California’s energy grid reliability in limbo amid budget delays
By willowt // 2025-07-05
Copy
 
  • California’s new $321 billion state budget cuts $18 million from grid reliability programs, deferring critical energy investments.
  • Demand Side Grid Support (DSGS) and Distributed Electricity Backup Assets (DEBA) face funding uncertainty amid heat waves.
  • Clean energy advocates warn delays threaten grid stability, renewable energy adoption and climate goals.
  • Governor Newsom attributes budget shortfalls to federal policies, including tariffs and market volatility.
  • Funding for clean transportation and school buses is also delayed, risking jobs and air quality improvements.
In a decision critics call reckless, California’s state budget approved by Governor Gavin Newsom has left grid reliability programs in serious jeopardy, cutting key funding amid worsening heat-driven power shortages. With solar and wind energy capacity strained during extreme weather, the $321 billion budget trimmed $18 million from emergency support programs designed to stabilize the grid, while deferring larger Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and climate bond investments to later this year. Advocates warn this delay could exacerbate energy instability, undermining both environmental targets and public safety as the state faces increasingly fierce heat waves.

Delays in funding highlight tensions between green ambition and reliability

The budget slashes funding for two critical grid resilience programs: the Demand Side Grid Support (DSGS) and Distributed Electricity Backup Assets (DEBA), which provide emergency power and decentralized energy storage during grid emergencies. Originally slated to receive $473 million through 2028, the programs were reduced to $50 million in May before losing $18 million in the finalized budget. Legislature and Newsom’s office instead postponed decisions about the state’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fundand $4.9 billion in climate bonds, citing fiscal uncertainty. Edson Perez, California lead at Advanced Energy United (AEU), criticized the move as “bad timing for grid stability.” “Reliability programs like DSGS have delivered results. … California cannot keep deferring,” he said, noting the programs help keep the lights on “with clean energy” during extreme weather. AEU called the deferred investments “a gamble with the public’s safety and economic future.” Similar missteps in funding caused rolling blackouts during 2020 heat waves, with critics then blaming overreliance on intermittent renewables like solar, which falter during cloudy or hot nights. Kate Unger of the California Solar & Storage Association warned the cuts will deter program participation, calling the lack of clarity “problematic.” “These programs should be growing,” she emphasized, pointing to rising heat-related risks. Meanwhile, the budget allocated just $132 million to electric vehicle incentives, far less than the $1.5 billion annually needed to meet zero-emission vehicle targets.

California’s green energy struggles

California’s current grid instability echoes past policy missteps. The state’s aggressive renewable energy mandates—targeting 100% carbon-free electricity by 2045—complexify grid management, requiring supplemental power sources (like natural gas) during lulls in wind or sunlight. In 2020, such gaps caused blackouts blamed on inadequate “grid flexibility,” prompting calls for reliability upgrades. But that push faced pushback from environmental groups wary of fossil fuels’ climate impacts. Now, even Newsom admits green energy’s operational limits: during the 2022 Pacific Gas & Electric failures, he acknowledged solar-and-wind-only systems “don’t work” during prolonged cloudy periods. Yet the new budget risks deepening this challenge by scaling back funding for storage and distributed energy resources.

Political accountability: Newsom blames Washington, advocates demand local action

Governor Newsom attributes California’s fiscal strain to President Trump-era policies, including fluctuating tariffs on imported materials needed for renewables and vehicle production. His office did not address direct questions about the grid funding but has framed state budget limitations as intertwined with federal inaction. Yet critics argue California’s leaders share blame. “These cuts send a chilling signal to clean energy industries,” said Perez, noting the sector supports 60,000 jobs. “Investments in electrification aren’t optional—they’re core to reducing emissions and protecting workers.” Environmental justice advocates added that delayed clean transportation funds would hurt low-income communities suffering from both pollution and unreliable power.

Urgency grows as summers heat up

With summer temperatures soaring and grid stressors intensifying, California stands at a crossroads. The deferral of funding for DSGS, DEBA and clean transportation programs could mean prolonged blackouts, higher emissions from emergency fossil fuel reliance and lost economic opportunities in homegrown energy innovation. Governor Newsom has until late 2025 to resolve funding for climate initiatives, but the clock is ticking. As Perez put it: “California must decide—will it lead in affordable, reliable clean energy, or keep its people in the dark?” Sources for this article include: UtilityDive.com AdvancedEnergyUnited.org
Copy