Free cookie consent management tool by TermsFeed

Rising electric bills helped spur a Democratic upset in rural Virginia

Nov 12, 2025
Written by
Elizabeth Ouzts
In collaboration with
canarymedia.com
Rising electric bills helped spur a Democratic upset in rural Virginia

Many households in rugged and rural southwest Virginia are already struggling to make ends meet. But they pay some of the highest electric rates in the nation, with prices that have risen at more than three times the pace of inflation over the last decade and a half.

Last week, residents of the Appalachian region voted to do something about it, joining Americans around the country in electing candidates who made affordability and spiking electricity bills central to their campaigns.

To wit: Voters in Montgomery and Roanoke counties elected Lily Franklin, a Democrat and former schoolteacher from Blacksburg, as their representative to the state House of Delegates. With 51% of the vote, she beat out a Republican incumbent in a district that voted for President Donald Trump three times in a row.

“It is a huge deal that we won this,” she told Canary Media.

The price of electricity wasn’t the only economic issue on voters’ minds as they cast their ballots across Virginia, giving Democrats the governor’s office, a larger majority in the House of Delegates, and a governing trifecta in Richmond. But Franklin said the topic came up again and again in her district, home to Virginia Tech as well as large swaths of mountain countryside.

“I talked to thousands of people across the district, and rising energy bills was a top concern,” she said. ​“I would hear it time after time — people were like, ​‘My bill is almost three times what it was last year, and I haven’t changed anything.’”

Franklin is determined to tackle the problem when she’s sworn in on Jan. 14. ​“I’m not fixing inflation as a state legislator,” she said, ​“but I can work on energy in Virginia and bring down people’s bills.”

Of course, that’s easier said than done. But Clean Virginia, a Charlottesville-based nonprofit with a research division and a campaign arm that endorsed Franklin and numerous other candidates, just issued a report that could serve as a guide. The study homes in on Appalachian Power Co., or APCo, the investor-owned utility that serves all but a few patches of southwest Virginia.

“The last General Assembly session on the energy front was really dominated by intensive focus on the cost crisis in APCo territory,” said Brennan Gilmore, executive director of Clean Virginia.

That effort culminated in legislation heavily influenced by the utility that temporarily scaled back some fuel costs for customers, he said. ​“But it was not a holistic look at what the actual drivers of the crisis were, [or] a holistic look at how to resolve those crises.”

So, Gilmore’s staff spent months digging into regulatory filings in both Virginia and West Virginia, where APCo is headquartered. What they found is that base rates aren’t the main problem. Instead, add-on fees known as riders are the real culprits — and they typically receive far less regulatory scrutiny.

Riders, especially to fund grid upgrades, are hardly confined to APCo territory, rising in multiple jurisdictions nationwide and even sparking a popular internet meme that cheekily sums up the charges: ​“Distribution fee. Processing fee. … Transmission fee. Fee fee. Fee fi fo fum fee. Might as well fee. … Another dollar won’t hurt fee.”

In deep-red Patrick County, south of Franklin’s district on the border of Virginia and North Carolina, the internet hive mind mostly blames the monopoly-utility model for these costs, with scores of commenters on a local Facebook page bemoaning bills that doubled and even tripled in the span of a month.

The Clean Virginia report authors tend to agree, saying the rising bills overall are propelled by a regulatory system that ​“incentivizes utility overspending, inflates utility profits, and puts disproportionate costs on residential customers.” But the study also drills down on specifics.

The researchers note that Virginia’s 2020 Clean Economy Act, which requires APCo to sell 100% renewable energy by midcentury, is causing some of these riders. But they’re relatively paltry: Solar and wind generation to comply with the law makes up less than 1% of households’ monthly bills today, the report found, and is expected to comprise just 3% of monthly costs next year.

Riders for fuel costs and for high-voltage, long-distance electrical wires, by contrast, make up nearly half of the average household bill in southwest Virginia. Fuel costs more than tripled between 2007 and 2024. Transmission fees rose fivefold from 2009, when regulators first allowed them as a separate line item.

