Johnson, who worked on federal energy policy issues while an assistant to U.S. Rep. Tom Cole and former Rep. Wes Watkins, said his experience in the Legislature will help him bring a fresh approach to the commission’s rulemaking and quasi-judicial functions.

“Historically, the commission and the Legislature have butted heads on a lot of issues, and a lot of that is over power and who has the authority,” Johnson said. He said commission members should work closely with lawmakers to establish an energy policy that promotes the state, builds an energy infrastructure and protects consumers.

“I’ve got the relationships here and I know the process,” Johnson said from inside his state Capitol office. “I feel I am the most well-rounded. I think I bring both government and real-world experience.”

The candidates agreed the state is not doing enough to diversify the fuels Oklahoma utilities use to generate electricity and risks higher prices unless it begins using coal, wind, solar and nuclear fuels to supplement natural gas.

Oklahoma residential customers generally pay between 7.7-cents and 8.5-cents per kilowatt hour for electricity, among the lowest in the nation.

“You don’t go out and buy all of one type of stock. You buy diversification. And I think that applies to the energy side as well,” Murphy said.

“I think we’ve gotten a decent start, Johnson said. “I don’t think we’re doing enough yet.”

Last year, the three-member commission voted 2-1 against raising customer rates to pay for a $1.8 billion, 950-megawatt coal-fired plant proposed by Public Service Company of Oklahoma in northern Oklahoma. The utility abandoned plans for the project.

Opponents said the utility had not proven it had sufficiently explored alternatives, including demand-side management and conservation programs to reduce electricity usage.

Murphy and Johnson said they did not hear all the evidence in the case and did not know how they would have voted. But both said new coal technology that emits less pollutants has made it an attractive alternative to higher-priced fuels.

“I would have been inclined to allow them to build a plant that was not based on natural gas. I would have been inclined to let them recoup the money for that cost,” Johnson said. “We’ve got to increase our electricity capacity. But second, we’ve got to make sure we’re diversified.”

“Am I open to the use of coal? Yes,” said Murphy. “Am I open to the use of nuclear power? Yes.”

Oklahoma power producers have said the estimated $5 billion cost and lengthy construction time for a nuclear power plant make it unlikely they will turn to nuclear energy to meet rising consumer demand.

But the candidates said nuclear energy is an alternative the commission should explore for the state’s energy future.

“I think it’s something that we really have to look at. But I think people have to ask: ‘Do you want to put a nuclear power plant in tornado alley?’” Murphy said.