Upstate Duke Energy customers will pay more for power beginning in August, what to know

South Carolina’s Public Service Commission (PSC) has approved Duke Energy Carolinas’ request to raise customer rates by a total of 13% over two years beginning in August 2024.

The commission, which regulates public utilities in the state, has been reviewing the case since May. Duke initially filed the rate change request in January. Duke’s previous rate increase went into effect in 2019.

The 13% total increase will be split into two parts. The first increase will go into effect Aug. 1, when Duke Energy Carolinas’ 658,000 residential customers will begin paying 8.7% more for their energy bills. Then, on Aug. 1, 2026, the cost will increase again by 4.3%.

Costs will also increase for commercial and industrial customers.

According to Duke, a customer using 1,000 kilowatt hours each month would see a monthly increase of about $12.06 on their bill in 2024 and about $6.43 in 2026, totaling $18.49. Based on data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the average detached single-family home in the South consumed nearly 16,000 kilowatts of electricity annually in 2015, equaling about 1,318 kilowatts each month.

The commission approved the rate increase, calling it “just,” “reasonable,” and “in the public interest.”

Two of the commission members, Chair Florence P. Belser and Stephen "Mike" Caston, dissented from the commission's majority opinion.

While the cost increase for customers is significant, the commission approved a far lower revenue increase for Duke than they initially requested.

Duke initially requested a base revenue increase of about $323 million. Ultimately, the commission agreed to an increase of nearly $234 million.

The rate increase approval follows a settlement agreement between Duke and various businesses and environmental groups filed in May.

Duke was joined in the agreement by the South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff, the South Carolina Energy Users Committee, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, the Coastal Conservation League, Vote Solar, and the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce. Walmart and CEC Recycling did not sign the agreement, but they noted at the time that they did not oppose the settlement.

The state’s Department of Consumer Affairs did not agree to the settlement.

Prior to the agreement, Duke had requested a nearly 20% increase in costs between 2024 and 2026. The company faced public outcry from customers, who said the rate increase was unfair and expensive. Customers were able to speak to Duke representatives and members of the PSC at seven public hearings held throughout the state in April and May.

In the settlement, Duke also agreed to roughly 26% less in increased revenue, totaling about $240 million. The company also agreed to lessen costs related to compensation for their board of directors.

Furthermore, the commission upheld Duke’s plan to organize a “Low-Income Affordability Study,” funded by $1 million from shareholders rather than customers and another $1 million from shareholders to support South Carolina Local Weatherization Agencies.

Like many utility companies, Duke spent money on investments before the rate request and requested revenue to recover those costs. According to their application, between the prior approved rate case in 2018 and the 2024 increase, Duke spent money on:

• The electric grid system, including strengthening it and diversifying energy sources, such as hydro and solar
• Maintaining and improving current grid infrastructure
• Adding new programs and services
• Planning for growth, such as additional energy demand

They also spent money on their nuclear power facilities and decommissioning prior coal-powered facilities.

The five-person commission approved most of the agreements presented in the settlement, save for those related to coal ash – a contentious issue between the company and state regulators.

Previously, Duke requested recovery for money spent closing coal ash basins in North Carolina and South Carolina, following a law introduced in North Carolina in 2014 and a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ruling in 2015. The PSC denied the request for cost recovery associated with North Carolina plants.

Subsequently, Duke took the matter to the South Carolina Supreme Court, claiming the PSC had erred in judgment and asking for recovery for both the closure costs and litigation fees. The Supreme Court upheld the PSC’s decision in 2021.

Customers can learn more about Duke’s rationale for the rate increase on their website.

Sarah Swetlik covers climate change and environmental issues in South Carolina's Upstate for The Greenville News. Reach her at sswetlik@gannett.com or on X at @sarahgswetlik.

Have a question for Sustainability with Sarah? Ask here or email sswetlik@gannett.com.