by Monte Pearson

When Gordon van Welie was appointed CEO of ISO-NE in 2002, one of his primary tasks was to shepherd the transition from oil and coal to natural gas. In the 2000s, it became clear that coal and oil created more air pollution than gas, emitted more CO2 than gas, and, with the advent of fracking, no longer had a major price advantage over gas. The transition happened rapidly in the 2010s, with coal and oil burning plants undergoing costly conversions to gas. By 2020, less than one percent of New England electricity was generated with oil power and just a handful of coal based peaker plants were in operation.

As CEO of an agency that oversees the entire New England electric grid, van Welie became a committed warrior for natural gas. He developed a tight relationship with power plant operators, helping them plan a profitable future by exploiting the advantages of natural gas. He became a spokesperson for the natural gas industry, touting its virtues over all other forms of power and created a Board of Directors and a managerial staff that believed in and reflected the natural gas perspective. Unfortunately, in life nothing remains certain, great triumphs can set off devastating future consequences, and obsolescence of technology and technique is an ongoing process.

Now, his natural gas perspective, his tight relationship with natural gas, is a growing problem for ISO, for its Board and managers, and for Gordon van Welie. For years, ISO-NE and its leadership has promoted natural gas both by words and by tilting the region’s Forward Capacity Market so that only natural gas can win in the bidding for new power capacity. Since the Paris Agreement of 2016, ISO and Gordon van Welie have denied that climate change has anything to do with the electric power generating system. Fires in Australia and California, melting polar ice caps, and devastating droughts has not shaken their resolve. Even a New England winter with 50% increases in electricity rates and fears that shortages of natural gas will lead to brown-outs has not changed their devotion.

In a January 3 editorial essay in the Boston Globe, van Welie indicated he was not moving from natural gas. He said, “existing power plants and fuel sources will need to be retained and maintained to provide critical energy supply reserves until long-duration storage technologies take hold.” In a letter a few days later, Senator Ed Markey replied that van Welie “fails to fully acknowledge the role that ISO-NE has played so far in stifling and delaying the region’s transition to cheaper and cleaner energy… The result of ISO-NE’s obstruction? Keeping pricey dirty energy on the grid and cheap clean energy off.”

When a major institution – private, government, or non-profit – proves itself to be trapped in an old or obsolete organizational strategy, the sensible response is to bring in new management, people with new ideas and a new way of approaching organizational challenges. ISO-NE has failed. It is time for new, more climate-friendly leadership at ISO-NE. It is time for Gordon van Welie to leave the historical stage.