Governments at all levels seem to have contradictory aspirations as far as the supply of electricity is concerned. While manufacturers are required to reduce their emission of pollutants, their ingenuity to achieve this objective while reducing the cost of power is curtailed by unnecessary federal and state laws. In Louisiana, for instance, it is nearly impossible to purchase energy from a private supplier even if it is cheaper and cleaner than the one sourced from CLECO (Ayres & Ayres, 2009). The monopolistic control of a local utility like CLECO hurt the local community by limiting economic growth as well as through the derailments it causes in the efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The federal, state and local authorities are supposed to make laws that benefit the people living within their jurisdictions. The residents of the Canal and Ville Platte area lost when CLECO made it impossible for Cabot Corporation and Primary Energy to proceed with their planned energy-recycling and cost-saving endeavors. The State of Louisiana has the most restrictive laws as far as the sale of electric power between private parties is concerned. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that investors and executives of the local utility have the financial muscle to engage proficient lobbyists in their dealings with the compliant utility commissions (Ayres & Ayres, 2009). The members of the general public are left in the dark about the alternative strategies which can make their environment safe and increase job opportunities.
There are three major categories of stakeholders including the general public, private businesses, and governmental agencies. The latter two have conflicting objectives as while companies seek ways of remaining profitable, the government is focused on enforcing the laws claimed to be for the good of the public. The antagonism results in a scenario where win-win negotiations are impossible (Ayres & Ayres, 2009). The party that has the law on its side wins, a situation that edges firms out of business.
The Plan of Action and Failure Occasioned
The local utility is exploiting its legal advantage to eliminate competition and hence safeguard the room for its own expansion. Firms such as Cabot Corporation and Columbian Chemicals are exploring the means of handling the competition from cheap imports while still doing their part to protect the environment. They see recycling as a viable option since it increases fuel efficiency from 33% to between 50% and 80% (Ayres & Ayres, 2009). It is also cleaner and cheaper than the use of fossil fuel. The general public is ill-informed, and they are indifferent to what is happening. While the governor makes an attempt to remedy the situation, it is already too late. The companies involved are unable to proceed with their recycling plans.
Ayres, R. U., & Ayres, E. H. (2009). Crossing the energy divide: Moving from fossil fuel dependence to a clean-energy future. Prentice Hall.