Republican and Democrat governors urge Trump to keep clean energy in mix

Republican governors in resource-rich western states have embraced an “all-of-the-above” energy policy approach in contrast to President-elect Donald Trump, who wants the US to achieve “energy dominance” with fossil fuels.

In a bipartisan resolution issued last week, 12 Republican governors joined their seven Democratic counterparts in recognising that a priority for energy is to ensure it is “clean, affordable, equitable and reliable by providing a balanced portfolio of resources.”

It suggests that Trump will face a different reception from most Republican state chief executives than eight years ago regarding alternative and clean energy when those technologies were a relatively minor player in their energy mixes and economies.

Among western states with Republican governors are the Dakotas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, and Utah – all major renewable energy producers. Wind and solar already supply at least 25% of electricity generation in all but four Republican-led states.

WGA member states are Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

Renewables have gone mainstream even in western fossil fuel states, while corporate America is now a major and growing end user.

In Republican coal producing Montana, Utah, and Wyoming, solar and wind have gained acceptance among most state policymakers, as they have in crude oil and natural gas leaders North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Texas.

That doesn’t mean they are immune from criticism by several Republican governors and local legislators who support fossil fuels. Notably cool is Texas governor Greg Abbott, although renewables have boomed there since he took office in 2015.

While most western Republican elected officials and rank-and-file would agree with WGA’s embrace of a balanced energy portfolio, their party’s national leader does not.

Trump, who takes office on 20 January, last month said, “America is blessed with vast amounts of ‘liquid gold’ and other valuable minerals and resources, right beneath our feet. We will ‘DRILL, BABY, DRILL.’”

His rejection of solar and particularly wind reflects both his personal prejudice and belief that renewables are too expensive and intermittent, and over-reliant on expensive federal subsidies.

Trump asks if both technologies are cheap, dependable, and mature, as their advocates contend, and have benefitted from decades of federal financial support, why should taxpayers spend at least $420bn over the next decade to further underwrite them?

He also links solar and wind with efforts to address climate change, which he has called a “hoax”. That opinion is not shared by most Republican elected officials or their constituents.

Trump has yet to completely define “energy dominance,” but it would include expansion of US crude oil and natural gas production, both currently at record levels, and ramp exports of liquified natural gas (LNG) to allied nations in Asia and Europe.

To what extent this will happen is unclear. The federal government can’t force private companies to produce more hydrocarbons, and their investment decisions reflect market conditions such as supply and demand, shareholder, and other considerations.

The oil and gas industry represents almost 8% of the US $28trn national economy, which is largely services based, according to the American Petroleum Institute, a national trade group.

What role coal would play beyond its present 15% share of electric power production under Trump is unclear. Wyoming is the largest coal producing state by far, while Montana, North Dakota, Texas, and Colorado, rank fifth, seventh, ninth, and tenth.

Utility executives have said even if his administration eases federal emissions standards, they plan to continue retiring older plants or in a minority of cases, convert them to burn cleaner natural gas. There are no plans to build new ones as cost-effective carbon capture and storage technology is not on the horizon.

Western Republican governors support continued operation of modern facilities in their states equipped with latest generation pollution control technology, as they often use local coal.

The broader issue for many western governors is that fossil fuels generate billions annually in revenue for state budgets, support local economies and jobs. Transitioning toward cleaner alternatives can result in loss of revenue and jobs, which poses a thorny political problem.

Still, western Republican states contain at least 750GW of untapped, mostly high-quality onshore wind and solar resource, although a large chunk is on lands owned by the federal government outside of Texas. That has drawn interest from private investors who remain wary of regulatory hurdles for project approvals.

In their resolution on energy, WGA noted the “presence of federal lands affects energy projects and infrastructure deployment across the West.”

It said a priority is to advance “efficient environmental review, siting, and permitting processes that facilitate clean energy development and the improvement and construction of necessary energy infrastructure.”

This will require close coordination between states, private developers, utilities, and federal agencies, WGA added.

That squares with Trump’s determination to streamline federal infrastructure permitting, promote private sector investments, and focus on innovation instead of “totally unnecessary regulation.”

His vehicle for doing this is a new National Energy Council led by North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, his choice to head the Department of Interior.