The column below reflects the views of the author, and these opinions are neither endorsed nor supported by WisOpinion.com.

Gregg Hoffmann’s Oct. 19 WisBiz Green post on our energy report opens by saying it needs “careful scrutiny.” We agree, and we welcome everyone to read the report and think critically about it. Unfortunately, several of Mr. Hoffmann’s criticisms respond to arguments the report doesn’t make.

Take his first paragraph, which says our report recommends tying “executives’ bonuses to ratepayers’ cost savings.” That isn’t our recommendation. We recommend tying a portion of utilities’ authorized profit to how well they control costs. Early news coverage described it that way, and WisBusiness has since updated its wording.

In our introduction, we point out that a decade of energy policy has favored wind and solar without accounting for their true cost or what they can be counted on to deliver. Mr. Hoffmann’s next paragraph shows why that matters.

First, Mr. Hoffmann quotes Smart Energy, which he describes as an electricity and gas supplier. In other words, it’s a company that sells power plans, and its blog is closer to marketing than research.

The Smart Energy quote is optimistic, but it sidesteps the data in our report. In 2024, Wisconsin solar ran at 18.3% of its rated capacity for the year and just 5.9% in January. Nowhere does our report claim solar panels produce nothing on cloudy days. The problem is how little they produce when Wisconsin needs power most.

Second, Mr. Hoffmann says grid operators plan for wind and solar’s lower output. They do. As noted in our report, MISO counts a typical wind farm for only about 23% of its rated capacity toward peak demand. But planning for a shortfall doesn’t make it go away. It means paying for backup.

That’s like buying a car rated at 30 mpg that actually gets 20 mpg, and saying it’s no big deal because I’ll just stop at Kwik Trip more. Planning for it doesn’t make the extra gas free.

Mr. Hoffmann’s sources also say batteries can store extra energy for when generation dips. They can, but they aren’t free. Alliant alone planned to spend $354 million on 175 megawatts of batteries at its Wisconsin solar sites, and ratepayers cover that on top of the solar. When the PSC approved the Paris solar-battery purchase in 2022, the Citizens Utility Board argued the utilities had failed to consider alternatives or show the project was cost-effective.

Smart Energy also compares the grid to an air traffic controller rerouting electrons to where they’re needed. But you can’t reroute electrons that don’t exist.

Third, RENEW Wisconsin’s Alex Beld, quoted in the post, says we ignore subsidies for oil and gas. In fact, Figure 12 of our report shows federal tax incentives for nuclear, oil and gas, coal, wind, and solar side by side. Per unit of energy produced, solar received more than 130 times more in tax incentives than oil and gas in 2022.

Still, we’re glad to find common ground: Mr. Hoffmann thinks our proposal to let large users like data centers supply their own power is worth exploring. Consumer Regulated Electricity, in particular, is a bold new reform that could bring speed to power for businesses while protecting ratepayers.

We also agree that utilities take advantage of gaps in Wisconsin’s regulatory process. But the split review the Union of Concerned Scientists criticizes isn’t unique to natural gas. Invenergy builds the plant, and utilities buy it in a separate proceeding. That’s how Paris, Darien, Badger Hollow, and Koshkonong solar were done.

The next few years are a great opportunity for Wisconsin to fix a broken monopoly system that isn’t serving ratepayers well. We dispute that our reforms, many of which have nothing to do with renewables, are more political than practical. 

In conclusion, being environmentally friendly does not mean sacrificing affordability or reliability. As Sheboygan writer Stephen Heins, a self-described practical environmentalist, put it, “A practical path does not require abandoning environmental goals. It requires ranking them against other human needs and against the evidence of what works. ‘Best of the Above’ energy—reliable, affordable sources that include natural gas, nuclear (including smaller reactors that have proven out), coal with modern controls where appropriate, and renewables that can compete without permanent subsidies—aligns with that standard.”

Sam Krebs is policy and government affairs manager for the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty.

Jerry Ponio is legislative director for Americans for Prosperity Wisconsin.