“Their ‘all of the above’ debate wasn’t all of the above…. It was a propaganda stage for a ‘clean energy’ pact between EEI and NRDC for announcing their joint indoctrination campaign aimed at increasing market share of electricity at the expense of natural gas.”

“What this ‘powerful’ cabal intends to do is to monopolize energy by electricity under the guise of environmental necessity.

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), the national trade association representing state public service commissioners who regulate investor-owned utilities, was recently the site of a political war against natural gas. [1] On the last day of NARUC’s annual Winter Policy Summit (February 14), E&E News reported (Nation’s regulators get down to business at winter meeting): [2]

The final NARUC session on Wednesday will feature a debate of sorts between Phil Moeller, executive vice president of the Edison Electric Institute, and Ralph Cavanagh, co-director of the energy program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, on an ‘all of the above’ energy strategy.

[Editor note: Mark Krebs has been a leading advocate (see here) for free-market decision-making between natural gas and electricity in homes and places of business, challenging the ‘deep decarbonization’ push of energy interventionists to disciminate against fossil fuels at point of use. This is the first of a two-part post.]

“Grid reliability should not eclipse energy reliability; especially during weather emergencies. Yet, much of the discussion looks like more of the same rent-seeking by interests looking for rebuilding damaged electricity infrastructure with inherently unreliable wind and solar generation based ‘microgrids’.”

The House Energy and Commerce Committee is undertaking an in-depth review of the laws and regulations affecting electric energy. Much of that review is through a series of hearing that started last July. The objectives for this series of hearings were officially stated as follows:

Today, the nation’s electricity industry is undergoing a period of transformation due to technological innovation and market competition, creating tremendous benefits to American consumers.

“With a new political outlook in Washington, DC with climate and energy policy, Exxon Mobil should formally reject both cap-and-trade and a carbon tax.”

Rex Tillerson, whose confirmation hearing is scheduled for tomorrow, presided over a major public policy change while CEO of Exxon Mobil, reversing the prior policy of the principled realist Lee Raymond. Political forces, as well as a doomed attempt at appeasing its enemies (ending up in the state State Attorney General investigative war), led Exxon Mobil to reluctantly embrace a tax on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

My interpretation of Rex Tillerson et al.’s (failed) policy shift finds support for “it was just PR” rather than a fundamental belief in climate peril. As such, this shift is easily reversible by Exxon Mobil’s new CEO, Darren Woods.…

“The bulk of AWEA’s presentation was designed to show how many and diverse are the offshore wind projects under way. Other than Deepwater Wind and the likely dead Cape Wind projects, all the other projects or possible projects are living on government grants and/or remain little more than speculative research projects. [AWEA head Tom] Kiernan acknowledged that the problem for offshore wind is its cost, likely three to five times that of onshore wind projects.

At last month’s National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA) annual meeting, the Offshore Renewables Committee hosted a breakout-session presentation by Tom Kiernan, chief executive officer of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA).  With him was research analyst Celeste Wanner who presented a rundown of the status of offshore wind projects. [1]

As one would expect, Mr. Kiernan presented all the positives for wind energy – its cost has declined to where it is now competitive with coal and natural gas generated electricity, there are no emissions since there is no fuel burned to generate electricity.…