Category: Articles of Note

This is an update of articles that I have read that I want to mention but only have time to provide a brief summary.  I have also included links to some other items of interest.  Previous commentaries are available here. 

I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

Videos

Gorilla Science is the creation of Martin Durkin and Tom Nelson.  Their first video looks at heat waves and finds that careful analysis of the data contradicts the mainstream narrative.

The Unpopular Truth    

John Robson at Climate Discussion Nexus released a video of a talk with Dr. Javier Vinós. The interview covered his book Solving the Climate Puzzle, his reasons for challenging the prevailing orthodox “Enhanced CO2 Hypothesis” about climate change, including the spectacular weakness of computer climate models, and his alternative explanation for the cooling and warming of planet Earth.

Ben Pile talks about the net-zero initiative in Great Britain.

True Cost of Wind Energy

John Droz describes ten unacknowledged costs that wind energy proponents overlook when talking about costs.  He states “The system is setup to grease the skids for wind energy developers — not ratepayers. When it comes to wind energy, we are dealing with 21st century snake oil salespeople. They have a sophisticated multi-part strategy to profit at the public’s expense.”  His post explains why.

Coal Plants

Ron Stein compares coal-fired power plants in the United States and China.  There are 200 operating coal plants in the USA, 1,142  in China, and over 2,400 in the world.  He notes that “Due to onerous regulations by the Biden Administration and the overreach of his BLM and EPA, approximately 170 of the remaining coal-fired plants in the U.S. are scheduled to be de-commissioned by 2030, and there are no plans to build any new coal-fired plants in the U.S.”  Based on my experience I think that a coal plant with modern pollution controls can be a pragmatic component of an electric system.  There is no getting around the CO2 emissions, but all the other pollutants can be controlled well.  Importantly, they are resilient because fuel can be stored on-site, and the US has tremendous coal reserves.  Also, in my experience the coal mined in the western US can be done responsibly and the land reclaimed acceptably.  On the other hand, mining that removes mountain tops in West Virginia does not meet those criteria.

Solar Site Selection In New York

Paces tackles climate change through technology.  They analyzed solar energy siting trends in 12 states “offering a comprehensive perspective of the challenges and opportunities developers face.”  In New York they found:

• Suitable sites for solar Decreased 9.6%, from 6,908 sites in January to 6,245 by October, and is projected to drop to 5,372 by mid-2025.
• Smaller Parcels Are Increasing Project Complexity New York: Decreased 4.9%, from 41.0 acres in January to 39.0 acres by October, and is projected to drop to 37.6 acres by mid-2025.
• Declining Feeder Capacity Adds Complexity New York: Decreased 5.9%, from 3.54 MW in January to 3.33 MW by October, and is projected to drop to 3.20 MW by mid-2025.

This Year in Gas

Doomberg is an excellent blog that covers energy issues but most articles are behind a paywall.  This article describes energy markets and makes some good points.  Someday I will try to address this description of energy markets relative to New York’s cap and invest proposed program:

To understand energy markets, one need only internalize four things. First, energy is life—a point so central to our framework of macroeconomic and geopolitical analysis that it needs no further elaboration in today’s pages. Second, energy is fungible, and all primary forms of energy, being additive to the human endeavor, will be greedily consumed in its pursuit. Third, energy prices are highly inelastic, such that mere percentage points of regional supply imbalances cause wild market swings. Finally, the energy industry is reliably incapable of self-discipline, unable to resist the allure of drilling the next well.

I was more interested in the following quote.  I believe that burning natural gas at base-load power plants wastes a valuable resource that should be used more elsewhere.  I think that the idea that heavy and medium duty trucks can be converted to all-electric battery vehicles is nuts.  On the other hand, it is relatively easy to convert a diesel truck to burn liquified natural gas.  Further proof of my belief that this approach is a pragmatic solution to the diesel inhalable particulate matter environmental justice concerns was provided here:

Despite a parade of dire predictions about depleting shale wells, wars in the Middle East, and this-time-we-really-mean-it producer discipline, the world exits 2024 with oil down for the year and clinging to the bottom of its heavily-managed range. As measured in ounces of gold, the stuff has basically never been cheaper. We turn to China for a key reason why:

“Trucking fleets in China are embracing cleaner-burning liquefied natural gas (LNG) for fuel, a trend neighbouring India wants to emulate, accelerating a decline in diesel demand and rattling suppliers to the world’s biggest oil importer.

