The 2024 general election could be the turning point in our country’s energy future, setting the stage for significant shifts in how Americans produce and consume energy for decades to come.
Recent local, state and federal energy policy developments have been mixed. While there has been encouraging progress in recognizing natural gas as a clean, reliable and affordable domestic energy source, there have also been far too many attempts at the state and community level to hinder Americans’ ability to choose their preferred energy source.
As candidates debate our energy future during this election season, it’s critical to remember that consumer interests are directly impacted — positively or negatively — by elected officials’ decisions.
Concerns have been raised about efforts to limit energy choice, due to their adverse effects on energy affordability. Publicly-owned natural gas systems understand the need to adopt sustainable energy solutions and are committed to improving energy efficiency without sacrificing affordability and reliability. As the election season moves into full swing, here’s what I think voters should keep their eyes on.
What Do Energy Consumers Care About?
Most Americans recognize the importance of integrating natural gas with renewable energy sources to energize their homes and buildings. However, recent policies from the White House and the Department of Energy (DOE) have limited the role that natural gas can play in providing reliable and affordable energy to consumers, contradicting consumers’ desire for a diverse energy mix.
As voters, it’s crucial to support candidates who listen to what most energy consumers want rather than catering to the demands of the most vocal minority.
Natural Gas Policy Challenges and Opportunities
State policymakers’ attempt to ban natural gas in New York last year is a powerful example of some states’ shortsighted attempts to curb natural gas usage. While the policy doesn’t ban natural gas in all buildings, it will significantly impact new construction, increasing utility bills for working families while jeopardizing energy resiliency.
In contrast, the reversal of Berkeley, California’s natural gas ban — and similar revocations in other localities across the 9th Circuit — illustrates the need for practical energy policies that align with our nation’s precedent of protecting energy choice. Over 50% of states have passed energy choice legislation to date, demonstrating a robust voter demand for leaders who are committed to preserving access to affordable and reliable natural gas for over 157 million Americans.
In 2025, lawmakers at all levels will face policy decisions that could either address or exacerbate these energy challenges. As candidates seek our vote, will they heed Americans’ calls for affordable and reliable energy?
Promoting Energy Choice, Equity and Innovation
Voters expect their federal, state and local elected officials to champion sound, effective energy solutions.
The incoming 119th Congress has the opportunity to respond to what they hear from voters on the campaign trail — which should include reforming the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA). Initially enacted in 1975, this act and its subsequent amendments gave DOE the authority to set and update minimum efficiency standards for consumer products, including many natural gas-fired appliances.
Unfortunately, many recently proposed efficiency standards are based on cost-benefit analyses that project only minimal energy and consumer savings, which promotes expensive fuel switching from gas to electric appliances. American consumers deserve policy reforms that ensure future appliance energy rulings are based on transparent criteria with economically justified thresholds for significant energy savings.
As we enter the peak of the 2024 election season, let’s remember that our votes in November will shape the energy landscape of tomorrow. By electing leaders who prioritize collaborative and balanced solutions that bring all stakeholders to the table, we can pave the way for a sustainable energy future.
Dave Schryver is President & CEO of the American Public Gas Association, a trade association representing more than 730 local, publicly and municipally owned gas systems in 38 states.
This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Voting for anyone who ever said anything favorable about The Green New Deal, Net Zero, or anything favorable about a transition to “renewable energy” is counterproductive, to use litotes.
Litotes? Never in my 74 years have I heard that word- googled it.
Understatement – it’s a UK trait 👍
©️The British
At least we openly state that we are shilling now. Or do we get such posts from clean energy associations in the future, too?
Expressing an opinion or position is shilling? Being a leader in that industry means he most likely knows a lot about that industry. If you find something wrong with what he wrote, you’d be more adult at pointing it out rather than making an accusation.
Try telling that to the tens of thousands of women and children in the rare earth mines
We couldn’t possibly get by without natural gas. In my house it fires a boiler that would be all but impossible to replace with a heat pump. Even if we had the generating capacity to do so, we do not have sufficient distribution capacity from cables to transformers.
That having been said, gas associations have tried to use the “crisis” to undermine coal, so to speak. Powder River Baasin coal is one-third the price of natural gas on a per unit heat basis, and super critical boilers and turbines can convert to electrical energy efficiently. Stop the fratricide! Otherwise, once you are the last fossil fuel source standing, you may find yourselves facing undesirable edicts from Feds working with activists.
