Energy

Will Americans Give Trump a Chance to “Terminate the Green New Scam”?

Electricity Prices Have Skyrocketed Under Biden and Harris

Critics of former President Donald Trump often claim he is lying. Much of the time, however, the critics fail to recognize he is simply using hyperbole to highlight the problems Democrats and establishment Republicans are causing across our country.

Sunday night, Trump was at it again during his campaign rally at New York’s Madison Square Garden. He told the crowd, “We will achieve energy independence. … We’re gonna drill, baby, drill. And I will terminate the green new scam and will cut your energy prices in half, 50 percent, within one year from January 20.”

U.S. Federal Renewable Energy Subsidies are Driving the Energy Transition

“We have heard testimony … about the threat climate change poses to entire sectors of our economy … So, what are we, the federal government, doing to protect against these threats? Actually, we are subsidizing the danger. As we’ll hear today, the United States subsidizes the fossil fuel industry with taxpayer dollars.” – U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse

Executive Summary

It is common for advocates of renewable energy to complain about the subsidies given to fossil fuels. Joining Sen. Whitehouse in this are groups like the International Monetary Fund, The Future is Electric, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

One thing these renewable advocates have in common is they greatly exaggerate the amount of fossil fuel subsidies. Whitehouse claims the U.S. subsidies in 2022 were $20 billion. The IMF ups the amount to $660 billion (2020). As Figure 1 shows, these claims are not accurate.

Perhaps these claims are efforts to distract from massive renewable energy subsidies that are driving the ‘energy transition’ from fossil fuels to renewables. From 2010 to 2019, renewables received $74 billion from the U.S. government. They are expected to increase to $244 billion from 2020 to 2029.

Only a decade ago, Texas had the most competitive electricity market in the world, a market that produced reliable, affordable electricity. Today, the Texas electric grid has been taken over by Texas government. This has produced predictable results: reliability has plummeted while costs have skyrocketed.

A new study by the Energy Alliance explains how high the costs have gone. In 2023, the U.S. government, Texas’ state government, and Texas local governments increased the cost of electricity in the Texas by $19.9 billion, most of it by providing subsidies and other benefits to generators and utilities. This represented 42.7% of the total cost of electricity to Texans in the area served by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT).

How did it come to pass that more than 40% of Texans’ electricity costs are imposed on them by government? The answer is simple: Texas policymakers supported ever increasing subsidies for renewable energy even as renewables were degrading the reliability of the Texas grid. And when the reliability problem caused by renewable subsidies became so apparent to the public that it could no longer be ignored—think Winter Storm Uri, policymakers decided to throw more taxpayer dollars at all generation sources rather than end renewable subsidies.

With its grid overwhelmed by renewable energy, Texas is putting natural gas back in the game. The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) has received 125 notices of intent that propose more than 55,000 megawatts of new generation, most of it gas-fired.

Texans should not be surprised at this turn of events. Generators are simply following the money. Taxpayer money, that is.

At its June 10 meeting, the Mount Vernon City Council gave the go ahead for city staff to apply for funding through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Community Change Program. Funding through the program could be as high as $20 million.

City Engineer Brian Ball explained to the council the city might use the funding for projects like the city’s tree planting program, a new municipal courthouse and construction of year-round restrooms at Arch Park and Ariel Foundation Park.

Funding for the program comes from the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The funding is being awarded to “to meet the goals and objectives of two Executive Orders (EO 14008 and EO 13985) issued by President Joe Biden.

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick recently responded to the significant number of applicants seeking government subsidies to build new natural gas-fired electric generation plants. In a May 31 statement, he said, "As of this morning, 81 applicants representing over 41 gigawatts of dispatchable power generation projects have applied for the competitive low-interest loan program provided through the Texas Energy Fund (TEF) to keep up with our growing state."

Part three of a state-required public hearing on a proposed industrial solar farm project in Knox County, Ohio drew overwhelming opposition from local residents.

Again.

A May 29 "extended hearing" on the Frasier Solar project, developed by Austin-based Open Road Renewables in Clinton and Miller Townships, was required after more than 800 residents attended the original April 4 hearing, with more than 140 signing up to speak. Most didn't get a chance.

The groundswell of April opposition led the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB), which hosted the meeting, to extend the hearing for the first time in state history.

A consistent view expressed by locals: Knox County farmland is too valuable to waste, covering it with industrial solar panels.

Reuters recently ran a story highlighting wind generation's failure through the early months of 2023:

The Texas power grid operator urged homes and businesses to conserve electricity on Tuesday as the first major heat wave of the season spurs residents to crank power-hungry air conditioners. Power prices for Tuesday topped $2,500 per megawatt hour (MWh) in the state's day-ahead market on expectations that demand would reach record levels later in the day, according to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT).

In addition to the heavy demand for cooling, the Texas grid is also under strain from a recent dip in power generation from wind sources, which if sustained may deprive the ERCOT system of a key source of clean power when it is needed most. Wind power is Texas' second largest source of electricity behind natural gas, so any prolonged drop in wind generation may leave the ERCOT system under strain just as the peak demand season kicks off.

Read More

WSJ: Berkshire Hathaway’s Energy Idea Is a Bad Fit for Texas

"Two years ago, not long after the Texas electricity system snapped following a winter storm, Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway pitched an idea to Texas lawmakers: Let us build some backup power plants in exchange for steady, guaranteed payment. Now the state is one step closer to making that concept a reality.

"The state Senate earlier this month passed a bundle of bills aimed at reforming the state’s energy system, the most substantial of which proposes a so-called Texas Energy Insurance Program. Under that system, the state would run a competitive process to select power plants that would serve as backups in case of emergencies. Only natural-gas-fueled power plants with on-site fuel storage would qualify. It is an attractive proposition for any power plant that could attain the designation: Such plants would earn a regulated rate of return on equity—with a ceiling of 10% a year—whether they end up being used or not. ...

"The bill states that such backup power plants could be used to “resolve an actual or anticipated violation of transmission security criteria.” That is a phrase that could be interpreted as regular transmission congestion, something that happens “every few minutes,” according to Beth Garza, senior fellow at think tank R Street and a former director of the independent market monitor for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or Ercot, which is the electricity system operator for Texas.

"Critics, which include the Texas Competitive Power Advocates, an industry group that represents power plant owners in Texas, have said such power plants could undermine their own purpose by discouraging new generators from entering the competitive market."

Read the rest at the WSJ

Austin passes subsidies for gas power to counter wind-power subsidies that have destabilized the state electric grid.

