| Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
Is it possible to keep the lights on during peak demand and care for the planet and public health at the same time?
That’s the question Austin’s Electric Utility Commission plans to tackle at its meeting on Monday, May 11, as it considers Austin Energy’s proposal to build more natural gas-powered peaking units in the city.
The advisory Electric Utility Commission also plans to discuss a full economic modeling of both renewable and conventional power sources for Austin Energy. Proposals to expand local energy generation – including more peaker units – will go to city council later this month, according to Lisa Martin, Austin Energy’s Chief Operating Officer.
Though Austin Energy sees new peaker units as a necessary stopgap to keep electricity flowing during extreme demand, some residents say that the fast-start gas units could increase pollution in already-overburdened East Austin communities – and undermine Austin Energy’s goal to deliver carbon-free power by 2035, as laid out in its Resource, Generation, and Climate Protection Plan. Currently, all the city’s peaker units are in East Austin.
Kaiba White, a climate policy and outreach specialist for Public Citizen who sits on the Electric Utility Commission, told Austin Free Press that more peakers would create “more climate impacts and locally polluted air.”
Peaker units serve as backup generators to switch on in dire circumstances, such as extreme weather events. Though gas turbines have higher operating costs than renewables, they start up quickly on demand, according to the clean-energy company Enel North America. Natural gas turbines also release nitrogen oxide, ozone and particulate matter into the air. Their greenhouse gas emissions trap heat in the atmosphere.
Credit: Austin Energy
Carbon-free alternatives such as solar and battery storage systems exist, but Martin does not see these filling the gap in demand. This leaves gas peakers, in Austin Energy’s eyes, as a necessary “tool.” New peakers will be more efficient and produce fewer emissions than existing ones.
“We’re operating from a deficit right now,” Martin said. “And as we look into the future and we see our energy needs continue to grow, we need to add additional (peaker) units.”
Even if council acts now, these units would not come online for several years, Martin noted at a November meeting of the Austin Energy Utility Oversight Committee. “We’re finding that new peakers have a very long lead time. Some quoted the earliest availability in 2029. Other manufacturers aren’t even accepting orders until 2030.”
At the November 2025 meeting, Mayor Kirk Watson expressed concerns about having enough power without adding peakers. Council Member José Vela echoed that sentiment, encouraging Austin Energy to hop into the queue and commit to buying the units.
Air quality qualms
As the council and Austin Energy seek new peakers, Travis County is already at risk of exceeding ozone standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Similarly, particulate matter concentrations in Austin currently exceed the EPA standard at 11.4 micrograms per cubic meter.
“Our air quality is bad enough that anything significant we do to worsen it is necessarily going to impact those who are closest to that plant and, because air moves, all of Austin,” Rebecca Bernhardt, program director at Texas Physicians for Social Responsibility, told Austin Free Press. Even short-term exposure to ozone and particulate matter increases rates of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, according to the Environmental Defense Fund.
Pollution exposure can lead to premature death, a systematic review in the Journal of the American Medical Association found. According to a meta-analysis published in the National Library of Medicine, emissions can be especially harmful on very hot days – when peakers are likely to be used.
Martin acknowledged the negative health effects of fossil fuels. However, she told Austin Free Press that without adequate energy supply, people may be forced to choose between paying an electric bill or going to the doctor. If the power goes out, people may be exposed to extreme heat or cold, creating different health problems.
“Those are the types of things we think about when we take into consideration the trade-offs and we do our very best to be as responsible as we can, while still providing for our customers’ needs,” Martin said.
White said this trade-off is unnecessary. She believes Austin Energy can even out demand spikes by asking customers to adjust usage during low-demand hours and “rely on renewable energy as long as it is efficient.”
East Austin home to peakers
Currently, Austin Energy controls 10 peaker units: four at Decker Creek Power Station and six at Sand Hill Energy Center. These are located in city council Districts 1 and 2, respectively. A Clean Energy Group mapping tool shows that 41% of the population surrounding Decker Creek Power Station is lower income and 85% are people of color. Sand Hill data were not included.
A comprehensive map created by the Environmental Defense Fund similarly shows that East Austin overall has greater climate vulnerability and greater risk of chronic disease than West Austin.
“The single best determinant for a community’s air quality is racial makeup,” Bernhardt said. “We’re not taking the pollution load in the eastern crescent seriously. It’s a deeply unjust idea.”
Austin Energy narrowed possible locations to a short list of 14 sites for the new units on both the east and west sides of the city. However, the natural gas lines on the west side are smaller, and Martin noted that Austin Energy might not be able to find the necessary infrastructure for peakers there. “It’s important to make sure that the power can flow across our system,” Martin said.
Al Braden, an environmental photographer who is vice chair of the Electric Utility Commission, believes that Decker and Sand Hill are likely locations for new peakers because the transmission capacity and gas lines are already there. “The east side of Austin has been saddled with our generation plans since the 1950s,” he said.
Credit: Al Braden and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas
White agrees that East Austin is more exposed to industrial pollution and noted, “Austin Energy has been very cagey about where they would put these new peakers. The people who are most exposed are not the same people who are making these decisions.”
Renewable alternatives?
Braden does not see a justification for more gas peakers. By 2030, he believes transmission lines and the statewide grid will be able to support a carbon-free Austin.
Statewide, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) — the state’s independent system operator — is investing $33 billion to enhance transmission lines over the next five years, increasing statewide capacity fivefold, according to an ERCOT.
Locally, Austin Energy plans to bring 78 megawatts of battery power online by 2027 and 270 megawatts by 2035, which Braden said will “eat” demand spikes. The utility is similarly working to build out utility-scale solar and offers a solar rebate of up to $2,500 for residential customers.
“The generation plan was based on an earlier set of circumstances where batteries and renewables weren’t as widely available,” Braden said.
Austin Energy conducted three public information sessions, including one at Decker Middle School. According to Stephanie Chavez Noell, director of community arts for Parents’ Climate Community. There was little notice for the meetings, resulting in poor attendance, she said.
“I called Decker Middle School before the meeting, and they didn’t know anything about the info sessions,” she said. Noell added that members of the utility commission were similarly out of the loop.
White and Braden agree that Austin Energy hurried through the peaker proposal process. White could not predict what the utility commission will recommend on May 11. The Austin City Council is not bound by the commission’s recommendation.
A communications strategist for District 1 Council Member Natasha Harper-Madison told Austin Free Press, “We are currently coordinating with Austin Energy to better understand the resource plan and its potential impacts.”
District 2 Council Member Vanessa Fuentes was unable to comment on the introduction of new peakers in her district as she is on parental leave.
Piper Guinn is a native Texan and recent graduate of Whittier College, where she received a BA in political science. She currently works in Austin, covering the environment and local government beats.
