Finally, Someone in Washington Who Understands

Energy Secretary Chris Wright just told Fox Business that rising electricity costs are what keep him up at night. "It's what I worry about most seven days a week," Wright said. "We want to stop the rise in electricity for Americans and reshore jobs and opportunity there."

After four decades of fighting utility rate cases and watching politicians ignore the real-world impact of their energy policies, it's refreshing to hear a federal official who actually gets it. Wright understands something that too many policymakers miss: when electricity costs skyrocket, businesses suffer, jobs disappear, and families struggle to keep the lights on.

For northern Indiana businesses already hammered by NIPSCO's 26% rate increase, Wright's candid assessment should be both validating and concerning. Validating because someone in power finally acknowledges the crisis. Concerning because it confirms what we've been warning about; this is just the beginning.

The Numbers Don't Lie

Goldman Sachs analysts delivered a stark warning that validates everything we've been seeing in utility rate cases: nine of 13 U.S. regional power markets have already reached "critical tightness" this summer, with all but one expected to hit that threshold by 2030.

What does "critical tightness" mean for your business? Higher prices, supply disruptions, and the constant threat of rolling blackouts during peak demand periods. When reserve margins fall below critical thresholds, electricity stops being a commodity and becomes a scarce resource, and priced accordingly at that.

The Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), which serves northern Indiana through NIPSCO, is squarely in this danger zone. We're not talking about theoretical problems five years down the road. We're talking about reliability challenges that could hit this summer.

The Policy Failures That Got Us Here

Wright has been brutally honest about the root cause of this crisis: "For 30 years... we've paid people to build intermittent sources that only work when the wind's blowing or when the sun's shining. The more of that you put on the grid, the more expensive electricity becomes for Americans."

This isn't anti-renewable rhetoric, it's engineering reality. I've spent decades analyzing utility resource planning, and the math is unforgiving:

Capacity Factor Economics: Solar panels generate power roughly 25% of the time. Wind turbines manage about 35%. But businesses need electricity 24/7/365. The gap has to be filled by something, and that something is getting more expensive every year.

Grid Stability Costs: Intermittent generation requires backup power, frequency regulation, and voltage support all costly services that get passed through to customers in rate cases.

Stranded Asset Recovery: When utilities retire perfectly functional coal and gas plants early to meet renewable mandates, they recover those "stranded costs" through rate increases. Guess who pays? You do.

Maryland: A Preview of Coming Attractions

Wright pointed to Maryland as the epicenter of the power crisis, and it's a cautionary tale for every other state. Maryland Democrats spent years championing solar and wind while retiring coal plants. The result? Grid chaos, soaring bills, and a Democratic governor whose approval ratings are cratering.

Sound familiar? Indiana has been following the same playbook, just a few years behind. Governor Holcomb's energy plan emphasizes renewables and "fuel diversity" utility speak for forcing customers to pay for both unreliable renewables and the backup generation needed to keep the lights on.

What This Means for NIPSCO Customers

Based on my analysis of NIPSCO's resource planning and experience in their rate cases, Wright's warning signals several challenges ahead:

Higher Capacity Costs: When MISO's reserve margins tighten, capacity auction prices spike. NIPSCO passes those costs directly to customers through capacity charges on your bill.

Emergency Generation Costs: During peak demand periods with low wind and solar output, MISO will fire up expensive peaking units. Those costs get recovered through energy charges.

Reliability Investment Recovery: NIPSCO will justify massive transmission and distribution upgrades as "reliability improvements," using Wright's warnings as supporting evidence in rate cases.

Accelerated Infrastructure Replacement: Expect NIPSCO to argue that aging infrastructure can't handle the stress of an increasingly unreliable grid, necessitating faster replacement cycles and higher rate base investments.

The Trump Administration's Response

Wright's testimony to Congress was refreshingly direct: solar and wind subsidies have been "disastrous for the grid." The Trump administration is moving to restore stable fossil fuel generation, but the damage from years of misguided policy won't be undone overnight.

The challenge is time. Power plants take years to build, and utilities have to navigate complex regulatory approvals at both the state and federal level. Meanwhile, data centers and electrification are driving demand higher every month.

For northern Indiana businesses, this creates a particularly difficult situation. NIPSCO's territory sits at the intersection of multiple demand pressures:

• Chicago-area data center expansion spilling into Indiana
• Industrial electrification as manufacturers shift processes
• EV charging infrastructure buildout along major transportation corridors
• Residential heat pump adoption driven by federal incentives

The Fair Rates Alliance Position

Wright's acknowledgment of the power bill crisis validates what we've been arguing in rate cases: the current trajectory is unsustainable. But acknowledging the problem isn't the same as solving it, and utilities will use this crisis to justify rate increases that go far beyond what's actually needed.

Our position is clear:

Demand Accountability: New demand drivers, especially data centers, should pay for the infrastructure they require. Don't socialize these costs across existing customers.

Resource Planning Realism: Utilities need to plan for actual reliability, not renewable energy targets that ignore physical constraints.

Cost-Benefit Analysis: Every infrastructure project justified by reliability concerns should be subject to rigorous economic analysis. Emergency doesn't mean blank check.

Regulatory Oversight: State regulators need to distinguish between legitimate reliability investments and utility wish lists disguised as emergency measures.

What Businesses Can Do

Monitor MISO Planning: MISO publishes resource adequacy assessments that directly impact capacity costs. Understanding these forecasts helps predict coming rate pressures.

Engage in Rate Cases: When NIPSCO files its next rate case, business testimony about economic impacts carries weight with IURC commissioners.

Demand Transparency: Ask hard questions about which customers are driving infrastructure costs and whether they're paying their fair share.

Plan for Higher Costs: While we'll fight unjustified increases, some cost escalation is inevitable given current policy trajectories.

The Bottom Line

Energy Secretary Wright deserves credit for honest assessment of the power bill crisis. After years of politicians pretending that renewable mandates and grid reliability were compatible, we finally have a federal official willing to acknowledge the trade-offs.

But recognition is just the first step. The policies that created this crisis took years to implement, and fixing them will take time we may not have. In the meantime, businesses are caught between rising demand, retiring generation, and utilities eager to make customers pay for policy failures.

For northern Indiana businesses already dealing with NIPSCO's rate increases, Wright's warnings should be a wake-up call. The power bill crisis isn't a temporary spike; it's the new normal until we rebuild the reliable generation capacity that policy makers forced utilities to retire.

The question isn't whether electricity costs will continue rising. Wright has answered that: they will. The question is whether those increases will be justified by actual need or padded with utility gold-plating that has nothing to do with grid reliability.

That's where regulatory oversight and business advocacy become crucial. Without watchdogs demanding proof of necessity, "reliability" becomes a blank check written by ratepayers... exactly what Wright says he's trying to prevent.

‍

Read more at: https://www.zerohedge.com/ai/energy-secretary-wright-voices-concern-over-power-bill-crisis-says-trump-correcting-era

‍