Maryland leaders keep telling us that if we want to dominate AI, quantum computing, and the next generation of high-tech industries, we must first dominate “clean energy.” Sounds great. Sounds noble. Sounds like a TED Talk sponsored by the Sierra Club.
But here’s the problem: their version of “clean energy” is a two-item menu—solar panels and offshore wind turbines—served with a very expensive side of battery storage and Rose-Colored Glasses Optimism.
The real world does not work like that.
The grid does not work like that.
AI data centers absolutely do not work like that.
And Marylanders paying some of the highest electric rates in the Mid-Atlantic definitely do not work like that.
Maryland needs an all-of-the-above strategy. Not the fantasy-of-the-few strategy being pushed in Annapolis.
Let’s break it down.
1. Solar-Wind-Storage Isn’t a Strategy. It’s a Limitation.
The Maryland Matters article leans heavily—very heavily—on the idea that if we just build more solar farms and offshore wind turbines, the heavens will open, the electrons will fall like rain, and Big Tech will come running.
Except Maryland’s own data says the opposite.
The Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) acknowledges that land-based wind and solar have limited resource potential in the state. Translation: you can fill every farm from Cumberland to Ocean City with panels and still come up short.[1]
Even MEA’s “Reaching 100% Carbon-Free Electricity” report admits Maryland needs 3.4 to 4.3 GW of new nuclear to hit long-term clean-energy goals—even after maxing out wind and solar.[2]
So why does the article pretend nuclear isn’t real?
Why ignore dispatchable power?
Why act like math is optional?
Because the goal isn’t reliability. The goal is ideology.
2. The Cost Explosion Nobody Wants to Talk About
The article celebrates renewables as if they’re magically cheap.
But a 2025 analysis by Resources for the Future (RFF) shows that tightening renewable-only mandates makes Maryland electricity more expensive, not less.[3]
And guess who gets hit hardest?
Not the state agencies writing policy.
Not the lobbyists drafting clean-energy mandates.
You. Your wallet. Your monthly bill.
RFF found something else: an Emissions Intensity Standard, which allows nuclear, hydro, and low-carbon dispatchable generation, keeps prices significantly lower than a renewable-only path.[4]
Maryland Matters doesn’t mention that. I wonder why.
3. “Clean Coal” and Carbon Capture Exist — Even if Annapolis Pretends They Don’t
The article refuses even to acknowledge clean coal, carbon capture, or coal-to-gas retrofits. They talk as if these technologies are imaginary… the energy equivalent of Bigfoot.
But the MEA’s own modelling shows that after coal plants retire by 2028, Maryland still leans heavily on combined-cycle natural gas to keep the lights on.[5]
So let’s get this straight:
- Coal is “bad,”
- gas is “fine,”
- nuclear is “awkward silence,”
- and wind turbines in the ocean are “progress.”
That’s not an energy policy.
That’s a political mood board.
If the state truly wants low-carbon dispatchable power, clean coal with CCS, upgraded hydro, and modern gas infrastructure must stay on the table.
4. Reliability Isn’t Optional — Especially for AI
AI data centers use massive amounts of electricity. Quantum computers require extremely stable, uninterrupted power.
Maryland cannot run these industries on wishful thinking and cloudy-day solar output.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA):
- Coal is already down to ~5% of Maryland’s power.
- Natural gas produces more electricity than nuclear as of 2023.[6]
That means Maryland is already vulnerable.
Retire more dispatchable generation without replacements?
Rates go up.
Reliability goes down.
AI companies go elsewhere.
This is not complicated.
5. The Danger of One-Path Thinking
When policymakers bet everything on one narrow set of technologies—wind, solar, batteries—they create:
- Stranded assets
- Higher bills
- Slower grid expansions
- Massive vulnerability if storage underperforms or supply-chain costs spike
A diversified portfolio isn’t an opinion. It’s the only serious path forward.
My View: Maryland Needs “Everything—Not Just Two Things”
You want to lead in AI?
You want to lead in quantum?
Then you need an energy system built for adults.
That includes:
- Nuclear (large & small modular reactors)
- Hydroelectric power upgrades
- Clean coal and CCS retrofits
- Natural gas as a stabilizer
- Solar & wind where appropriate
- Grid modernization
- Long-duration storage where cost-effective
Maryland Matters is right about one thing:
Energy matters.
But they’re wrong about the solution.
Maryland cannot build the future on intermittent power and good intentions.
We need all of the above.
Not some of the above, and definitely not less than the above.
ENDNOTES & SOURCES
[1] Maryland Energy Administration, Net-Zero Resource Potential Analysis
[2] MEA, Reaching 100% Net Carbon-Free Electricity (2024–2025 findings)
[3] Resources for the Future, Maryland Clean Electricity Policy Analysis (2025)
[4] RFF, Price Impact Comparison: Renewable-Only vs Emissions Intensity Standard
[5] MEA Modelling, 2035 Base Case Energy Mix Projections
[6] U.S. Energy Information Administration, Maryland State Energy Profile (2023)
Jimmy Schwartz is a contributor to the Montgomery County Republican Club and Direct Line News
Direct Line News is a Maryland-based free-access publication committed to the Republican reform tradition.
About The Author
