The use of electric storage is a critical component to the integration of intermittent clean energy technologies on the electric grid. That being said, however, just mentioning Pumped Storage Hydro (PSH) to some stakeholders often unleashes a torrent of criticism of how its use adversely affects riverine and lake aquatic systems. In addition, opponents cite the high cost of PSH as an argument against using PSH as an energy storage technology. This opposition explains, in part, why only 42 PSH projects were built in the United States since 1929 by electric utilities, and public power and water authorities like the New York Power Authority, California Department of Water Resources, and Grand River Dam Authority.

The majority of companies in the natural gas and liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry seem fixated on promoting natural gas as the clean “bridge fuel” to further deployment of renewable energy technologies. While natural gas emits far less carbon dioxide (CO2)than coal or oil used to generate power and heat, it is still a “fossil fuel” that contributes to the adverse effects on climate. Fossil‐fuel opponents are increasingly skeptical of the climate benefits reported by the US natural gas and LNG industry. These opponents often cite a study released in April 2020 that showed methane emissions from the Permian basin of West Texas and New Mexico, one of the largest oil‐producing regions in the world, are more than two times higher than federal government estimates.

Environmental justice (EJ) communities are defined as “a community with significant representation of communities of color, low‐income communities, or tribal and indigenous communities, that experiences, or is at risk of experiencing higher or more adverse human health or environmental effects.” As the energy transition to cleaner and greener forms of energy is accelerating, it does not necessarily mean the development of renewable energy projects will happen with little or no EJ conflicts. Just the opposite may occur, but in the name of fighting climate change.

On October 15, 2020, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) announced in a proposed policy statement that it had jurisdiction over carbon pricing mechanisms within the wholesale electricity markets. In that same policy statement, FERC also confirmed it had the authority to approve such rules if brought forward by regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs).

Natural gas is coming increasingly under attack by policymakers and elected officials who are embracing “electrification only” as a means of reaching state clean energy and climate‐mitigation goals. Achieving these goals may mean reducing the use of natural gas as a residential and industrial fuel. Earlier this year, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) launched a new rulemaking to address the state's transition away from natural gas. The commission will address issues related to stranded assets and cost recovery, and unfair shifting of costs among different customer classes. Other state public utility commissions in New Jersey and New York may follow shortly, given their increasing opposition to interstate natural gas pipelines that would serve their residents and businesses.