By William Opalka

BOSTON — New England’s states may have to set aside their self-interests to overcome high energy prices that are slowing the region’s economy, Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker told the 2015 ISO-NE Regional Plan meeting on Thursday.

The first-term Republican said the region’s competitive advantages are at risk, citing a “sense of desperation” among his fellow governors over energy costs.

“One of the things that’s going to be most fundamental to our ability to succeed is to develop strategies and plans that can get a lot of people who don’t necessarily agree on things to come together and find a way to put the optimal success of the region above what might be the most optimal solution for any particular player,” he said.

“We don’t believe we can achieve the energy security, competitiveness, reliability and affordability … alone. It’s got to be a regional conversation,” he said.

Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut agreed earlier this year to seek multi-state, long-term contracts to procure large-scale renewable resources. More problematic is building large, multi-state electric transmission and natural gas pipeline projects.

“I think it’s pretty hard to look at the data and conclude that we won’t need to increase our capacity over time,” Baker said, referring to New England’s increasing reliance on natural gas generation and the fuel shortages that occur in the winter months. (See Dueling Studies Dispute Need for More Pipelines in New England.)

He also endorsed exploring the feasibility of importing more hydropower, which would require expensive power lines. “Canadian hydro has potential to be a significant player in the region,” he said, adding that the decision to proceed will depend on how the projects affect ratepayers. “If it doesn’t make sense, we won’t do it,” he said.

Policy Mandates Sometimes at Odds with Market Forces, Panelists Say

Following the governor’s address, a panel discussed whether the region’s pursuit of public policy initiatives is incompatible with low-cost energy.

Over the past 16 years, panelists said, New England’s energy strategy has often been at cross-purposes. The development of competitive markets, the transition from coal to natural gas generation, the integration of renewables and the need for expensive infrastructure all have made it difficult to keep rates affordable.

“In New England, our representatives have decided that renewable energy is really important, notwithstanding whatever preferences the market may have in its short-term, day-to-day interest,” said Edward Krapels, founder of Anbaric Transmission.

“I see us going down two paths,” he said. “The planning by the ISO to maintain reliability leads you down one path. Actions by the governors to create a clean energy economy take you down a parallel path and the two don’t converge.”

He said the three-state model for procuring renewables is the beginning of that convergence.

Public policy has had to contend with “the historical forces of technology and geology” — cheap natural gas — said Katie Dykes, deputy commissioner for energy at the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.

“This low gas price environment that we’ve had has done more for the fuel mix of this industry than the [Environmental Protection Agency] and the environmental advocates have been able to do over the last several years,” said Bob Hayes, vice president of natural gas trading for Calpine.

But he cautioned that the region’s dependence on liquefied natural gas “for the foreseeable future is a precarious one at best and one that I’d definitely be concerned about.”

Tanya Bodell, executive director of research firm Energyzt, said EPA’s initial draft of the Clean Power Plan was an example of policy ignoring reliability. EPA backed off from its proposed early deadline of 2020, delaying it by two years, after widespread criticism.

“That change was needed to show that your state plan is going to result in a reliable outcome,” she said.