What a mess. Renewable subsidies have distorted and destabilized the Texas electric grid, which resulted in a week-long power outage during the February 2021 freeze. To prevent more blackouts, Republicans in the Lone Star State now plan to subsidize gas power plants.

The Texas Senate last week passed putative energy reforms to “level the playing field,” as Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick put it. Texans will now spend tens of billions of dollars to bolster natural-gas plants that provide reliable power but can’t make money because of competition from subsidized renewable energy.

Federal tax credits have encouraged an oversupply of wind power, which Lone Star State Republicans assisted last decade by charging rate payers $7 billion to build thousands of miles of transmission lines from West Texas and the Panhandle to big cities. Solar and wind supply about 30% of Texas power on average but sometimes can produce more than half.

Wind generators pocket a tax credit for every kilowatt hour they produce no matter if the grid needs it. A surfeit of wind is increasingly driving wholesale power prices negative—i.e., generators have to pay to offload their power. Wind producers can still make money because of the tax credits, but fossil-fuel plants that provide baseload power can’t.

Read the rest at the Wall Street Journal

Our state leaders continue to hand out more money to big business while claiming it will benefit us.

In this case, the Texas Senate “voted to set aside $3.9 billion for escalating costs being pushed onto customers.” While this sounds like a good idea, this money would go directly to businesses; it is unclear how much will make it back into the pockets of consumers.

by Chuck DeVore

When Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom called a special legislative session in December to tax California’s oil refiners out of their “excessive” profits, he was following a well-trod path of Golden State governors blaming the oil and gas industry for the state’s high energy prices.

Newsom should look in a mirror to see the reason for high energy prices.

California typically has the highest gasoline prices in the contiguous United States — an artifact of three things:

Persistent air quality issues that demand a special gasoline formulation;

The highest fuel taxes in America — including an array of “fees” such as a “cap-and-trade”;

And an isolated fuel market due to the special formulation that results in no refinery slack so that when a plant has an accident or goes down for maintenance, prices can quickly soar.

Today, gasoline in California goes for $4.62 per gallon, of which about 90 cents are state taxes and fees and 18.4 cents federal.

Everyone knows that the Texas electricity grid has problems. And just about everyone knows that the problems with the grid have been caused by government intervention. The question becomes, then, why would Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and the Texas Senate reveal a plan this week to fix the grid with MORE government intervention?

Of course, they are not alone in their folly. Both Gov. Greg Abbott and the Texas House have successfully pushed for more government intervention in the grid since the winter freeze of 2021. The result? More than $20 billion in subsidies for generators and natural gas companies and, not surprisingly, higher electricity prices for Texas consumers; prices have jumped from about 12 cents per kilowatt hour to almost 14.5 cents. And no increased reliability as wind and solar farms continue to flood the Texas market.

The reason for this folly is that none of our politicians and bureaucrats want to admit that it was their support for market intervention, particularly renewable energy subsidies, that led to worst blackout in Texas history. As a result, they are doubling down on their deception, hoping that if they force Texans to give enough money to electric generators and natural gas suppliers we might not have another statewide blackout.

Unfortunately, the Senate plan does the exact same thing as the Public Utility Commission is attempting to do with its market redesign effort: use consumers' money to fill the coffers of generators while doing little to improve reliability.

This path has already proved to be a waste of consumer's money, undermining both competition and reliability in the Texas electricity market. The path to an affordable and reliable supply of electricity is not to take billions of dollars from Texans and give it to generators with multi-billion-dollar market caps. Instead, the way to increase the reliability and affordability of the Texas grid is to shut off the subsidies for all generators--traditional and renewable. Unfortunately, the Senate plan leaves Texas renewable subsidies firmly in place while adding billions of dollars more for the others.

There is some sanity, though, in this conversation. While the recently filed SB 6 and SB 7 (the Senate Plan) will do more good for companies like Berkshire Hathaway than it will for Texas consumers, Sen. Bob Hall's bill, SB 1752, eliminates many of the subsidies for renewable and traditional generators that have led to the near collapse of the Texas electric grid.

The provisions in his bill include:

eliminates the ability of counties, cities, and special districts to offer property tax abatements for renewable energy generation, i.e., wind and solar farms

eliminates the ability of the PUC to designate more Competitive Renewable Energy Zones (CREZ) for the transmission of renewable energy

prohibits transmission companies from charging consumers for the costs of building and operating CREZ transmission lines. Instead, the cost for building and operating CREZ lines is transferred to renewable generators who have received federal tax credits and use the CREZ lines.

prohibits renewable generators from selling electricity below $27.50 per megawatt hour

forces renewable generators to pay for the cost of interconnecting to the grid (currently, consumers pay for these costs for all generators);

requires the PUC to make renewable generators pay for the losses of transmission of their electricity sold into the market

eliminates the Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) subsidies under Texas’ Renewable Portfolio Standard.

prohibits the PCU from mandating a reserve margin. Mandating a reserve margin or otherwise requiring a certain amount of generation in the market (which is what the PUC is trying to do with its market restructuring) would end Texas' competitive, “energy only” market

eliminates the PUC’s ability to manipulate market prices by purchasing electricity outside of the market process.

The only way to ensure the reliability and affordability of the Texas grid is to stop politicians from running it. Sen. Bob Hall has given all of us a great blueprint for how to do this.

The Public Utility Commission of Texas recently voted to proceed with a redesign of the Texas electricity market despite opposition concerned about its high cost and poor chances to improve reliability.

Independent evaluations of the PUC’s plan show that the most likely outcome of the PUC’s current direction is higher costs for consumers with no appreciable improvement in reliability.

Making electricity more expensive will not make Texas' electric grid more reliable. Instead, it will line the pockets of generators with billions of dollars that belong to Texas consumers. Texas should scrap the PUC's market redesign project.

Perhaps the best place to start to understand the problems with the PUC’s market redesign is that it does almost nothing to address the primary cause of unreliability in the Texas market, renewable energy. Instead, renewables will continue their current domination of the market, making up almost 99% of all new generation coming online in the next four years.

Texas long ago passed the threshold where its inherent intermittency can be adequately compensated for. The problem is a simple matter of physics. When wind and solar generation drop off the grid, new energy must come online instantaneously to replace it. This puts massive stress on the power grid, and having generation on standby to compensate is extremely expensive.

Today, everyone is pushing for batteries to plug these gaps, but they are not up to the task. Not only are they much more expensive than thermal generation, but it is impossible to install batteries anywhere near the quantity needed to fill in the gaps created by wind and solar generation.

