Energy Bill Could Cost North Carolina Over $47 Billion and 50,000 Jobs Annually, New Research Finds

RALEIGH, N.C. — North Carolina’s controversial energy bill, Senate Bill 266, is drawing sharp criticism just days before the state legislature is set to vote on whether to override Governor Josh Stein’s veto. According to new research, the legislation could cost the state tens of billions of dollars in economic activity and tens of thousands of jobs annually.

Massive Job and Investment Losses Projected

A report by BW Research, commissioned by clean energy advocates, estimates that if SB 266 becomes law, North Carolina would lose 50,700 jobs each year from 2030 to 2035, primarily in solar and clean energy construction. In total, the state stands to forgo $47.2 billion in new power plant construction — including solar, wind, nuclear, and natural gas facilities.

The legislation repeals Duke Energy’s existing mandate to reduce climate pollution by 70% by 2030 (compared to 2005 levels), though it preserves a more distant carbon neutrality goal for midcentury. Critics argue that removing this short-term emissions target will undercut clean energy growth, causing Duke to rely more heavily on older, polluting fossil-fuel plants.

Higher Costs, Fewer Resources

Gov. Stein vetoed the bill on July 2, saying it would ultimately drive up consumer electricity costs and shift financial burdens from large industries to everyday families. He cited an EQ Research study that concluded the bill “shifts the cost of electricity from large industrial users onto the backs of regular people,” a sentiment echoed in statements from environmental and consumer advocacy groups.

New modeling also shows Duke Energy would build 40% less new generation capacity under SB 266, and could be short 12 gigawatts of power by 2035, forcing it to buy out-of-state electricity or expand fossil fuel reliance — especially during extreme winter demand.

Political Showdown Looms

The override vote is scheduled for Tuesday, July 29, with Senate President Phil Berger and House Speaker Destin Hall expressing confidence it will pass. The House needs only one more Democratic vote to override the veto — a plausible outcome, given 11 House Democrats originally supported the bill.

Speaker Hall defended the bill, stating it would provide “cheap, reliable energy,” cut red tape, and save North Carolinians $12 billion, though analysts dispute these claims.

Meanwhile, clean energy groups warn that the state risks losing its competitive edge for attracting high-tech and energy-intensive industries if the legislation passes. Duke’s potential underbuilding could limit the state’s capacity to meet rising demand from businesses and residents alike.

Environmental and Economic Consequences

Researchers from NC State University also warned that without SB 266’s climate targets, Duke would burn 40% more natural gas from 2030 to 2050. Under volatile fuel pricing, this could add $23 billion to consumer utility bills, potentially erasing any projected savings from delaying infrastructure upgrades.

“This bill fails the test of growing our economy and lowering costs,” Gov. Stein said in a statement, urging lawmakers to reconsider.

Still, business lobbies like the North Carolina Chamber support the bill and intend to rate lawmakers favorably based on their SB 266 votes. This political pressure may determine whether the veto stands or falls next week.

What do you think? Should North Carolina keep its climate goals or shift toward fossil fuels to cut short-term costs? Share your thoughts with us at SaludaStandard-Sentinel.com.