Holding back the sea

Growing up as an Army brat in Germany in the early 1970s, I was blessed to see a lot of the world. Each nearby country had its own stories locals would tell, but one that I always remembered was about the little Dutch boy who saved Holland.

You might know the tale about Hans Brinker and his little brother, who were out playing near a dike when they noticed a small leak. Realizing that it could become a big leak or even a break that would mean disaster for the surrounding towns and farmland, Hans quickly plugged the hole with his finger while his brother ran to town. Help soon arrived, the dike was repaired, and Hans and his brother were hailed for saving Holland.

These days I feel like leaders in the electric and natural gas industries are in the same position — trying to hold back the 100% renewable and zero-carbon agenda. Just recently I was reading an article on Utility Dive that confused me. Five senators from New England are asking Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm to help prevent natural gas supply shortages and higher prices in the region during the coldest months of the year.

They didn’t ask for many specifics, but they did suggest suspending the Jones Act, a 1920 law that requires any shipping between U.S. ports to be handled by U.S. ships with American crews. Their hope is that this would give them access to liquid natural gas by tanker if conditions reach a crisis point during the winter.

The president of the American Maritime Partnership, however, doesn’t think the Jones Act is the problem. Instead, he argues that the issue is a lack of natural gas pipelines in New England, not enough natural gas storage facilities and risky short-term natural gas purchases in the region.

I have to say I agree with his point of view. What these lawmakers are asking for is spe- cial treatment. They blocked pipelines into their area and have leaned instead on energy resources like offshore wind and hydropower. The shortage is only there because they have not allowed the demand for natural gas to be served. Now they want the federal government to step in to prevent the high prices and supply problems that have resulted.

It seems to me that if you’re going to make these decisions and put up political roadblocks to developing your energy resources, then the offset is that you have to be accountable for your decisions. If these states don’t have something to replace the natural gas that they have turned their backs on, their leaders should take responsibility for that decision. Even if it means high prices or fuel shortages.

Clearly, not everyone agrees. In fact, I saw another story about Montgomery County, Maryland, becoming the first county on the East Coast to ban natural gas as a heat source in any new buildings. The new regulation is expected to go into effect by the end of 2026 as part of local building codes.

It puts us in the electric industry in the position of holding back that great sea of environmentalists, trying to get everyone to see that we need a diverse energy mix. We can provide reliable and affordable electricity so long as we use renewable energy as part of a larger mix that includes carbon-reduced energy, fossil fuels and nuclear power.

But demands for green energy to be absolute are devastating. And now they’re asking our government to step in because they took an irresponsible path. It’s just not fair.

If you’re going to talk the talk then you should also walk the walk. If they believe so much in the power of renewable energy then they should hold to those principles. As for us, hopefully we can keep to a more responsible path and be like the little Dutch boy who saved Holland. 