Mayor Wu tonight will introduce a $150-million program with Eversource and National Grid to subsidize the installation of 5,000 energy-saving heat pumps in Boston homes and small businesses now heated with oil and electricity - and weatherize 10,000 homes between now and 2027.
Wu will unveil the plan, scheduled to start up this fall, in her state of the city address, which starts at 7 p.m.
The city, the utilities and Mass Save will target homeowners who now use oil and electrical resistance to heat their homes, rather than those using natural gas, because, the city says, oil and traditional electrical heating are the most inefficient ways to heat. The city estimates that switching over 5,000 homes could save their owners a total of $300 million in energy costs over three years.
The announcement comes after the state Department of Public Utilities recently adopted a plan to slash Mass Save's budget - which comes from surcharges on electricity and natural-gas bills - by $500 million over the next three years.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Save money
By Anonymous
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 11:16am
This is the very reason why peoples bills have skyrocketed, the delivery cost on your bill is directly funding these programs. People aren’t buying the wonky math anymore. End MassSave!
Mass Save charges are
By Lowry Hemphill
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 3:13pm
Mass Save charges are responsible for just 13-14% of this winter’s increase in monthly gas bills. Our gas bills would be substantially higher without the energy saving measures (like weatherization of older homes) paid for by Mass Save. Energy saving measures by individual households reduce overall demand for gas and mean the gas companies don’t need to invest in as much costly new infrastructure, passing the costs on to consumers.
is that true or bs?
By Jeff F
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 7:12pm
I’ve been hearing this claim a lot, but MassSave has been around for over a decade - why would it be causing such a big jump in residential prices only now?
I’ve heard plenty of stories about contractors doing shady/incompetent work under the cover of MassSave (and first-person reports of big savings from the program too), but this sudden cost crisis smells a little like scapegoating to cover corporate profiteering.
MassSave
By Anonymous
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 9:39pm
Continues to increase every go around. They increased it by an astronomical number, patted each other on the back, then acted surprised when people got pissed after seeing their bills.
it was such a driving factor they just shaved $500m off the increase. See the following from the state.
https://www.mass.gov/news/dpu-reduces-mass-save-plan-by-500-million-and-approves-proposals-to-reduce-residential-gas-bills
The investment
By Sator
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 8:24pm
the investment is in the atmosphere, the one we leave for our kids.
Your bottom line if strictly financial, and that is amoral.
THE bottom line is what you have forgotten about. THE bottom line is that atmospheric physics doesn't care about your quarterly profits.
Fuck that noise.
By PastaBatman
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 12:28pm
Mass saves is just some trickle down economics bullshit. How about helping renters out?
Despite my misgivings about MassSave rentors are not left out
By Daan
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 1:42pm
Rentors can benefit. Everytime I've looked into MassSave I have come across ways that rentors can receive some benefits. Look into it. Despite the damage that MassSave contractors can do to property owners what they can do for rentors is far more limited and might save you cash (which you're already paying if you pay for electricity).
Agree that MassSave in its current incarnation is problematic
By Daan
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 1:41pm
On my last bill the "Evergy Efficiency Charge" was 8.3%. That's a lot. The managers of MassSave cannot be trusted to manage the program so that people using it don't wind up victims of the authorized vendors and contractors malfeasance and neglect. Massachusetts unfortunately has such weak civil laws that vendors can cause considerable damage and not suffer deserved punishment for their neglect. This is from direct experience.
If this program that Wu is pushing costs one cent from Boston tax payers then Wu is again proving herself to be an incompetent manager. MassSave has $4 billion in reserve. At least the Commonwealth's Dept. of Public Utilities recognized that ratepayers are paying way too much into the program and instructed the managers to reduce their budget to a measly $4.5 billion. Not one cent should come out of the city budget.
The bigger question is whether MassSave has actually acted as a buffer against rising energy costs? Then there is the question of how much their poor management has cost ratepayers?
I can answer from personal experience that their managerial incompetence cost me far more than it will ever save me.
Reducing energy use is a no-brainer (except for those without brains, such as the Presidential Orangutang (with apologies to real orangatangs). But when a program is no longer doing what it was set up to do, then it is time to end the current version and come up with a new version. Does MassSave need a $4.5 billion dollar budget? Where is the money actually going?
Your questions are easily answered.
By Sator
Wed, 03/19/2025 - 8:25pm
But you look great on that soapox. Ignorance is a choice. Maybe go read about it before you play victim AGAIN.
What would help with energy costs
By Anon
Thu, 03/20/2025 - 12:32pm
Can she do something about LIHEAP? The program in Boston is administered by ABCD, and it's a trainwreck. The people administering it are ridiculously incompetent. They don't understand the basics of what various documentation means, like how you calculate inconsistent/per-diem income by averaging based on the year-to-date on the paystub, and insist on things like a BPS employee getting a letter from BPS explaining why they aren't paid in the summer. One person I know was told they were missing proof of foster care income, because they had sent in proof of foster care income 10+ years ago, they said they only fostered a relative that one year, and ABCD said they needed a letter saying they weren't fostering currently. A letter from whom exactly? Another was incomplete because they didn't sufficiently explain why their 12-year-old isn't employed.
They also take 4-5 months to process applications (well, in most cases, to send an "incomplete letter" because their staff are incompetent and don't understand the documentation they're reviewing) so people get their utilities shut off before they can get approved. Can it be moved to a different agency, or can the city assist ABCD with hiring people who understand how income documentation works?
Add comment