By Bob Gatty
Americans are paying more to keep the lights on, and conservative leader David Jenkins believes part of the blame lies withDonald Trump’s energy policies that favor expensive fossil fuels over cheaper renewable alternatives.
Jenkins, president of Conservatives for Responsible Stewardship, says much of the political rhetoric surrounding wind and solar is badly outdated. In an interview on the Lean to the Left podcast, he argues that renewable energy has become far more reliable and far less expensive than many critics claim.
One of the biggest myths, Jenkins says, is that wind and solar cannot be counted on because they are intermittent. That may once have been a legitimate concern, but modern grid management and large-scale battery storage have changed the equation.
He points to Texas, where wind and solar played a major role in stabilizing the electric grid during periods of extreme cold and heat.
Paying Companies Not to Produce Energy
Jenkins is especially critical of Trump administration moves to cancel offshore wind projects while simultaneously keeping aging coal plants operating.
He cites payments totaling hundreds of millions of dollars to energy companies that agreed to abandon wind projects, including projects that were already well underway. He argues that such policies make little economic sense at a time when electricity demand is increasing rapidly because of data centers and other new energy needs.
“But here, just in the last year or so, the Trump administration has paid Duke Energy $129 million to cancel offshore wind projects. It’s paid Invenergy 765 million to surrender four wind leases in New York and the Gulf of Maine. And it’s paid TotalEnergies a French company, nearly one billion to abandon its offshore wind projects off of New York and North Carolina, and some of these were well underway,” he said.
“So here we are paying taxpayer dollars, your and my taxpayer dollars, to get companies to stop producing energy or stop developing energy at the exact same time we’ve got this data center boom where we’ve got more demand for energy than we’ve ever seen before. On what planet does that make any sense?”
At the same time, Jenkins says the administration has ordered old coal-fired power plants to remain open even when utilities had planned to retire them because of their high operating costs.
According to Jenkins, some of those plants produce electricity at roughly $120 to $130 per megawatt hour, compared with about $40 to $45 per megawatt hour for some renewable sources. He argues that forcing utilities to keep expensive plants operating ultimately means higher bills for customers.
Utility Watchdogs—or Utility Lapdogs?
Jenkins also points to another problem: state utility commissions.
These regulatory bodies are supposed to protect consumers, but Jenkins says some have become too closely aligned with the utilities they regulate.
He cited Tucson Electric Power as an example, saying the company’s rates rose only modestly over a 20-year period but climbed much more sharply in recent years while the parent company was reporting record profits.
In Jenkins’ view, the question consumers should be asking is not only what utilities are charging, but why regulators are approving those increases.
Renewable Energy Is Now Often Cheaper
Jenkins acknowledges that renewable energy was once far more expensive.
He recalls that early solar technology was prohibitively costly, but says those economics have changed dramatically. Today, he argues, solar, wind and geothermal can be less expensive than coal and natural gas.
That changes the entire debate, he says.
Consumers are no longer necessarily being asked to pay more to support cleaner energy. In many cases, Jenkins argues, sticking with fossil fuels is what costs more.
The Misinformation Machine
Jenkins says powerful economic interests help explain why outdated claims about renewable energy persist.
He argues that fossil-fuel companies see solar, wind and electric vehicles as threats to their traditional business model and spend heavily to influence politics, public opinion and even academic research.
The result, he says, is a public conversation filled with misinformation about solar panels, wind power and electric vehicles.
A Conservative Case for Conservation
Jenkins describes himself as a traditional conservative and traces his philosophy to figures such as Theodore Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.
For him, conservation is not a liberal cause.
He argues that responsible stewardship—protecting resources and thinking about future generations—is fundamentally conservative.
His organization, Conservatives for Responsible Stewardship, works on energy policy, public lands and wildlife issues and has helped support renewable-energy initiatives in several states.
Jenkins sums up his position simply: energy should not be ideological.
“There is no red or blue or right or left energy,” he says. “Energy’s just energy.”
And right now, he believes renewables often make the most economic sense.