Gary Silverman
Columnist
An editorial in last week’s paper indicated bipartisan agreement that future energy demands in Virginia will grow beyond our current production capacity. Almost everyone agrees that we need to be able to produce more electricity. How best to add production is a major challenge facing the Commonwealth, with divergence along party lines.
Virginia’s demand for electricity is growing quickly. Driving this demand are new data centers, estimated to use up to half of the state’s electricity by 2030. A growing population, and electrification of industry, residences and vehicles are also contributing to an increased demand for electricity. Clearly, we must do something to increase production.
Partisan disagreements have resulted in little government action for the past several years to solve this problem, as the governor has vetoed proposed legislation. The last successful major legislation response occurred back in 2020 when the Virginia Clean Economy Act went into effect, establishing a pathway for more clean energy production. However, even as energy demand then began to greatly exceed earlier projections, Virginia did little to encourage more production or even to meet the obligations of the existing law! For example, we were part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which would have brought in hundreds of millions of dollars for energy efficiency programs. However, the Governor removed the state from this agreement, arguing that it was too costly. Even though the courts ruled that the removal was illegal, it was not reinstated. One of the consequences of this removal was the loss of incentive to build clean energy facilities – meaning we have fallen even further behind in meeting our energy needs.
Although perhaps oversimplified, the bipartisan divide involves increasing the use of renewable energy versus increasing the use of fossil fuels. Local opposition to solar arrays and windmills is often a NIMBY (Not in My Backyard) response – as actual environmental impacts are small and costs are now competitive or lower than fossil fuels. Local NIMBY opposition to developing more fossil fuels facilities also is important – remember the hostility as the Mountain Valley Pipeline was built over the opposition in our neighborhoods? More importantly, carbon emissions from fossil fuels drive extreme weather. As weather becomes more severe it costs you both in terms of comfort and dollars (e.g., your bills to cool your house, the price of insuring your home, and your taxes to respond to extreme events). Extreme weather will continue to increase until carbon emissions are reversed, yet 21st century energy demands are not going away (AI and cryptocurrencies are here to stay). Important decisions need to be made in a hurry, and future legislative gridlock will help no one move forward.
