Trump's America could mean a role for Minnesota as an energy example for the rest of the country.
In a Minnesota Post article, Sam Brodey writes about how Minnesota's energy goals are unlikely to be impacted by any action against the Clean Power Plan by Trump.
If anything, state policymakers and utility companies may have an outsized role to play under President Trump.
The anticipated disappearance of an aggressive EPA is going to place more power in the hands of states to act — or not.
“In reality, states have always led the way on carbon reduction and clean energy,” Hamilton says, adding that will continue under Trump.
Garofalo, who is a critic of CPP, predicted that under Trump, “you’re going to see more energy policy designed at a state and regional level as opposed to the federal government. The one-size fits all approach hasn’t worked, doesn’t work, and won’t work.”
He mentioned nuclear policy, and the fate of Xcel’s two nuclear power plants in Minnesota, in Monticello and Prairie Island, as the “big elephant in the room.”
“If we close those and replace them with wind and natural gas, it’s going to be the equivalent of adding one million new cars on the road,” he said. “The federal government wasn’t doing anything about that before, that’s the big impact on the state side.”
Chan adds that Minnesota, as a relative leader in clean energy, could play a role to engage other states. He mentioned Xcel potentially pushing policymakers elsewhere, saying it “is going to be interested in having a consistent playing field in the different states they operate in.”