The PUC’s plan essentially follows its recent actions of driving electricity costs up and grid reliability down. And seems to be driven more by corporate cronyism than concerns for reliability. Not only will renewable generators and battery manufacturers benefit. The PUC's new market design also implements a credit system that will provide payments to all generators totaling an estimated $5.7 billion a year. The PUC says consumers may not pay that much because energy costs may decline. Yet recent history shows that the PUC's promises for more affordable and reliable electricity have not come true.

Prior to the PUC’s vote, members of the Texas Senate's Business and Commerce Committee had sent a letter to the PUC commissioners asking them to pause the process until the Legislature could address its concerns about the PUC's proposed market redesign. Others also raised concerns.

Opposition to the PUC’s actions focuses on two main problems. One is that the PUC’s plan is simply an East Coast-style capacity market that eliminates competition in the market and instead relies on the PUC and managers of the grid to determine how much electricity we need and how much consumers should pay for it. Other U.S. capacity markets have only accomplished one thing: making electricity more expensive without improving reliability.

Another problem with the PUC’s action is that the plan does nothing to slow the growth of renewables—the PUC estimates that 99% of all new generation over the next four years will be solar or wind. Any effort to improve grid reliability without addressing the fundamental problem of intermittent generation will fail.

Underlying both of these is the concern that the PUC’s plan will do nothing to bring more reliable generation to the grid. In its recent report, The End of Texas’ Energy-Only Electricity Market, the Energy Alliance uses the PUC’s own studies to highlight this problem. It also calculates that the market redesign, coupled with existing market intervention, will result in Texans being saddled with an annual electricity tax as high as $8 billion a year by 2026.

There is, however, a path to reliable and affordable electricity. First, the Texas Legislature must tell the PUC to scrap its market redesign project. Second, the PUC must stop manipulating electricity prices, which includes dropping plans for adopting a mandatory reliability standard. Third, Texas must make renewable generators pay for the costs unreliable wind and solar are imposing on the system because of federal subsidies and eliminate all Texas subsidies for traditional and renewable generation.

In other words, Texas politicians and regulators should get out of the way and let the market work. That may be too much to expect from them, but Texas was built on dreams just as big. It might just happen.

The Texas PUC is Going to Replace Competition and Market Prices with a Capacity Market

Download the .pdf version of this here.

Download a .pdf version of a PowerPoint presentation on this topic.

The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) last week released the E3 report on the market redesign of the Texas electric grid. Unfortunately, the report follows the lead of the Texas Legislature in failing to address the primary problem behind the reliability problem Texas is facing: the manipulation of market prices by the federal and Texas governments. The manipulation has occurred through two primary market interventions. First, federal, state, and local renewable energy subsidies. Second, the PUC’s Operating Reserve Demand Curve and Ancillary Services. The following highlights problems with the PUC market design process and recommends a path to resorting reliability and affordability to the Texas electric grid.

The PUC/E3 Report Doubles Down on the Status Quo

As economists Michael’s and Kleit explained in 2013, the beauty of the Texas market’s energy-only design was that is provided adequate capacity at a much lower cost than the so-called capacity markets:

ERCOT’s “energy-only” market relies on competitive market forces to meet the long-term electricity needs of the 23 million Texans in its service area. Shorter-term needs are also met through the competitive market. … Competition has worked remarkably well in ERCOT since its introduction about 15 years ago. Consumers can choose over a hundred different plans from dozens of providers. Billions of dollars invested in generation have provided Texas with a reliable supply of affordably priced electricity.

While today’s market still bears the name ‘energy-only,’ regulators have done everything possible to turn it into a capacity market through continuous intervention in the market. Yet the E3 report treats the current market as a fully functional "Energy-Only" market. All of its analyses of the possible proposed use the current market design as a baseline. E3 made no effort to model what a true energy-only market would look like or what a market without subsidies for renewable and traditional generators would look like.

The PUC/E3 Report Offers No Path for Addressing the Growth of Intermittent Generation

The E3 report projects what the installed capacity for each generation source in the electric market would be under each of the seven scenarios it analyzed. One notable aspect of this is that the amount of capacity from renewable energy, wind and solar farms, is the same under the proposed market redesigns as it is under the baseline status quo. What this means is that the proposed market redesigns will do nothing to reduce the growth of intermittent generation in Texas. This is remarkable because it has been well documented that renewable energy has played a major role in increasing the cost of electricity for Texans and in reducing the reliability.

In 2007, electricity from wind and solar generation made up 3% of the total electricity generated in ERCOT. Through June, the total this year is 37%--more than natural gas. The reason for this is simple. Renewables totaled 85% of new generation over the last four years as subsidies allowed renewables to practice predatory pricing and keep new natural gas plants from coming online. Even when the intermittency of renewables hasn’t led to reliability problems, it has significantly increased the cost of electricity as regulators have forced Texans to pay billions of dollars to get enough generation online to keep the lights on. And the market redesign won’t make things better. The E3 report estimates that almost 99% of new generation coming online in Texas through 2026 will be renewables.

The Market Design Recommendations in the PUC/E3 Report Will Transfer Billions of Dollars of Wealth from Texas Consumers to Texas Generators

On p. 5 of its report, E3 suggests that its proposed redesign of the Texas market will result in an incremental increase in costs to Texans of $460 million per year. However, the costs will be much higher. E3 is able to claim the $460 million figure by comparing the proposed market redesigns to its status quo scenario. Yet the status quo scenario contains billions of dollars of current and future cost increases already added to Texans’ electric, property tax, and income tax bills by federal, state, and local governments.

For instance, the E3 report builds in the $2 billion of in increased costs through July 31 from the PUC’s Operating Reserve Demand Curve (ORDC) and ancillary services. Of this, $1 billion was a result of changes the PUC made to the ORDC made in January 2022. One group estimates that the ORDC will add an additional $1.3 billion to the cost of Texas electricity next year.

Then there is the cost of securitization caused by the PUC’s arbitrary and capricious decision

during the 2021 winter storm to raise electricity prices to $9,000 per MWH. The result is that Texas consumers are on the hook for at least $10.5 billion in costs from the storm. The annual cost on consumers’ electric bills will be at least $738 million per year.

There are also the annual costs associated with CREZ lines ($573 million), Texas Renewable Portfolio Standard ($27 million), and congestion costs associated with renewables ($766 million).

Add all these up, and the recommended alternative in the E3 report will force Texas consumers will have to pay $5.8 billion a year above market price for the electricity they purchase in ERCOT. Most of that will be used to subsidize thermal and renewable generators in Texas with multi-billion-dollar market caps in Texas’ newly designed capacity market.

