Daily Times

WASHINGTON: When the administration of US President Donald Trump proposed new subsidies for coal and nuclear plants, it seemed like an obvious way to deliver on campaign promises to boost the nation’s energy industry.

And yet the plan, announced in September, set off sharp criticism from other sectors that Trump has also vowed to help, such as natural gas and utilities.

“Subsidies don’t make you competitive – and don’t make you great again,” said Robert Flexon, the president and chief executive of Dynegy Inc , a Houston-based utility that owns both coal- and gas-fired power plants.

Squabbling over the proposal exemplifies the administration’s larger struggle to deliver on promises of a sweeping “energy renaissance” across the coal, oil, gas and nuclear industries.

Trouble is, policies that help one of those sectors often hurt another, illustrating the complexity of energy regulation and the difficulty in appeasing competing interests. While election campaigns often seek to neatly divide voters into two camps – those supporting energy vs. those supporting the environment – such rhetoric fails to capture the messier policy impacts on profits, hiring and emissions reductions across the energy landscape.

There is little evidence that Trump’s moves so far have aided energy firms of any stripe; some administration proposals have languished amid divisive politics, while other regulatory changes have seen their impact muted by market forces.

Utilities, for instance, have shown little interest in buying more coal-fired power despite the regulatory rollbacks in Trump’s pro-coal push.

A broader measure of investor sentiment on the energy industry – the Standard & Poor’s 500 energy index – lost more than 7 percent in 2017 even as stock markets soared.

White House and Energy Department officials did not respond to requests for comment.

Another political flashpoint has been the administration’s waffling over proposed changes to biofuels policy.

Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency initially entertained a plan from oil refiners to upend regulations requiring them to blend ethanol into their gasoline – then rejected it after a backlash from the ethanol industry, rooted in Midwest corn-growing states that supported Trump’s election.

The dispute sparked open warfare among the congressional backers of various industry interests, including threats to block Trump’s agency nominations and accusations he had welched on campaign promises.

Even the coal industry, which played a starring role in Trump’s campaign, has seen a marginal return on its lobbying efforts. It has, for instance, had little success so far in attacking subsidies for wind and solar power. Trump and others in his administration have criticized renewable energy as expensive and dependent on government support. But the White House has not sought to repeal tax breaks expected to provide $12.3 billion to renewable energy firms by 2020, which other Republicans continue to support.

Fossil-fuel firms clearly have more influence on policy under Trump and easier access to decision makers. Coal, oil, and gas company executives have met regularly with senior administration officials, according to official agency schedules.

Their policy victories include rollbacks of regulations limiting emissions of carbon, methane and other pollutants; the opening of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling; and the lifting of a coal-mining moratorium on federal lands.

But the impact of these moves on production, profits and jobs remains uncertain. Demand for additional drilling and mining leases on federal lands has been thin, and top US oil and gas companies have told shareholders in regulatory filings that environmental regulations have little impact on their business.

While coal advocates have generally cheered Trump’s ascension, White House policies have so far had little effect on US coal consumption.

Robert Murray, chief executive of private coal company Murray Energy Corp., said Republican efforts to boost coal have addressed only the “low hanging fruit” of overturning a few environmental regulations while avoiding tougher issues.

The oil and gas industry, also championed by Trump, similarly feels let down by an administration it had hoped would strip away government interference, said Susan Ginsburg, a senior vice president of regulatory affairs for the Independent Petroleum Association of America, which represents small oil and gas companies.

Published in Daily Times, December 7^th 2017.