The rise of LNG trucks in China comes on top of world-leading electric vehicle (EV) adoption there and a prolonged economic slowdown, dampening demand in what for decades has been the main driver in oil consumption growth, with crude imports down 2.8% so far this year, weakening global prices.”

Offshore Wind

David Wojick has written many articles about offshore wind issues and compiled them into a summary recently.  His work emphasizes the impacts of the proposed massive developments on whales in general and the North Atlantic Right Whale in particular.  For example, in this article he documents new links about organizations that advocate for whales but “when it comes to offshore wind they look to have abandoned the whales in favor of green nirvana.”

New York Transition Update

Francis Menton published a good update of New York’s standing in the race to be the first jurisdiction to hit the “Green Energy Wall” where it becomes obvious that the future powered by wind and sun cannot work.  In an earlier post he declared Germany to be the winner in the race because “Its pursuit of the ‘renewable’ wind and solar electricity fantasy has put it in a spot where regular wind/sun droughts cause huge electricity price spikes, and major industries have become uncompetitive.  It has no solution to its dead end and can go no farther.”  He wrote:

If Germany has “hit the wall,” what is the appropriate analogy for New York?  New York passed its Climate Act with great fanfare in 2019.  The Act orders that we are to have a “net zero” energy system by 2050, with interim deadlines along the way.  The first serious deadline arrives in 2030, where the official mandate is 70% of electricity generation from “renewables” (aka “70 x 30”).  That deadline is now just five years away.  Within the past year, all the efforts to move toward the 70 x 30 goal are falling apart, as anybody who had given the subject any critical thought knew that they inevitably would.  But nobody in authority has yet been willing to acknowledge that this has turned into a farce.

Here’s my analogy: New York is like the cartoon character Wile E. Coyote, who has run off the cliff and is now suspended in mid-air, apparently not knowing what will happen next.

Frequent readers of this blog know that many of my posts are long because I get document all my statements.  This is because of my background in industry where it is necessary to prove my arguments to have credibility.  This is an update of articles that I have read that I want to mention but do not require a detailed post.  Previous commentaries are available here. 

I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

Videos

• There is no question that the global climate has been warming since the end of the Little Ice Age circa 1850.  There are two questions that I think are important: why it has warmed and how much has it warmed.   CO2 Coalition released a short video about the urban heat island that addresses the second question.  If we are worried about global temperatures, then local effects should not be included.  For example, temperature measurements in New York City’s Central Park have warmed by some amount due to development around the park in addition to the global driver causing warming.  The video correctly describes the issue but, in my opinion, does not completely explain why the urban heat island occurs.  I think the video over-emphasizes the impact of direct heat releases relative to the impact of buildings and other structures absorbing heat from the sun.  Even with that caveat this is still a worthwhile video.

Betting on the Energy Transition

Mark Mills notes that policies that ignore the fact that modern civilization depends on abundant, affordable, and reliable energy do not turn out well.  The tremendous energy requirements of artificial intelligence means that the energy use will continue to grow.  He notes that “For context, today’s global cloud already consumes ten times more electricity than all the world’s EVs combined.”  Given the challenges that renewable energy impose on energy abundance, affordability, and reliability he bets that fossil fuel use will force abandonment of the “energy transition”.