Fuel costs are closely tied to national markets for coal and gas, which make up over 80% of APCo’s power-generating capacity. Coal prices more than doubled in 2021 alone, the report says. Likewise, natural-gas prices jumped 540% between 2020 and 2022. Since APCo customers pay 100% of fuel costs, they bear the full brunt of these increases, while shareholders bear none, Clean Virginia notes.

“If you’re using generation technology that requires a lot of fuel, customers are going to pay more than if you use a renewable source with no fuel,” Gilmore said. ​“Add the volatility and the spike in natural-gas prices because of global and other economic issues, then you see a direct correlation between increased bills and fossil-fuel prices.”

But fuel fees appear to be rising for other reasons, too, the study says. The charges include power purchases from other utilities, and last year, the report notes, the Virginia attorney general found that APCo was buying coal power at above-market rates from an affiliate company, Ohio Valley Electric Corp.

“Legislators should urge [regulators] to order refunds if APCo’s interaffiliate power purchases exceed market benchmarks,” the report suggests.

APCo may also be using more coal power than is cost-effective.

Across the country, plant operators have scaled back use of coal-fired units not just because the fuel itself is expensive, but because the aging plants cost a lot to operate and maintain. Last year, the average run time for U.S. coal plants was a little over 40%. But regulators in West Virginia — where APCo operates two coal plants — have ordered the utility to run the facilities at least 69% of the time, the report says, citing testimony from a recent rate case.

Passthrough of volatile fuel costs is a common problem for utility customers, Gilmore said. ​“But there are some specific APCo elements of this,” he said, ​“including uneconomic dispatch of their coal plants, and a sort of self-dealing with some of the APCo affiliate-owned coal plants.”

Perhaps the biggest challenge is the utility’s ballooning transmission fees. One problem, according to the study, is that the cost of building and maintaining these high-voltage electric lines in the area’s hilly terrain is spread among relatively few customers. The much larger Dominion Energy, for instance, charges less than half as much in transmission costs per household as does APCo.

Data centers could well be a factor, too. Though virtually none are in southwest Virginia, hubs in Ohio, northern Virginia, and elsewhere are crowding the grid run by the regional transmission organization PJM Interconnection. PJM allocates the resulting costs for upfitting lines across its member utilities, without factoring in where these large electric loads are located.

For its part, APCo said in an emailed statement that ​“investing in and maintaining [our] generation, transmission and distribution network is essential for minimizing and shortening outages, accommodating growing energy demands and integrating new energy sources.”

Like utilities nationwide, the statement continued, APCo faces high interest rates and inflation, driving up a number of the expenses associated with generating and delivering power, including ​“higher material and labor costs; … cost recovery for major storms; fuel-related costs not yet recovered through the fuel factor, and cost recovery for investments made in generating plants and distribution infrastructure.”

The company also touted its energy-efficiency programs and noted that a $10 decrease in fuel costs took effect Nov. 1.

The price cut grew out of the law Gilmore said inspired his group’s study, which notes, ​“given that methane gas prices are projected to double between 2024 and 2026, fuel costs are likely to increase again in the near future.”

Incoming Del. Franklin called the reduction woefully insufficient.

“It’s not a whole lot of relief when your wages haven’t gone up any, your groceries are still more expensive, and your rent’s really high — or your property taxes have gone up,” she said. ​“We have to have a more substantial plan to bring down rates.”

The recommendations in the plan by Clean Virginia, such as requiring utilities to pick up a share of fuel costs and reducing reliance on riders, echo a recent report that grew out of a bipartisan resolution from the 2024 General Assembly.

But Franklin believes neither party is fully united on how to lower prices.

“There are folks that think if we have an all-of-the-above approach — that is how we bring down costs,” she said. ​“Then you’ve got some people on both sides that think nuclear is the direction.”

Neither of those are quick fixes, Franklin said, with lead times of five to seven years for new gas plants and even longer timelines for nuclear.

Her own aspirations for office range from sweeping reforms, like prohibiting APCo and Dominion from making campaign contributions, to incremental steps like shifting some of the rate burden from residential customers to industrial ones and providing incentives for rooftop solar.

“And at the end of the day, we’ve got to help the people,” she said, ​“and that’s what I’m going to remind members of my party.”

Recent News

Weekly newsletter

No spam. Just the interesting articles in your inbox every week.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
In collaboration with
canarymedia.com
>