One of the most significant shifts from our recent elections is America is headed back to an “all of the above” strategy that expands our energy options rather than further restricting them.
In the last four years, there has been an expensive shift away from carbon fuels (gas and natural gas) to subsidizing wind, solar and electric vehicles.
President Trump would be wise to look at inclusive strategies incorporated in the 2005 Energy Policy Act signed into law by President George W. Bush that focused on incremental improvements coupled with innovation.
Our state also needs to broaden its strategy as well to ensure Washington’s energy is more affordable and available.
For example, outgoing Gov. Jay Inslee joined a dozen governors asking President Joe Biden to end the sale of new gas-powered vehicles nationwide starting in 2035. Inslee pushed our state’s ban up to 2030. Complete reliance on EVs is unwise and fraught with a myriad of vexing problems.
Rather than focusing totally on battery-powered EVs, carmakers see a need for diversity and lower costs of buying an EV. For example, Toyota, which launched gas-electric hybrids in 1997, is also focusing on lowering fuel consumption and curtailing air pollutants.
While EV production and sales are ramping up, Toyota’s goal is to produce 3.5 million electric vehicles annually by 2030, which would be more than one-third of its current yearly sales.
As of October 2023, EVs comprised 6.5% of the total new car market, according to consumer research firm J.D. Power. By comparison, Green Car Report says more than one billion gas and diesel vehicles are on our planet today.
In July 2023, Inslee changed our state’s building codes to significantly restrict natural gas use in new buildings. Lawmakers made them state law; however, voters rebelled and passed Initiative 2066, which blocks the state and local governments from taking steps to restrict natural gas in homes and buildings.
That comes despite new “green” technology that is used to extract methane from garbage landfills before it escapes into the atmosphere. It is collected and burned as a fuel source. Methane is needed to replace more polluting oil that is used to propel ocean-going ships. Tacoma-based Tote Maritime is pioneering liquefied natural gas to run its vessels sailing between Washington and Alaska.
So here is what needs to happen in 2025.
First, we need to recognize there are no simple or magical answers. Each fuel source has its advantages and shortcomings — and its specific purpose.
For example, during extreme weather when solar and wind generation is down or insufficient, more-dependable natural gas, coal, hydro and nuclear energy is needed to augment the power grid. Do not hastily decommission power plants until there is proven and tested electricity replacement online.
Second, energy policymakers need a reality check. They need to consider the impact of their limitations. For example, at times in California, EV drivers are not allowed to charge their cars because of electric grid overload, particularly during a heat wave.
Third, elected officials must innovate. For example, in Wyoming, state officials are working with TerraPower founder Bill Gates to convert the Rocky Mountain Power coal plant to the first sodium-cooled advanced nuclear reactor.
Fourth, there must be a recognition of tradeoffs. For example, the four lower Snake River dams have 24 generators producing enough electricity to power a city the size of Seattle at peak generation. To replace their capacity would require between 2,900 and 4,200 wind turbines, or six natural gas generating facilities.
Our elected leaders need to keep open minds and reinvigorate our enterprising spirit. While government incentives are important, they should be used to encourage innovation — and not to drive buying decisions.
Our focus must be an “all the above” strategy.
Don C. Brunell is a business analyst, writer and columnist. Contact thebrunells@msn.com