Summary at https://watervaporandwarming.blogspot.com shows that ‘extra’ water vapor, above that from planet warming feedback, is from human activity, mostly irrigation, & can explain 2/3 of average global temperature increase since 1909 with no significant contribution from burning fossil fuels.
Total BS
Any extra water vapor from human activities has about 9 days on average before it is dissipated as rain or snow. Water vapor, which lasts only days in the atmosphere, is ultimately controlled by air temperature and pressure according to thermodynamics.
You have been making this false claim for many years and it is long past time to stop.
Must say, I didn’t think human WV would make any difference….But having quickly read Dan’s paper, I think I’m definitely going to read it again…his formulas are correct…whether his application of them is…remains for another read-through, coffee, and no distractions..
And of course it is never replaced. /s
Per pulse, ok. But a constant cycling is different. Your comment is flawed, logically.
A canal is not a one time thing, for example.
Just like the CO2 cycle, new water vapor replaces that which falls as rain, else we would never see clouds again.
Kamala won’t ban fracking. She will ban giving out licenses. Same thing Biden did with oil leases. Bypass Congress and the Courts.
Luckily, she hasn’t a chance in hell of getting elected, IMHO. I just hope Trump slams the climate cult with all his power.
“Most Americans recognize the importance of integrating natural gas with renewable energy sources….”
I suspect the majority of Americans don’t care at all for ruinables.
The best thing the next president could do is close the Department of Energy and fire all its employees. They contribute nothing to America’s energy economy and energy independence. They are instead a parasite that lives off the private energy economy and actively works to destroy it, especially when Democrat administrations are in charge.
Disagree. Next administration needs to curtail excesses and put the department back on its Congressional defined program.
The gasman author is a hack writer aiming at seventh grade students. There are no numbers in his article about energy, so I will provide some
Fossil fuels accounted for about 60% of U.S. electricity generation in 2023. Natural gas was the top source—about 43%—of U.S. utility-scale electricity.
That should have been the first sentence.
Fossil fuels remain the greatest source of electricity generation worldwide. In 2023, coal accounted for roughly 35.5 percent of the global power mix, while natural gas followed with a 23 percent share.
That should be the second sentence.
The article should have also mentioned how CO2 has been called a pollutant since 2007:
(April 2, 2007) – After a four-year court battle, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled today 5-4 that carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping emissions are “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act, and that the U.S. government already has authority to start curbing them.
Trump did NOT change that definition of CO2 in his four years.
Biden is not all there, and Harris is out campaigning. They are not running the country. It is run by the leftist administrative state, which does not consist of elected people. Congress has too little power over the “Deep State” and the Supreme Court has no police force or army to enforce decisions.
This is a complicated political subject. The right question is: What could Trump do to take power back from the Deep State? I assume Trump will not be in prison or killed before the election. although the leftist Deep State seems to be working on both, along with their usual election fraud.
Insults detract from any potential valid points made.
When your vote goes toward electing people who love to “ban” more and more things, you should re-evaluate as to why you vote at all.
It is a certainty that eventually your vote will be banned as well. Why wait around for the inevitable?
While I basically agree with Dave there is no reason to integrate fossil fuel and nuclear energy with wind and solar. Wind and solar are a drain on our energy supply, the sooner we remove them from the grid the better off we will all be. Wind and solar are not affordable, they are not dependable, they are not renewable, they are not green, they are not recyclable and they are not sustainable. Get rid of them now before they cause any more damage.
The author hasn’t been paying attention. I can see from the other side of the Atlantic that the burning issues that will decide the 2024 vote-rigging exercise are – in no particular order:
the number of people who prioritise how late an unborn child can be killed over the safety and prosperity of the already born
who support flooding the Country with illegal immigrants and drugs
who will vote for anyone/anything (having a pulse/functioning brain optional)
who isn’t Donald Trump and any colour not orange
In the UK recent election where the Net Zero lunacy of the then Labour Party in Opposition was know to be even more maniacal, with a population suffering from surging energy bill and not much interested in renewables, they voted in Labour largely because they weren’t the Conservatives in Office for 14 years. And there was a fledgling alternative Party – Reform UK – which did well – but not well enough. We now enjoy a Socialist tyranny, locking people up for waving the Union Jack… inappropriately; among other things.