Garofalo goal: More clean energy that’s also more affordable

A long litany of testifiers regaled the House Job Growth and Energy Affordability Committee Monday with data and talking points from advocates and critics of wind power in Minnesota. And Chair Rep. Pat Garofalo (R-Farmington) said members of that panel can expect more of same as the committee steers its course through Minnesota energy policy.  

“Energy is a very complex area of public policy,” Garofalo said shortly before the hearing. “The first thing I want to do is to make sure that as legislators, we all agree on the facts – the technical and engineering aspects of it. That’s what the wind power hearing is about today. There are assets and liabilities to wind power, and we want to make sure legislators understand both sides of the issue. I think you’ll see us doing this kind of hearing with many other energy sources.”

Rep. Pat Garofalo

Session Daily spoke with Garofalo about his legislative agenda and his view of the prospects for finding common ground on energy policy with the DFLers who control the Minnesota Senate and the governor’s office. This is an edited transcript of that conversation.

Session Daily: Can you describe your legislative agenda for energy policy this session?

Pat Garofalo: We want to have cleaner energy that is also more affordable. Over the last 10 years, we’ve passed a lot of policies that made things cleaner but also more expensive. More recent advances in technology have created an opportunity to update our laws to achieve better affordability. It’s a false choice to say you have to be dirtier to be more affordable, or that you have to be expensive to be cleaner.

SD: Do you expect to see action on renewable energy sources this session? Are there points of agreement to be reached with the DFLers who control the Senate and the governor’s office?

Garofalo: Yes, I believe so. I think there’s a shared common goal of cleaner energy that’s more affordable. I want to be respectful of waiting for the governor’s proposals first, but I do have some ideas on the subject involving particular energy portfolios.

One is the conversion of diesel fleet vehicles to natural gas. It’s a better option for the environment, and it can save transit lines and school districts money. I’m hopeful that we can find other energy portfolios we can also address.

SD: You’re on record opposing subsidies for Minnesota-grown solar energy initiatives due to the cost. Is there a level of subsidy you could support for solar incentives?

Garofalo: I guess I would say that I support smart solar and oppose dumb solar, and the devil’s always in the details. I’m sure we can work something out.

SD: Early in session your purchase of a Tesla has attracted a lot of attention around here. Why did you decide to buy a Tesla?

Garofalo: Well, I’ve been a saver my whole life and figured I was due to buy myself a toy. I would also say that if you’re trying to make a fully informed vehicle decision, it’s the best choice. It goes from 0 to 60 miles an hour in five seconds. From an environmental standpoint, it’s a zero emissions vehicle. From a maintenance standpoint, there are no oil changes and it requires little mechanical maintenance. And it costs the equivalent of 35-40 cents a gallon to drive. It’s really a great car.