In addition to these costs on their electric bills, Texans will also have to bear the costs of federal and local renewable subsidies through their income and property taxes. The Energy Alliance estimates that these costs will total about $2.6 billion in 2026; $167 million from local property tax abatements for wind and solar farms and $2.4 billion in federal subsidies through the Production Tax Credit (wind) and Investment Tax Credit (solar).The federal subsidies include increases contained in the recently passed Inflation Reduction Act. The total annual cost in 2026 that Texans will have to pay for their electricity above market-priced energy costs will be about $8.4 billion.

Recommendations

Scrap the Market Redesign Project at the PUC. Instead, maintain Texas’ energy-only market and restore its health through these steps:

End the PUC’s manipulation of market prices by eliminating the ORDC and ERCOT’s Ancillary Services.

Do not adopt a mandatory reliability standard

Directly address the price distortions caused by renewable resources receiving out-of-market support through requiring either
- Renewable energy minimum offer price
- Firmness of dispatch for renewable energy

Eliminate/do not renew Chapter 312 and 313 property tax abatements for wind and solar generation

Make Texas’ Renewable Energy Credits program voluntary

End the socialization of grid connection and transmission costs

Require the PUC to model the costs and reliability of Texas’ energy-only market with these recommendations in place

Problems with generation adequacy in Texas were once rare occurrences. But no more.

As everyone knows, Texas had the worst blackout in its history during the winter of 2021, when 10 million Texans went without power and 12 million without water. After the Texas Legislature passed a number of bills in response, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott proclaimed, “Bottom line is that everything that needed to be done was done to fix the power grid in Texas.”

At least until this summer, that is, when in May electricity prices skyrocketed in response to generation shortages as the state’s grid regulator ERCOT (Electric Reliability Council of Texas) asked Texans “to conserve power when they can by setting their thermostats to 78-degrees or above and avoiding the usage of large appliances (such as dishwashers, washers and dryers).” Then in July, ERCOT again warned Texans several times to conserve energy as generating reserves tightened.

While Texas politicians may not have done much to improve the reliability of our electric grid, they have done a great job of increasing the cost of electricity. And unless they stop politicizing management of the Texas electric grid, prices will continue to increase as reliability continues to decline.

Download Model Legislation: Eliminate Texas' Renewable Portfolio Standard

Texas Renewable Portfolio Standard forces Texas retail electric providers to purchase either renewable energy or renewable energy credits. The renewable energy credits trading program has already costs Texas $627 million, and will cost Texas consumers another $27 million in 2023.

Texans might be forgiven for thinking they have it better than the Brits when it comes to keeping the lights on. After all, they live in the energy capital of the world. However, the destructive nature of renewable energy like that used in Great Britain knows no borders, especially when American politicians push subsidies and mandates to force a shift away from fossil fuels, threatening not just Texas but the entire U.S. electric grid.

Just a few days after the British were warned they might have to lower their thermostats and delay their dinners this winter to avoid blackouts, Texans were advised to conserve energy on last Monday and Wednesday as summer temperatures peaked.

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the grid manager for most of Texas, issued a conservation appeal to Texans and Texas businesses as the week’s temperatures were expected to top 105 degrees.

Yet the high temperatures were not all that unusual for Texas this summer. So even though demand was pushing to near-record levels, the primary reason for the call for conservation was “wind generation [that] is currently generating significantly less than what it historically generated in this time period.” On Wednesday, some forced traditional outages and lower solar output due to West Texas cloud cover also contributed.

Renewables—wind and solar—have come to dominate Texas’s electricity market. For years, coal and natural gas had been the leading sources of electric generation. Over the last two years, though, renewables have topped both, with wind leading the way.

But not last week.

The Energy Alliance, of which I am the policy director, just released a new study, The Decline and Fall of Reliability, Affordability, and Competition in ERCOT, that explains the connection between political interference and the decline in generation adequacy and reliability in the Texas grid.

In response to the Texas’ blackouts, Texas politicians and regulators have undertaken a restructuring of the Texas electricity market. The restructuring ignores the role that previous political interventions in the market played in the blackouts and Texas’ more recent grid reliability problems.

Rather than address the harm being done to the Texas grid by federal, state, and local renewable energy subsidies, state leaders, the Texas Legislature, and regulators are moving away from competition in Texas’ world-class energy-only market and pushing for a de facto capacity market in Texas, an outcome that subsidy-seeking generators have been promoting for over a decade.

The direction Texas is taking now will line generators' pockets with billions of dollars each year with consumers paying the cost through higher electricity prices.

The greatest danger that the Texas grid faces now is the political establishment’s unwillingness to challenge the push for subsidies by generators and the renewable energy industry,” Peacock added. “If this continues, Texas will lose what is left of its competitive energy-only market. Yet the possibility of restoring reliability, affordability, and competition to ERCOT remains. All Texas has to do is let the market work.

You can read the full report here. Or the executive summary here.

Yesterday, ERCOT (the electric grid manager for Texas) issued a Conservation Appeal to Texans and Texas businesses "asking Texans and Texas businesses to voluntarily conserve electricity" today.

Why?

Well, it is going to be hot today, with temperatures reaching perhaps as high as 108 in parts of the state.

But the big problem Texans are facing today is wind energy. As ERCOT explains:

Comments on S7-10-22: The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors

The Energy Alliance

I am writing to express my concerns about the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) notice of proposed rulemaking on the Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors (ESG rule).

When it became law, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 included as one rationale for its passage the “important national interest in maintaining fair and orderly securities trading, assuring the fairness of securities transactions and markets and protecting investors.” While many rightly focus on the protection of investors when referencing SEC regulation, it must also be noted that all U.S. citizens in their roles as consumers, producers, and investors have an interest in the efficiency and productivity of markets that are subject to fair and orderly securities regulation. This proposed rule would impose unnecessary requirements on publicly traded companies that stand in opposition to decades of theory and practice related to securities regulation, and would thus threaten the interests of all Americans.

In the aftermath of last year's Great Texas Blackout, there has been much consternation and confusion. The lack of clarity has been evident in the proclamations and actions from politicians, regulators, and the energy industry.

There is one thing, however, that has become crystal clear in light of the blackout; nobody involved wants to take responsibility for the part they played. This is quite evident in ERCOT’s (Electric Reliability Council of Texas) Roadmap to Improving Grid Reliability.

By Laurie A. Luebbert

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) released a statement last week noting that unusually high temperatures predicted for the weekend and this week would likely lead to an increased demand for electric power.

Texas might be the focal point now, but it’s not a challenge for the Lone Star State alone.

In light of rising temperatures, ERCOT did not request that residents curtail energy use, the warning pauses any planned maintenance on power plants to ensure power remains consistent, the Austin Journal reported.

