The role of a diverse electricity generation portfolio

Miller highlights comments from Tuesday's House Subcommittee on Energy and Power hearing titled, "American Energy Security and Innovation: The Role of a Diverse Electricity Generation Portfolio."

J. Scott Applewhite/AP/File
The American flag flies over the Rayburn House Office Building at the US Capitol in Washington, Sunday.

The Subcommittee on Energy and Power held a hearing yesterday in the Rayburn House Office Building. The hearing was entitled, “American Energy Security and Innovation: The Role of a Diverse Electricity Generation Portfolio” and below are a few of the statements regarding the role of coal-based electricity presented during yesterday’s testimony:

Mark McCullough, Executive Vice President of Generation, AEP

“For over a century, AEP has been a pioneer in the development of advanced coal-fueled generation technologies, which include many first-in-the-world accomplishments that have set the standard for combustion efficiencies, emissions control, and system performance.”

John McClure, Vice President for Government Affairs and General Counsel, Nebraska Public Power District

“What many do not realize is coal remains a more competitively priced fuel for certain regions of the country due to the proximity of supply, especially in the central and western U.S. Natural gas may be a great option if your power plant is located near a robust network of gas pipelines, but unfortunately many of the existing coal plants do not have access to pipeline capacity to convert from coal to natural gas.

Coal has been a mainstay of our Nation’s generating mix, and the Energy Information Administration continues to show coal as an important part of a diverse fuel mix for the coming decades.”

Rep. Ed Whitfield (KY-1)

“The EPA, without question, has established an unfortunate trend line, methodically establishing a regulatory framework to eliminate coal, and taking away diversity choicesfrom utilities throughout the country.”

Rep. Steve Scalise (LA-1)

“The government is picking winners and losers and those that lose are the families that will pay higher electricity costs.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.