By Paul Roberts / For The Herald
As summer turns to fall, we know cooler temperatures are around the corner, and we’ll be reaching for the thermostat more often.
Changes in energy policies eliminating renewable sources of energy like wind, solar and battery storage will decrease supply. This will result in higher costs for electricity and increased greenhouse gas pollution, contributing to global warming. Heating homes in the winter and cooling them in the summer is going to get more expensive as electricity costs increase. The risks of brownouts and blackouts will also increase.
New federal energy policies are putting a thumb on the scale favoring fossil fuels with greater subsidies while penalizing or eliminating renewable clean energy sources. The result will damage the environment and the economy.
The price of electricity is determined by supply and demand. Disruptive changes are underway for both.
On the demand side, virtually all planning models predict increased demand. The Northwest Power and Conservation Council predicts electricity in its four-state region could double in 20 years. The Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee predicts demand increases equivalent to adding seven Seattle-sized cities to the power grid within the next decade.
In addition to traditional population and job growth, surging electricity demand is driven by data centers feeding a voracious appetite for artificial intelligence (AI), technology and crypto-currency. Microsoft, Alphabet (Google), Amazon, Meta (Facebook) and others are investing billions of dollars in data centers and they are in a hurry to bring them online as fast as possible.
Climate change is adding to new demand with increased charging capacity for electric vehicle (EV) transportation, and air conditioning. These new sources are increasing demand and accelerating timing for new energy availability.
On the supply side, disruptive change is driven by new tax policies in the so-called Big Beautiful Bill pushed by President Trump and Republicans, with the aim to effectively eliminate renewable energy sources: wind, solar and battery storage. The tax bill will subsidize fossil fuel development while phasing out tax credits for clean energy. It is part of a culture war in Trump’s fight against climate science. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin recently said we want to “drive a dagger through the heart of the climate change religion.”
As reported in the Seattle Times, “The tax plan, broadly seen as the linchpin to Trump’s agenda marks the president’s latest shot in his escalating fight against climate science.” U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said: “Washington State, stands to loose an estimated $8.7 billion in clean-energy investments.”
Renewable energy is cost-competitive with fossil fuels and costs are trending down. Renewable pricing is less volatile than fossil fuels and renewables do not generate greenhouse gases. What is more, there are no hidden “external” costs as with fossil fuels warming the planet.
Other disruptive changes include upgrading the transmission and distribution grid, and capital costs financing new infrastructure.
New demand presents challenges for the grid. Demand for AI data centers are localized while EVs and increased air conditioning are spread over larger areas. Sources for new power generation, including wind and solar, may be located some distance from where its needed. The grid must be upgraded to match supply with demand.
Financing new infrastructure presents additional challenges and risks for utilities and their customers. Utilities must make investment decisions for tomorrow’s capital needs based on current best estimates. New infrastructure and upgrades are typically financed with debt instruments between 10 and 30 years. Customers and rate payers are on the hook for these costs. Changes and uncertainty in energy markets — supply and demand — raise the risk of building capital infrastructure that fails to meet future needs. These are known as stranded assets and are borne by customers and rate payers regardless.
At a time when demand for energy is surging, the Trump administration’s response is to wage a crusade on climate science. The effect is eliminating the most cost effective and cleanest sources of energy and increasing greenhouse gas emissions. The consequences will be higher energy costs for consumers at homes and businesses, a less reliable energy supply and a warmer planet.
The winners in this mindless endeavor include China and Europe who are not waiting for the U.S. to get it’s act together on energy or climate policy (“Green revolution is booming; just not in the U.S.,” The Herald, Sept. 2). The losers in the short run will be consumers; you and me. The crusade against climate science is leading us into a new dark age; literally.
Paul Roberts is retired and lives in Everett. His career spans five decades in infrastructure, economics and environmental policy including former Chair of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Board and advising Washington cities on climate change.
Eco-nomics
“Eco-nomics” is a series of articles exploring issues at the intersection of climate change and economics. Climate change (global warming) is caused by greenhouse gas emissions — carbon dioxide and methane chiefly — generated by human activities, primarily burning fossil fuels and agricultural practices. Global warming poses an existential threat to the planet. Successfully responding to this threat requires urgent actions — clear plans and actionable strategies — to rapidly reduce GHG emissions and adapt to climate-influenced events.
The Eco-nomics series focuses on mitigation and adaptation strategies viewed through the twin perspectives of science and economics. Find links to the series thus far at tinyurl.com/HeraldEco-nomics.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
