The State of Utility Planning, 2025 Q3

CIN Admin
CIN Admin
  • Updated
Resource Type Article
Author / Source Jon Rea (RMI)
Publication Date October 2025
Location United States
Initiative Type Policy, Technology, Program
Project Complexity Intermediate
Recommended For Staff, Board

View Full Document

Estimated reading time: 30+ minutes


Why This Matters for Rural Electric Co-ops

This quarterly IRP tracker provides rural electric cooperative leaders with a current, data-driven picture of where U.S. utility planning stands, which includes rising load projections, stalled decarbonization progress, and delayed fossil fuel retirements. For co-ops navigating G&T contract decisions and their own resource planning, understanding these national trends helps contextualize local pressures around capacity adequacy, renewable tax credit phase-outs, and regulatory uncertainty.

The analysis also highlights that delayed retirements and increased gas reliance, while common default choices, expose utilities to price volatility and long-term stranded asset risk. Co-ops can use this as a benchmarking tool to assess whether their own power supply trajectory aligns with emerging cost and climate expectations.


Key Takeaways

Quarterly summary of projected electricity demand and emissions drawn from public utility IRPs.
Utilities updated in Q3 2025 increased projected load by 2.1% and emissions by 5.5%, driven largely by data center and large-load growth, a trend with direct implications for co-ops experiencing similar pressures.
The phase-out of federal renewable tax credits is now visibly reducing wind and solar capacity plans, making near-term financing and procurement decisions more consequential for co-ops.
Delayed fossil plant retirements are the most common response to near-term capacity shortfalls, but this approach locks in gas price exposure and slows emissions reductions. Alternatives exist and should be evaluated.
Improved large-load forecasting and clearer understanding of the distinction between reliability and dispatchability are identified as key planning reforms that could benefit co-ops and G&Ts alike.

Implementation Considerations

  • Cost or Funding Requirements: Co-ops relying on G&T power supply decisions should factor in how national trends toward delayed retirements and increased gas capacity may affect long-term wholesale costs. Advocacy for IRP reform at the G&T level may require staff time and coalition-building.
  • Regulatory or Governance Considerations: Changes to MISO's seasonal accreditation rules and EPA greenhouse gas regulations are actively reshaping capacity decisions. Co-op leaders should ensure their G&T is monitoring and responding to these developments.
  • Staffing or Technology Requirements: Smaller co-ops may lack internal capacity to track IRP trends independently; they will need resources that can serve as efficient proxies. Co-ops with direct planning responsibilities should evaluate whether their forecasting tools adequately account for large-load uncertainty and climate variability.

Notable Examples

  • Santee Cooper (SC): IRP highlights the wide uncertainty range in large load forecasting, a model case for planning under uncertainty.
  • El Paso Electric (NM): Renewable portfolio standards helped maintain accelerated zero-carbon capacity plans despite broader industry headwinds.
  • Cleco Power (LA): Used MISO generator replacement process to repower a retired coal site with clean capacity, which is a potentially replicable strategy.

View Full Document

Estimated reading time: 30+ minutes

Related to

Was this article helpful?

Comments

0 comments

Please sign in to leave a comment.