Carol Blood
Non-partisanQ32 Energy and its management play a role in local economic and environmental sustainability through creating jobs, incorporating sources considered sustainable, and updating infrastructure. Which of these, or others, are your priorities for your Public Power District? And what scientific evidence informed your priorities?
“Energy policy, to me, is really about taking care of people, keeping bills stable, keeping the lights on, and making sure our communities stay strong for the long haul. In my public‑service work, I’ve always leaned on clear evidence and practical decision‑making, and that’s how I look at public power too.
Research from places like the Department of Energy and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory shows that when utilities modernize their infrastructure, outages drop and efficiency goes up. Studies from the Electric Power Research Institute back this up: a mix of reliable resources, including sustainable ones, makes the grid stronger without driving costs out of reach.
So my priorities are pretty straightforward. Keep the grid resilient. Invest in upgrades that actually improve reliability. Use data, not trends, to guide resource choices. And make sure we’re supporting the local workforce so the jobs tied to energy stay in our community.
I’ve always believed public power works best when decisions are transparent, evidence‑based, and centered on the people who pay the bills. That’s the approach I’ve taken throughout my career, and it’s the approach I bring to energy policy.
Policy making in public power, to me, starts with evidence‑based decision‑making and transparent governance so people can see how and why choices are made. It’s about smart risk mitigation, solid regulatory compliance, and practical long‑term resource planning that keeps the grid reliable. Good policy also leans on load forecasting and asset management to stay ahead of future needs. And because public power is tied directly to community well‑being, it includes workforce development, local economic resilience, ratepayer affordability, and community impact analysis so decisions support both stability and trust.”
Q33 Please discuss your professional views on different energy sources (ex. nuclear, solar, wind, hydropower, geothermal, biofuel, coal, natural gas, oil/petroleum) and what policies you will support related to the potential use of these energy sources, if at all?
“Energy policy, to me, is about giving ratepayers a reliable grid without locking them into one narrow path. I’ve always believed a broad energy portfolio is the smartest way to keep costs stable and protect the long‑term health of public power. Renewables like wind, solar, hydropower, geothermal, and even emerging biofuels are becoming more affordable and more dependable every year, and the research backs that up — especially from places like the Department of Energy and NREL. At the same time, nuclear remains a steady, zero‑carbon baseload resource, and natural gas still plays a role in meeting peak demand as we transition. My view is simple: no single source can do everything, and ratepayers are better off when we balance proven baseload with cost‑effective green energy.
The policies I support reflect that balance. I’m for expanding renewables, modernizing the grid so it can handle new technologies, and using evidence‑based planning to decide when and how different resources fit into the mix. I’m also for keeping reliability front and center, because sustainability doesn’t mean much if the power isn’t there when people need it. Public power works best when we stay practical, stay transparent, and keep ratepayers first.
I look at energy policy through evidence‑based decision‑making, resource diversification, cost‑effective sustainability, resilience planning, and ratepayer affordability so we can build a reliable, modern grid that uses a broad mix of green and traditional resources without losing sight of what people actually need.”
Q34 National discussion on data centers and their energy sources range from their potential to support cutting edge innovation to concerns on resource use, ownership, and raising utility costs. Nebraska’s energy infrastructure provides affordable and reliable energy, however projected significant increases in electricity demand, from data centers and other industries, will require more power than NE currently generates (NE Chamber Foundation). Do you think your Public Power District is prepared to address the growing demand for electricity and changes to water and land quality? What scientific evidence, if any, would you consider when making policy for your Public Power District related to data centers?
“When I think about data centers, I start with the same things I always do: keeping the grid reliable, keeping rates fair, and protecting the land and water we all depend on. Nebraska’s energy system is strong, but the demand coming from data centers and other big industries is going to push it hard. I believe OPPD can handle that growth, but only if we plan honestly and use solid evidence to guide every decision. Research from DOE and NREL shows that meeting large new loads takes real investment in transmission, grid modernization, and a diversified energy portfolio, especially cost‑effective green energy.
And I’ll say this plainly: I’m not interested in socializing the costs while privatizing the benefits. Residential customers shouldn’t be subsidizing massive corporate expansion. If data centers want to be here, they need to pay their fair share for the infrastructure they require and be transparent about their impacts on water, land, and emissions.
My approach is practical ,build resilience, expand clean energy, require fair cost‑sharing, and use scientific evidence to understand the true impacts. Growth can be good, but only if it protects ratepayers and the environment at the same time.
I look at data‑center growth through evidence‑based decision‑making, resource diversification, grid resilience, environmental impact analysis, and ratepayer affordability so we can meet rising demand without socializing costs or compromising water, land, or long‑term reliability.”