Maryland’s Climate Pollution Reduction Plan aims to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 60% from 2006 levels by 2031 and achieve net zero by 2045. The report states emissions were already down 30% by 2020, but less than 10% of that is due to Maryland’s energy policies. After 20 years of mandates, just 1.3% of electricity comes from wind and 2.7% from solar, far short of the 2024 goal of 34% from renewables.

Both our regional electric grid manager and federal agencies have issued dire warnings of a near-term electricity reliability cliff as Maryland is closing baseload power plants prematurely with no reliable replacements in sight.

They warn state policies need to change to avoid a crisis. Clearly, Maryland policies have failed, will continue to fail and are now even dangerous.

Two-thirds of the emission reductions achieved so far are in the electric generation sector. Over a quarter of in-state electric generation has been shifted to other states. In other words, Maryland is closing in-state power plants, which shows up as reducing Maryland emissions. The calculations ignore the fact emissions increase with longer transmission line distances. Lower cost, lower-emitting natural gas-powered plants and increased generation from nuclear power replaced about half the high-emitting coal generation based on economics, not Maryland policy.

Electricity demand dropped 10% as energy-intensive manufacturing left the state, and customers switched to LED lighting and efficient appliances. Most efficiency gains came from federal policies and cost-saving efforts, not state initiatives. Industry losses to other states comprised 14% of total emissions reductions, while improved vehicle gas mileage contributed 21%. Wind and solar accounted for just 5% of emission cuts.

Maryland policies focus on mandated increased use of offshore wind and electric vehicles. Both policies require federal regulations and subsidies unlikely to be continued by the Trump administration. Both developments are facing headwinds beyond coming federal policy changes.

Offshore wind is the most expensive way to generate electricity, especially when the cost of extensive transmission upgrades, expensive battery backup and redundant generation capacity requirements are added. One recent study concluded offshore wind could be 12 times as expensive as a new natural gas power plant. It is also five times as expensive as Small Modular Nuclear generation.

Offshore wind developer Ørsted withdrew from a project off the Delaware coast supported by Maryland subsidies that were not high enough to support the project.

The authorizing federal legislation for offshore wind specifically states projects may not unreasonably interfere with historic uses such as commercial fishing, vessel traffic and ocean views. Federal environmental impact statements conclude turbines will dominate the view, commercial fishing will abandon lease areas and vessel collisions will increase, leading to more human deaths.

The rich and powerful own properties on the north shore of Martha’s Vineyard and the Hamptons. Based on those concerns, planned offshore wind development off those coasts has been abandoned. Impacted towns and counties elsewhere have filed potentially successful lawsuits.

Maryland mandates that 43% of vehicles sold by Maryland auto dealers be electric in the 2027 model year that starts the summer of 2026. Only about 13% of vehicle sales in Maryland are electric, according to an analysis by the Alliance for Automative Innovation.

This failed policy will only hurt Maryland auto dealers, as consumers will go to neighboring states to purchase the vehicle they want. It is doubtful the mandates can be met. Federal lawsuits are challenging the California waiver used to support Maryland’s regulation and the Environmental Protection Agency’s effort to regulate vehicles based on carbon dioxide emissions that Congress has not approved. Federal subsidies for vehicles of $7,500 will likely be repealed, making electric cars even more unaffordable.

Maryland’s green energy plan assumptions are a fantasy. The plan relies on wind and solar generation growth to be 50 times faster over the next six years than over the last 20. Tens of billions of dollars in state subsidies are required to address expected multi-year budget deficits. Maryland’s Climate Pollution Reduction plan also assumes that federal subsidies will somehow continue despite the clear signals from Washington that they will end or be significantly reduced.

The plan correctly states that the entire state now meets federal clean air standards, which are standards set to protect public health, but then claims hundreds of billions in health benefits based on a single flawed study. All these inflated benefits ignore the costs to taxpayers and ratepayers, which have not been calculated. Maryland’s Climate Pollution Reduction Plan should return to the drawing board, and lawmakers should take the dire warnings about electric reliability seriously in the upcoming legislative session.

David T. Stevenson is director of the Center for Energy & Environment at the Caesar Rodney Institute and served on President Donald Trump’s 2016 Environmental Protection Agency transition team.