PUC Chairman Peter Lake (Sergio Flores, Houston Chronicle)

Following the political fallout from last year’s blackouts across Texas, the Texas Legislature took steps to divert attention from its contributions to the electric grid’s failure. In addition to passing several bills, it ordered the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) to revamp the Texas electricity market.

The problem with this is that the blackouts were not caused by a failure of the electricity market itself but by the massive interventions in the market authorized by the Legislature. This included billions of dollars of subsidies going to traditional and renewable energy generators plus the PUC’s decision to raise prices last year, which cost Texans as much as $38 billion.

It is in this light the PUC’s recent efforts to find a consultant to “to assist in the analysis, development and implementation” of an updated market should be viewed. Once again, it appears Texas leaders are putting generator profits over consumers’ best interests.

By Zachary Richter

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) is warning Texas residents about a possible grid overload this weekend because of high temperatures.

ERCOT released a statement this week noting that unusually high temperatures will likely lead to an increased demand on the grid. While the organization did not request a curtailing of energy use, the warning pauses any maintenance on power plants to ensure power remains consistent. Texans have become familiar with uncertainty surrounding their lights turning on, and Energy Alliance Policy Director Bill Peacock said this is preventable.

"Texas' refusal to deal with renewable energy subsidies continues to harm reliability on the Texas grid, and cost Texans billions of dollars," Peacock said. "More than $66 billion has been invested in renewable energy in Texas over the last 20 years. If not for generators chasing the more than $22 billion of renewable subsidies, that money could have been invested in reliable generation that would have largely addressed the problem Texas is facing this weekend."

As far back as at least King Edward I of England, people have been concerned about the environmental effects of fossil fuels.

In Edward’s case, the nobility of England were greatly distressed about the soot in the air as a result of the peasants’ attempts to keep warm by burning coal.

Today, most of the concern about the use of fossil fuels–coal, oil, and natural gas–is not about pollution but about putting naturally occurring carbon dioxide (CO2) back into the atmosphere from which it originally came.

The United States government has taken a light touch on this compared to many other countries. And even past efforts to reduce CO2 emissions were lessened when President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Accords to avoid the harmful economic effects of CO2 limits.

Americans have recently become painfully aware of the international scope of oil markets.

The war between Russia and Ukraine, being fought across the Atlantic Ocean more than 5,000 miles from America’s East Coast, has disrupted the global supply of oil – and thus gasoline. As a result, gasoline prices have risen dramatically in the last few weeks; regular gasoline now costs $4.32 a gallon on average, up from $3.48 before the war.

One way to overcome the problems caused by the war is to further develop international markets for oil to limit harm caused by supply disruptions. One step in that direction was Congress’ 2015 decision to allow U.S. oil exports, which, enhanced by the value provided by efficient international transportation of oil via supertankers, encouraged increased and more stable supplies of oil. But despite these advancements, several challenges are slowing progress in this area.

by John Kelly

This article originally appeared in the Austin Journal

The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) released data earlier this week that demonstrated a large surge in the amount of renewable energy put in place around the world in 2021.

"The global shift to renewables is underway," Francesco Camera, director-general of IRENA, told the Austin Journal recently. "2021 was a strong year for the energy transition – the world added almost 257 Gigawatts (GW) of renewables, increasing the stock of renewable power by 9.1% and contributing to an unprecedented 81% of global power additions. Solar power alone accounted for over half of the renewable additions with a record 133 GW last year, followed by 93 GW of wind energy overall, with offshore wind energy capacity hitting a record 21 GW."

I recently appeared on From the Stacks, the weekly video podcast of the Cornwall Alliance for The Stewardship of Creation. Cal Beisner was the host; he is also the founder and president of the Alliance. Cal and the folks of the Alliance are at the forefront of the effort to apply God's Word to caring for the world that God created for us. Which just makes sense; if God created the world, we ought to pay pretty close attention to how He's told us to take care of it.

We talked about several things on the show, but focused on a recent article in World magazine that portrays opposition to "climate change" by young Christians and "conservatives" as a good thing. Of course, one place to start is by pondering how one could possibly oppose climate change since the climate has been changing at least since the Fall of Man in the Garden of Eden.

Anyway, we had a great conversation. You can watch it below. You can also read the article that I published on the topic.

https://youtu.be/infERMkZsu4?t=44

This article first appeared in City Journal.

Just over a year ago, America had perhaps the world’s most affordable and reliable supply of energy. Today, hostility to fossil fuels—which began on President Joe Biden’s first day in office, when he canceled the Keystone XL pipeline—and the war in Ukraine have Americans heading toward energy insecurity. As gasoline and oil prices skyrocket, U.S. energy policy threatens the country’s infrastructure to discover, produce, and distribute energy from fossil fuels.

This is by design. The White House, along with state and local governments, has gone directly after production, distribution, and use of fossil fuels. In addition to shutting down pipelines, Biden issued an executive order early in his presidency that banned new oil and natural gas leasing on public lands and offshore waters. Though a federal court later overturned the ban, the U.S. Department of Interior has taken another route to halt new oil and gas leasing. Even for already leased lands, the federal government can take as many as 140 days to approve a drilling permit. (The process takes about two days in Texas.) The Bureau of Land Management approved just 95 permits for oil and natural gas drilling in January, down from 643 issued last April.

The Assault on U.S. Energy Markets has Americans Living on Borrowed Capital

It is hard to believe that just over a year ago America had perhaps the world’s most affordable and reliable supply of energy.

Today, the assault on fossil fuels - which began on President Joe Biden’s first day in office when he canceled the Keystone XL pipeline - has Americans heading toward European-style energy poverty, with gasoline and oil prices almost doubling since Biden took office. The higher prices and supply disruptions should not surprise us because current U.S. energy policy is threatening the infrastructure needed to discover, produce, and distribute energy from fossil fuels.

These policies continue today. This past week, Democrats in Congress held a hearing on rising energy prices where they attacked oil and gas companies for high prices instead of discussing how to lower them.

When most Texans woke up on the morning of February 15, 2021, they experienced something few Texans had ever experienced. Texas was gripped in the midst of the probably the worst winter storm in a century and millions had lost power--which would continue to be off for days for many.

Leaders in Texas state government, along with the media and industry, have tried to blame the free market for the Great Texas Blackout. However, that is not true. The explanation of why millions of Texans lost power is relatively simple: renewable energy, power-hungry politicians and regulators, and corporate cronyism.

As I explained in my presentation to Grassroots America in Tyler, TX on July 20 (download here or see below) , recent calls for a capacity market by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, Gov. Greg Abbott, and Rep. Chris Paddie, R-Marshall would mean the end of competition in the Texas electricity market. Instead, Texans would pay generators $4 billion or more for simply existing--then also have to pay them for the electricity we use.

