THE FEDERAL ENERGY Regulatory Commission (FERC) came to Portland, Maine, this week to discuss with policymakers from across the region the challenge of keeping the lights on while reducing the region’s skyrocketing energy costs and advancing clean energy goals.

It’s no easy task. While scalable clean energy sources like offshore wind, solar, and power storage are keys to meeting future demand and ensuring our clean energy future, most of these energy sources are just beginning to produce power load – with many questions surrounding the time some of these sources will need to scale and the overall extent of their capacity.

Massachusetts has led the nation in our commitment to nurturing an offshore wind power industry. However, we must recognize that energy we need today that isn’t produced by purely renewable sources still needs to be produced by someone – and preferably not from oil and coal, which are still used in excess today, pollute our air, and reverse our emissions progress.

As Dan Dolan, president of the New England Power Generators Association, recently told Politico, when we lack appropriate power generating resources, the alternative is to “burn oil, which has become the replacement fuel for natural gas” in the winter. Defaulting to this alternative is not only bad for the planet – but completely at odds with the objectives of the Biden administration, which has pledged to reduce emissions and build a clean, reliable energy infrastructure.

We believe it is imperative for FERC to play a meaningful role in helping solve New England’s energy crisis, especially since the region isn’t doing a particularly good job of doing so. With six different states offering differing solutions and perspectives, FERC needs to bring together policymakers and other critical stakeholders so that the region can develop a reliable, cost-effective and sustainable energy policy that successfully achieves crucial carbon reductions while balancing short- and medium-term needs.

What does that look like?

While we all can agree that the energy sources of the future will prominently feature renewables like wind and solar, betting on an aspirational strategy that only results in the utilization of spot market oil when those renewables aren’t available is irresponsible. It sends us in the wrong direction – hindering our climate progress while also hitting ratepayers and businesses in their pocketbooks. That is why proposals, such as taking the Everett liquefied natural gas facility off the table, are premature, at least until new clean energy and storage resources are operational.

That’s why we also need clean fuels like hydrogen and renewable natural gas, which can utilize existing pipe infrastructure. And, yes, we should not close the door on natural gas right now, which produces far fewer emissions than oil and accounts for more power load generation in New England than every other available energy resource combined.

The need for federal leadership is clear. Indeed, while power sources are so strained in New England, policy emphasis in most states has been to create vastly more demand for power in the transportation and building sectors as fast as possible. While virtually everyone knows this—ISO New England, FERC, and policymakers—there have not been adequate strategies implemented to address the implications. FERC can help amplify the urgency of this situation by frequently convening advocates, businesses, and policymakers to engage in frank, honest discussions grounded in near-term realities.

Wishing for availability of purely renewable sources that don’t exist has put us in the position of using diesel oil in the winter. Instead of relying on ideological rigidity, the time has come for policymakers to come together across New England and advocate for as many viable paths to clean energy as possible.

The time has come to acknowledge the reality of our energy crisis – and to act.

William Ryan is executive director of the Mass Coalition for Sustainable Energy.