RESOURCES

Resource Adequacy in the Pacific Northwest

Jan 20, 2026

Brad Cebulko

Partner

View

Erik Olson

Consultant

View

This assessment reviews regional and national resource adequacy (RA) studies to determine whether the collective evidence indicates an imminent or emergency-level RA crisis that would justify the recent emergency order to continue operating a Washington coal-fired generation plant beyond its planned retirement.

On December 16, 2025, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued Order 202-25-11 under its authority in Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act to prevent the planned retirement of Unit 2 of the Centralia Power Plant, citing “a shortage of electric energy, a shortage of facilities for the generation of electric energy, and other causes” in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council Northwest region.

Prepared for Earthjustice, Sierra Club, and Environmental Defense Fund, “Resource Adequacy in the Pacific Northwest: An Assessment of Resource Adequacy Studies Following the Planned Retirement of Centralia” does not conduct a new or independent RA model. Rather, it reviews, synthesizes, and interprets the results of existing national, regional, and utility-level studies, including those relied upon by DOE, to examine:

  • The extent to which RA best practices have been applied
  • The geographic scope covered by the analyses
  • How load growth has been incorporated into RA analyses
  • If/how analyses planned for Centralia’s retirement (and repowering)

Key Takeaway

The collective body of regional and national planning evidence gathered in this report, including from Energy + Environmental Economics, North America Electric Reliability Corporation, Western Electricity Coordinating Council, Bonneville Power Administration, and Puget Sound Energy, does not support the conclusion that the Pacific Northwest faces an imminent or emergency-level resource adequacy crisis. The retirement of Centralia Unit 2 is a long-planned transition that is fully reflected in regional planning analyses and is not identified as a driver of either near-term or medium-term reliability risk.

Form not loading? Your browser may be blocking it. Access the form here.

Impact-oriented

There is a difference between being mission-driven and agenda-driven. We approach each challenge with objectivity, ensuring that decisions are based in facts and outcomes, not advocacy or bias.

 

View Our Areas of Expertise

Contact Us