If this happens, we will be able to look back and see that February 15 was truly the day the market died.

But the market is not dead yet. Texans should stand up and tell our elected officials that we do not want to pay billions more for electricity. Instead, they should end renewable energy subsidies,= and tell Texas regulators to keep the hands off of the market.

By Karla Florez -- Austin News

Texans continue to point the finger at various parties to shift the blame for blackouts across the state, including at Gov. Greg Abbott’s efforts or lack thereof to strengthen the state’s power grid.

“It’s Day Two of conservation warnings from @GregAbbott_TX delicate power infrastructure,” Austin Mayor Steve Adler tweeted. “It’s still technically spring and Texas is experiencing late-summer temperatures, power plants offline, and the governor is tweeting about a border wall that he can’t fund.”

Bill Peacock, Policy Director of The Energy Alliance, has determined the cause of unreliable power grids to be the region’s dependence on the weather for power. Sources have become vulnerable through a combination of small mechanical problems and extreme weather changes, causing an inability for wind- and solar-power sources to generate electricity.

By Andy Nghiem -- Austin News

Texas residents face nearly $38 billion in energy costs related to power outages caused by last winter's extreme arctic storm.

As Winter Storm Uri battered Texas in February, causing massive blackouts across the state, the Texas Public Utility Commission (PUC) issued an order increasing the price of electricity to $9,000 per megawatt hour, compared to the average price of roughly $20 per megawatt hour.

The PUC rationalized its decision by stating that the high price would encourage energy companies to produce electricity during the power outages and that the prices should be a reflection of scarcity, energy expert Robert Bryce wrote in a Forbes article.

Photo by Singkham

Renewables show again that they aren’t reliable to power the grid.

By The Editorial Board - WSJ

Electric grid operators in Texas and California are again urging residents to conserve power amid a sweltering heat wave to avoid blackouts. Keeping your thermostat at 78 degrees during the summer may be the green new normal.

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (Ercot) warned this week that a large number of unexpected power plant outages combined with surging demand is straining the grid. Meantime, California’s Independent System Operator forecast that electricity demand might exceed supply several days this week. For residents in both states, this must feel like deja vu. ...

By Robert Bryce at RealClear Energy

The oldest maxim in politics is “follow the money.” That maxim also applies to electric grids.

Following the billions of dollars that have been spent on the Texas grid explains why the state continues to have electricity shortages. On Monday, ERCOT, the state’s troubled grid operator, asked Texans to reduce their electricity use. That request came exactly four months after Texas residents were asked to conserve electricity due to a massive winter storm.

Before going further, I’ll give you the punchline: As I explained in these pages in April, about $66 billion was spent on wind and solar in Texas in the years before the deadly February storm that left millions of Texans without electricity. In return for that $66 billion, the wind and solar sectors collected about $21.7 billion in local, state, and federal subsidies and incentives. That first figure comes from the wind energy and solar energy lobbies. The latter number comes from a report published last week by veteran Texas energy analyst Bill Peacock of The Energy Alliance.

By Andy Nghiem at the Austin News

Texas residents face nearly $38 billion in energy costs related to power outages caused by last winter's extreme arctic storm.

By Timothy Stuckey - Austin News

Texas lawmakers' recent response to February's widespread power outages due to the winter storm included making adjustments to the state's power grid that analysts say will begin to solve some of the problems identified by the storm, according to a Texas Tribune report.

Some critics argue, however, that the state legislature neglected to address two major issues of the blackouts, namely their aftermath and how to stop it from occurring again.

"The legislature passed bills allowing companies to securitize the debts they incurred during the blackouts," Energy Alliance Policy Director Bill Peacock told Austin News. "Which means the companies are going to be able to keep the money they earned because of the high prices, and Texas consumers are going to be stuck paying higher bills for years."

Texans aren’t out of the woods yet when it comes to the energy crisis

By Robert Montoya at Texas Scorecard

Despite Gov. Greg Abbott signing legislation in response to the February blackouts, concerns have emerged about Texas’ power grid this summer. Texas Scorecard spoke with three of the state’s energy experts about the possibility of future blackouts, what the Texas Legislature should have done during the regular session, what they actually did, and what, if anything, Abbott should have them do in a special session.

Blackouts

Last week, Abbott signed legislation created in response to deadly blackouts during February’s severe winter weather. “Everything that needed to be done was done to fix the power grid in Texas,” Abbot stated.

This week, as Texas summer temperatures began arriving, ERCOT—the Electric Reliability Council of Texas that manages Texas’ power grid—announced power outages due to mechanical failures.

Texas Scorecard interviewed former State Rep. Jason Isaac and Brent Bennett of Life:Powered, and Bill Peacock, policy director at the Energy Alliance about Texas’ electricity issues. Both firms study Texas’ electrical grid and political policies that affect it and consumers. Bennett had pointed out ERCOT, before this, claimed there was a less than one percent chance of rolling outages this summer. After ERCOT’s alert, we asked about the possibility of blackouts this year.

“Our reliance on renewables has put us in a situation where relatively minor fluctuations in the weather or mechanical problems can put us at risk,” Peacock said. “We are at a higher risk of blackouts than we’ve ever been. But we don’t know what will happen until it does.”

Robert Bradley Jr., a very knowledgeable energy economist with significant experience in the energy market, recently interviewed me for MasterResource, a blog covering energy issues from a free market perspective:

Bradley: How did the just-completed Texas legislative session deal with the February Blackout that caused so much damage to life and property?

Peacock: The session had two issues to address here. One was dealing with the aftermath costs; the other was reform to prevent it from happening again. The lawmakers did poorly with both.

Q: What did the Legislature do wrong in dealing with the aftermath?

A: The Legislature failed to appropriately address the massive financial costs of the blackout, most of which came from the Public Utility Commission of Texas’s (PUCT) panicked decision to raise electricity prices to $9,000 per MWh and leave them there for three days.

This panic raised wholesale costs during the blackout by more than $16 billion. Yet even though the commissioner’s decision was without merit and likely illegal, the Legislature refused to reverse the increase–which it could have easily done in line with ERCOT protocols.

Instead, the Legislature passed bills allowing companies to securitize the debts they incurred during the blackouts. Which means the companies are going to be able to keep the money they earned because of the high prices, and Texas consumers are going to be stuck paying higher bills for years.

A Year-by-Year Estimate of Renewable Energy Subsidy Costs for Texas and for the U.S.

