable energy facilities in the country. These coal plants have been unfairly restricted from running at full capacity. Removing federal regulations that hinder the operation of these power stations and ramping up advanced mining operations to supply fuel can help keep them online. The existing power stations, including Mitchell, Harrison, Amos, Pleasants, Mountaineer, Fort Martin, Longview, Grant Town, and Mt. Storm, represent a $14 billion annual economic engine that supports tens of thousands of high-paying jobs. However, these facilities have been struggling under relentless EPA pressure and ESG mandates that limit their capacity to operate at full potential. As a result, their untapped potential remains unrealized. West Virginia boasts the second-lowest energy rates in the country, but this advantage can be lost if the state continues down an expensive alternative energy path. The question is not whether coal or other sources of energy should meet power needs; it's how we do so. West Virginia has a unique opportunity to position itself as a leader in energy production and capitalize on its existing infrastructure.

Lawmakers question smart meter reliability and increasing utility rates impacting constituents' bills.

State faces potential $1.2B investment loss due to proposed property tax changes.

West Virginia sees a 50% drop in coal production, while natural gas output rises significantly.

Senator warns of impending electricity crisis, urges permitting reform for stable energy grid.