Testimony from:
Josiah Neeley, Senior Fellow, Energy, R Street Institute

Testimony in Support of South Carolina’s S. 867 Bill (and Amendment), Retail Choice for Large Commercial and Industrial (C&I) Electric Customers

March 10, 2026

Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee

Chairman and members of the committee,

My name is Josiah Neeley and I am a senior fellow in energy with the R Street Institute. R Street is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, public-policy research organization with a mission to engage in policy research and outreach to promote free markets and limited, effective government including in relation to electric market policy. I am testifying today in support of 867, and in particular in support of an amendment of 867 that would allow large commercial and industrial electric customers to access retail choice.

The electricity system is currently in the process of undergoing a profound transformation. For decades, electricity consumption in the United States was flat or declining, due to improved energy efficiency, a fall in manufacturing, and other factors. Now, however, energy consumption is rising again, and is projected to increase substantially in the coming decade. One illustrative forecast projects electricity demand in the United States to increase by 80 GW by 2030, of which roughly a fifth (16 GW) is expected to come from data centers.[1]  

These projected increases have led to widespread public concern about the impact that increased electric demand will have on prices. However, increased electric demand need not result in higher prices if that demand is met by new and cheaper sources of supply. Protecting South Carolina consumers will require tweaks to the existing regulatory structure to ease this process.

Currently, South Carolina operates under what is known as a vertically integrated monopoly utility electric model. Under this model, electric consumers in South Carolina have only one choice when it comes to receiving electric services: their local electric monopoly utility. Yet many other states allow some or all customers to choose their electric power providers.[2] In particular, some states – such as Virginia – maintain the utility model for residential customers but allow larger commercial and industrial customers to procure electricity from the open market. Allowing large, sophisticated commercial and industrial customers to access cheaper power through the market helps to reduce cost, which is good for business. In addition, this limited form of retail choice allows large power consumers to modulate their demand according to broader market dynamics, shifting their usage from peak periods to periods when prices are low. This helps to reduces stress on generation and transmission resources and improves power market efficiency, which can benefit all consumers, even those without direct access to retail choice.[3] For these reasons, we support the legislation. I would be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you,

Josiah Neeley
Senior Fellow, Energy
R Street Institute
jneeley@rstreet.org


[1] Devin Hartman and Olivia Manzagol, “AI’s Energy Footprint Warrants Markets, Not Panic,” R Street Institute, September 26, 2024. https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/ais-energy-footprint-warrants-markets-not-panic/

[2] See generally, Michael Giberson and Devin Hartman, “Competitive Structures Benefit Consumers,” R Street Policy Study 293, September, 2023. https://www.rstreet.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/FINAL_r-street-policy-study-no-293.pdf 

[3] William Driscoll, “Flexible demand through participation by large customers in wholesale markets,” pv magazine, May 25, 2023. https://pv-magazine-usa. com/2023/05/25/flexible-demand-through-participation-by-large-customers-in-wholesale-markets; Richard O’Neill, et al., “Treating Demand Equivalent to Supply in Wholesale Markets: An Opportunity for Customer, Market, and Social Benefits,” ESIG, May 2023. https://www.esig.energy/treating-demand-equivalent-to- supply-in-wholesale-markets-an-opportunity-for-customer-market-and-social-benefits.