The Texas electricity market is being overrun by renewable energy generation. Since 2018, 79.3% of all new generation has been intermittent renewable energy. Only 19.1% has come from generation that can be dispatched, and all of that comes from one source—natural gas. The lack of diversity that has resulted from this over-reliance on renewables has come at a great cost to Texans.

As far back as 1999, the Texas Legislature has provided subsidies, tax abatements, and benefits to renewable energy companies. Add in the cost of federal subsidies and tax credits, and from 2006 through the end of 2021 renewable energy generators in Texas will have benefitted to the tune of $24.2 billion.

Residents in two Texas counties may soon face new renewable energy farms if local officials don't change their tune.

Monday night (June 21 @ 6 p.m.) the trustees on the board of Troy I.S.D. can approve a tax abatement for Big Elm Solar. The solar farm will cover about 3,000 acres in Bell County, and many residents are not happy.

“This is all about the money that Clean Energy is promising the county and the school district,” said Robert Fleming, whose property would be affected by the solar farm. “It isn't about right and wrong.”

Despite years of increasing reliance on intermittent generation sources like wind and solar, Texas policymakers seem to have been caught by surprise by the blackouts experienced by millions of Texans this winter.

They should not have been. While temperatures dropped into the single digits for extended periods over much of Texas, solar and wind generators were largely no shows on the Texas grid. While other factors were in play, it was renewables that led Texas into darkness.

However, it does not seem that Texas policy makers learned much from this winter. As Texas faces the possibility of high temperatures this summer and the certainty that wind will operate at only a fraction of its installed capacity during periods of peak demand, it is possible the Legislature may adjourn on May 31 having done nothing to address the harm renewables are doing to the Texas grid.

*The latest in renewable technology will soon be coming to Texas.*

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), the entity that operates the Texas electric grid, last week projected record-high demand this summer because of hot, dry weather and Texas' continued economic growth. ERCOT projects that demand could reach as high as 77,144 megawatts (MW) this summer. But says with a projected 86,862 MW of generation capacity, there should be enough electricity to handle the load.

One caveat to ERCOT's projection of adequate supplies is the intermittency of wind generation. While total installed wind capacity in Texas is more than 25,000 MW, ERCOT is only relying on 6,700 MW of that during peak demand hours during the late summer afternoons.

Basically, ERCOT is saying that if everything goes right, we should be okay. Yet, everyone thought all would be okay only a few days before the worst blackouts in Texas history occurred this past winter. Blackouts that might have been prevented if it were not for the mal-investment in renewable generation in Texas.

*Image: Juan Figueroa/ The Dallas Morning News*

By Gerson Freitas Jr (Bloomberg)

Energy Transfer LP, the pipeline giant controlled by billionaire Kelcy Warren, has emerged as the biggest winner so far from the deadly winter storm that paralyzed Texas in February.

The company saw a positive earnings impact from the extreme weather of about $2.4 billion, it said Thursday in its first-quarter earnings statement. Energy Transfer raised its full-year earnings guidance to as much as $13.3 billion, from up to $11 billion previously. The stock jumped as much as 4.9% in after-hours trading.

See a printable version of the report at the Texas Energy Alliance

Introduction

In 1999, a bipartisan coalition of Texas legislators bucked the interests of Texas public utilities to introduce what became the world’s most competitive electricity market. Though not without its flaws, the legislation passed that session set the stage for an unprecedented experiment in allowing markets—that is, buyers and sellers—to determine how much electricity Texas needs and how much it costs.

For most of the last 22 years, the Texas market has experienced some growing pains but overall has performed well. However, Texas’ winter historic freeze exposed what has been an increasing problem—distortions of market prices and incentives pushed by corporations, environmentalists, and regulators who want to eliminate competition in favor of centralized control.

An effort is now being made in the Texas Capitol to finish off the Texas electricity market. The push to exchange Texas’ “energy-only” market for a “capacity” market in which generators get paid just for existing—then get paid again when they sell electricity. This double dipping would increase the cost of electricity for Texas consumers from about $4 billion to $8 billion per year. If successful, Texans will have an electricity grid that looks much like those of California and New York; no more reliable, but a lot more expensive.

By Juliette Fairley. Houston Republic

Taxpayer subsidies paid to wind and solar developers contributed to the grid nearing emergency conditions this week, according to an oil and gas expert.

“That's part of it,” Robert Bradley, CEO and founder of the Institute for Energy Research, said. “We get a lot of generation we don't need just because the tax breaks are so great, and when you keep adding the so-called unreliables, it’s at the expense of the reliables. They're the most expensive to build but the least expensive to dispatch.”

Other than mild weather and normally scheduled or expected outages, April 13, was a normal day until Texas' grid operator, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, sent an appeal for Texans to conserve electricity use because of allegedly near emergency conditions, according to media reports.

Karla Florez - Austin News

Earlier this week, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which operates the state's power grid, came close to declaring “emergency conditions” after approximately 25% of its capacity was shut off to undergo maintenance.

“Alert: Due to a combination of high-gen outages typical in April & higher-than-forecasted demand caused by a stalled cold front over TX, ERCOT may enter emergency conditions,” an ERCOT Twitter post read on Tuesday. “We do not expect customer outages. Declaring an emergency would allow us to access additional resources.”

ERCOT urged Texas residents to conserve energy despite mild weather conditions and a typical outage-average in the area, leading some consumers to question the operator’s reliability.

The statewide emergency alert was ultimately attributed to ERCOT missing its forecast load while intermittent generators (wind and solar) failed to perform to meet demand. This shortfall created an unfavorably tight reserve margin for the state’s electric grid. The occurrence sent out a wave of concern to consumers.

By Andy Nghiem

Representatives from Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Energy are currently proposing to build 10 new natural gas power plants in Texas at a cost of $8 billion.

The Texas Tribune reported that lawmakers would provide Berkshire a return on its investment by creating an additional charge on Texans’ power bills. Critics, however, question whether this deal will be good for Texans.

"Buffett obviously thinks he can make money by building new generation in Texas," Bill Peacock, policy director at The Energy Alliance, told Austin News. "Unfortunately, he doesn't want to take any risk on his investment. Instead he wants Texans to bear all of the costs for the new generation through higher electricity bills that would all but guarantee his profits."

By Bree Gonzales (this article was originally published in the Lone Star Standard)

State Sen. Kelly Hancock (R-North Richland Hills) has offered an amendment to Senate Bill 3, which provides that renewable energy sources must fund reliable ancillary services in the event that they are unable to meet demand.

Hancock, who also filed SB 1278, which promotes ancillary services to back up generation for intermittent resources, suggested to include a provision in SB 3. This would require the purchase of the ancillary services, which should be directed by the Public Utility Commission of Texas.

