Bills would shield LA from bad energy policy

Bills moving in the Louisiana Legislature not only look to forestall potentially bad policy decisions elsewhere emanating from faith in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, but actually to reverse the chances of these inflicting harm.

For years, Europe has demonstrated the costs, both in price and reliability, of government-subsidized or -mandated moves into increasing the proportion supplied of nondispatchable energy – the considered “green” forms primarily wind and solar power – as part of an overall portfolio of energy provision. Permanent spikes upwards in average pricing along with man-made crises of late demonstrate the problem, both economic and political, of state-sponsored favoring of less reliable, if not more expensive, renewable energy forms.

Fortunately, the federal government appears to be exiting that inferior policy option, but some states in their policy agendas continue to cling to the mythical, evidence-free view that fossil fuels cause significantly negative climate change. This religious faith often manifests in official renewable portfolio standards, where about half have some mandatory standard to be met sometime in the future (some as early as five years from now) specifying the proportion of renewable energy sources behind powering that state’s homes and businesses.

Even as Louisiana doesn’t have this, the actions of others still can prove harmful. The vast majority of Louisiana ratepayers derive their power from companies doing business in multiple states and members of power pools spanning many more. Thus, other states’ insistence on using elevated amounts of renewable energy can harm Louisiana consumers as the higher energy costs get passed along everywhere in the distribution chain.

So, even if the state eschews an RPS, its citizens pay the costs for others’. Unless the state fights back with something like HB 692 by Republican state Rep. Jacob Landry. The bill, which has passed the House, not only mandates that government agencies that regulate energy provision ensure that the cheapest and most reliable dispatchable sources are used – meaning fossil fuels and primarily natural gas – but is also gives natural gas and nuclear power the same preferential treatment as do renewables under state law. (It also gives preference to domestically-provided sources.)

In fact, the regime the bill would set up acts as if it were an “anti-RPS.” It not only obviates the possibility of foisting an RPS onto Louisiana’s citizenry but it also gives natural gas and nuclear power at least equal footing with renewable sources. This will force providers such as Entergy and American Electric Power to put into abeyance, if not ratchet back, their efforts to expand use of renewable sources, at least until the true cost of these (factoring in reliability and out government subsidies) falls enough to become competitive with fossil fuels.

In conjunction with this, SB 127 by GOP state Sen. Adam Bass would facilitate construction of nuclear fission sources of power, which could be employed both by utilities or by individual firms although perhaps years away. That bill should be taken up by the House later this week.

Both pieces of legislation need to become law to ensure Louisianans pay the lowest rates as possible and for businesses not to become uncompetitive, as these increasingly have become in Europe (which has less latitude to avoid the problem, as it has much less domestic fossil fuel production although some like France wisely have embraced nuclear power). Rather than be at the mercy of short-sighted policy-making elsewhere, Louisiana needs to take control of the issue of energy provision.