Connecticut Senate Republicans are calling on state environmental officials to disclose how much the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) costs electric customers before adopting regulations that would substantially reduce the program’s emissions cap.
Ten Senate Republicans signed an Aug. 3 letter to Acting Commissioner Emma Cimino of the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP), warning that the proposal could add to the state’s already high electricity costs.
“Connecticut’s families and businesses are already struggling with unaffordable electric bills,” the senators wrote. “If passed, this rule change will make Connecticut’s Unaffordability Crisis even WORSE.”
The letter was dated Aug. 3, the final day of public comment on DEEP’s proposed RGGI update.
The senators have a point. Before DEEP tightens a program that can affect wholesale electricity costs, ratepayers should be told what RGGI adds to their bills, how much comes back as direct relief and how much is routed through state-selected programs.
RGGI requires “fossil-fuel-fired electric power generators with a capacity of 25 megawatts or greater” to “hold allowances equal to their CO₂ emissions over a three-year control period.” Each allowance authorizes the release of one short ton of carbon dioxide.
DEEP’s proposed regulations would begin tightening RGGI’s emissions limits in 2027. By 2037, the regional cap would be at least 60% below the 2025 level, with deeper cuts if fewer reserve allowances are released to limit price increases. That would leave power plants with fewer allowances over time, although additional allowances could be released if prices rise too sharply.
The Senate Republicans did not ask Connecticut to withdraw from RGGI. Instead, they called on DEEP to calculate what the program costs households and businesses each year.
“Tell our job creators and ratepayers what RGGI’s yearly price tag is for them,” they wrote. “They deserve that transparency.”
The senators described such an analysis as “a common sense accounting measure” that would help identify a compliance cost that is not itemized as a separate RGGI charge on customers’ bills.
“Shine a light on it,” the letter said. “The public — overburdened ratepayers across Connecticut — has a right to know.”
In a July 23 briefing on the proposed regulations, DEEP said the changes would have a “minimal impacts on bills.” Depending on the scenario, bills could increase by less than 0.5% or decrease by less than 2%.
But the agency’s materials do not answer the senators’ basic question: what does RGGI cost Connecticut households and businesses each year? They also do not show what that cost means for a typical bill or how it compares with the amount returned through direct rate relief.
Where the Money Goes
Connecticut’s annual base allowance budget is approximately 4.1 million tons in 2026. The first RGGI auction cleared at just over $3 per allowance, while the June 2026 auction cleared at $35.
DEEP says RGGI generated approximately $85 million for Connecticut programs in 2025. Since the program began, Connecticut has directed $338 million toward energy-efficiency programs, more than $100 million toward Green Bank clean-energy investments and clean-vehicle rebates, and $117 million toward direct rate reductions.
Under Connecticut’s current rules, annual RGGI proceeds up to roughly $47 million in 2026 are distributed among energy-efficiency programs, Green Bank and vehicle-rebate initiatives, environmental-justice programs and DEEP-related costs. Proceeds above that threshold are returned directly to customers through bill credits, and the threshold rises by 2.5% each year.
Those programs may provide benefits, but they are not the same as lowering the bill for every customer. With Connecticut energy costs already high, direct rate relief should come before more money is steered into targeted subsidies and other state-directed programs.
Who Get’s the Final Say
The Republican letter raises a separate question about who should approve the changes.
“Any significant change like this must hinge upon legislative approval before it can become reality,” the senators wrote.
The proposal is already subject to review by a legislative committee. After reviewing public comments and obtaining a legal review from the attorney general’s office, DEEP plans to send the final regulations to the General Assembly’s bipartisan Legislative Regulation Review Committee. The regulations would take effect Jan. 1, 2027, if the committee approves them.
But the regulation-review process does not require a hearing before a legislative policy committee or approval by the full House and Senate.
By calling for legislative approval, the senators appear to be arguing that changes of this magnitude should not be completed through agency rulemaking and Regulations Review Committee approval alone.
The letter was signed by Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding (Brookfield) and Sens. Henri Martin (Bristol), Rob Sampson (Wolcott), Paul Cicarella (North Haven), Jeff Gordon (Woodstock), Eric Berthel(Watertown), Jason Perillo (Shelton), Tony Hwang (Fairfield), Ryan Fazio (Greenwich), and Heather Somers (Groton).
DEEP will now review the comments submitted during the public-comment period and develop its final regulatory proposal.
Before Connecticut tightens RGGI for another decade, DEEP should show its math. Ratepayers should know what the program adds to electricity prices, what they receive back directly and how much is spent through programs they may never use.