The amendment offered states, "The commission shall require intermittent generation resources in the ERCOT power region to purchase ancillary services and replacement power sufficient to manage net load variability."

The amendment, which was read and adopted is similar to Hancock’s SB 1278, will help drive grid reliability, particularly under emergency situations.

By Savannah Howe (this article was originally published in the Lone Star Standard)

The future of Texas' electric grid remains up in the air as controllers, legislators and advocacy groups battle over whether the competitive market should continue.

While the state has been operating on a competitive market – where consumers are offered an array of different electricity retailers, rates and plans – since 2002, recent blackouts have fostered concern that something in the current system isn't working. State Rep. Chris Paddie (R-Marshall) introduced House Bill 4378, calling for the state to give up the current market approach and adopt a capacity market, where Texans pay for their grid's capacity to produce electricity rather than their actual electricity use.

Others argue, however, that the alternative to the current market, a capacity market, is far from a solution. Energy Alliance Policy Director Bill Peacock argues that a capacity market will skyrocket electricity bills across Texas.

"It is basically an electricity tax of about $4 billion to $8 billion a year," Peacock told Lone Star Standard. "The reason for this is that a capacity market would tax Texans to pay for plants they already have and for future plants they may not need."

The feud between Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Gov. Greg Abbott has a new participant; Speaker of the Texas House Dade Phelan.

On Monday, the Texas Senate did what few have ever witnessed: introducing, referring, hearing, and passing a bill on the same day. The bill requires the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) to reverse its decision to raise the price of electricity to $9,000 per MWh during the Texas freeze.

Behind the whirlwind action is the conflict between Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick over who should address the $16 billion (or more) electric bill imposed on Texans by the PUC through its price increase.

Though Patrick and others have urged the PUC to reverse its decision, the Senate was forced to take action because Abbott and the previous PUC Chairman Arthur D’Andrea, claimed that the PUC cannot do so on its own.

Now Phelan has joined in. He indicated that the House has no intention of passing the hurried Senate bill, claiming “the decisions made on pricing were made based on ensuring the reliability of the grid.”

The truth, however, is that the PUC can reverse its decision because it did not have the authority to hike electricity prices in the first place. And rather than improving the reliability of the grid, the decision simply put billions of dollars into the bank accounts of generators and the natural gas industry, much of which will come out of the pockets of Texas consumers.

I was recently a guest on Robert Bryce's Power Hungry podcast. He wrote: "In the days immediately after the Texas Blackouts, numerous national media outlets published articles and TV segments which insisted that wind energy was not to blame for the electricity crisis. In this episode, Bill Peacock, policy director of The Energy Alliance, tells Robert about the history of wind energy in Texas, how the billions of dollars in “corporate cronyism” for renewables distorted the state’s electricity market, and how the state should reform that market to assure reliability and resilience." You can listen to the podcast here.

We should have seen it coming.

The $16 billion (or more) of electricity overcharges in Texas seem to have caught everyone by surprise, but the truth is they had been in the works for years.

For the last decade or so, the Texas Legislature and the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) have treated the Texas electricity market like California and New York treat their poor performing grids. Seemingly no regulation, no subsidy was out of bounds for what once had been the most competitive and successful electricity market in the world.

Yet despite the $23 billion of subsidies for generators--mostly renewable--and constant meddling by regulators, there was still enough market left to keep the lights on. All that was needed, though, was one spark to send the whole thing up in flames.

I recently was a guest on the Heartland Institute's podcast hosted by H. Sterling Burnett. Here it is:

Politicians interference in energy markets led to the failure of Texas’ energy grid during the polar vortex. Bill Peacock explains what went wrong.

Texas politicians and regulators interference in energy markets resulted in the closure of baseload bearing coal fueled power plants and the rise of intermittent wind and solar energy. This contributed to Texas' energy collapse during the polar vortex. Wind and solar failed just as the state's power system needed them the most. Energy subsidies made wind and solar seem cheap and drove coal and some natural gas plants out of business. Had politicians not mandated and subsidized green energy, eight million Texans would not have lost their power.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is lU3xnOhKZ_3yyFiPYEFV9WE7hJX9K-h151VLgXo9dEH-kZcOXIpezyrtRF42gM9zKfOEFVvtB8YJzvHONdvW0fGSDv3ewLGvLnJILGNtJflvXq_Spow7j2ivnMMaaDcO3m0bRhQ

If the theory that politicians are full of hot air is true, it is a wonder that the dome of the Texas capitol did not fly off into orbit last week.

During hearings in both the Texas House and Senate last Thursday questioning electricity market regulators and participants about the Texas blackouts, most--though not all--legislators spent their time pointing fingers at anyone but themselves.

But make no mistake. The blame for the Texas blackouts falls squarely on two groups of people: overzealous or scared politicians/regulators who cannot keep their hands off of the market and corporate cronyists who seek profits through government favoritism rather than through competition in the market.

The Bible may not have been the first place you turned to over the last couple of weeks to look for information about the Texas blackouts.

This may be in part because some in the church today teach us that the Bible and Christianity are not really appropriate for the public square, that if we go much beyond "Thou shall not kill" the Bible doesn't inform us very much when it comes to public policy.

Yet I believe this perspective sells the Bible short. And leaves the culture in great danger of God's judgment.

There has been a lot of debate about why Texas had rolling blackouts last week in the midst of the historic winter storm.

Poor winterization, lack of integration with the national grid, bureaucrats, deregulation, Enron’s Ken Lay, and frozen natural gas pipelines are frequent targets of politicians and media pundits for the blame.

However, the only time you will hear most of them talk about renewable energy is when they tell you that renewables were not the cause. You can almost hear the carnival huckster from Kansas saying, “Pay no attention to those frozen turbines behind the curtain.”

Have you ever noticed that the mainstream media and liberal politicians almost always say the exact same thing when something goes wrong with their narrative that only progressivism can save America?

Leaving aside for another time how they coordinate so well, they are at it again when it comes to trying to absolve renewable energy from the blame for last week’s Texas blackouts.

This was originally published in August 2020.

Many Californians are alarmed as each new day brings the prospect of more rolling blackouts.

Despite warnings from the California Public Utilities Commission that blackouts could affect millions, so far about only 600,000 homes and businesses have lost power. Yet the blame game has started.

“These blackouts … are unacceptable and unbefitting of the nation’s largest and most innovative state,” said California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Truth be told, it is the “innovation” of wind energy that is largely responsible for California’s blackouts. Since Texas is even more innovative when it comes to wind energy, today’s problems with California’s electric grid could be a glimpse into Texas’ future.