Hydrogen Dreams are Falling Apart

Paul Homewood explains How the West’s big bet on hydrogen fell apart.  He notes that Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest, an Australian billionaire who made big bets on green hydrogen, has “dropped a target to produce 15 million tons by 2030, blaming high costs and weak demand.”  Homewood goes on to explain:

Across the West, politicians have pledged to meet ambitious climate targets partly through developing different sources of the fuel, such as “blue” hydrogen made from natural gas, and “green” hydrogen derived through electrolysis of water.

Collectively, they have pledged to produce millions of tonnes of hydrogen in the coming decades – despite there being no proven path to doing so commercially.

On the same day that Forrest pulled back, the European Union was told that its plan to make and import 10 million metric tons of green hydrogen by the end of this decade was unrealistic as well – despite the bloc making €18.8bn (£15.8bn) available for a slew of projects.

The European Court of Auditors dismissed the target as one based on “political will” rather than concrete data, and said it had been partly spurred on by lobbyists.

Recall that the Climate Act Scoping Plan placeholder solution for dispatchable, emissions free resources is green hydrogen.  Homewood’s conclusion sums it up perfectly:

It is a mystery why politicians have allowed themselves to be fooled into thinking that hydrogen is a “superfuel”. The whole idea is ridiculous.

On all levels, it is hopelessly energy inefficient, massively expensive, and extremely difficult to store and transport.

Above all it is simply illogical to take one form of energy and then waste some of that energy turning into another form at huge cost.

Energy experts have known about this all along.

Offshore Wind Conundrums

David Wojick has been on a roll lately describing issues with offshore wind.  He notes that “Biden’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) proposes to build a huge amount of floating offshore wind in the Gulf of Maine.”  The problem is that the draft Environmental Assessment of the area designated for this monster project insanely ignores the cumulative environmental impacts of all the potential lease areas.  This problem is also a feature of New York’s offshore wind development. His description of the proposed floating offshore wind platforms proposed for Maine boggles the mind: “Simple physics says that if you want to put a 2,000-ton generator on top of a 500-foot tower with three 300-foot wings attached on a boat and have it still stand up in hurricane-force winds, it will have to be a mighty big boat.” 

Robert Bryce published an article entitled The Offshore Wind Scandal is Even Worse Than You Think  that addresses one of the cumulative environmental impacts that New York and the BOEM are ignoring. In charts he explains where the money is flowing, describes potential impacts to whales, and includes a map showing that New York’s offshore wind developments overlap the migration paths of the critically endangered North American Right Whale.  The big green environmental organizations are abandoning whales in general and the remaining North American Right Whales in particular.  Bryce quotes an opponent of offshore wind: “What is Big Wind going to say when they kill the last whale? ‘Sorry’?” 

Balanced View of Fossil Fuels

Alex Epstein explains why we should look at fossil fuels in a balanced way.  Here is a sample:

• Most “experts” look at the negatives of fossil fuels but ignore huge positives.
• Many “experts” ignore that much of the world would starve without fertilizer from natural gas.
• Fixating on the negatives and ignoring the positives of any technology is deadly.
• If we just looked at the negatives of antibiotics and ignored the positives, billions would die.
• To decide what to do about fossil fuels we must be balanced, looking at both negatives and positives.
• Fossil fuels do impact climate—but even there we must consider positives along with negatives.
• A huge, ignored climate positive we get from fossil fuels is the ability to master climate danger.
• Fossil fueled climate mastery has helped us become safer than ever from climate.
• In weighing fossil fuels’ positives and negatives, we must be precise—not exaggerate or fabricate.
• Sadly many “experts” exaggerate the negatives of fossil fuels in addition to ignoring the positives.
• If we carefully weigh fossil fuels’ positives and negatives, it becomes clear we need more of them.

Greenhouse Effect Misinformation

Harold D. Pierce, Jr. sent me a note about a paper by Joel Kaufmann titled Climate Change Reexamined that makes the very good point that CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas.  Proponents of climate change action typically ignore the implications of water on the GHG effect.  Pierce explains:

Shown in Fig. 7, is the infrared (IR) absorption spectrum of a sample of Philadelphia city air from 400 to 4,000 wavenumbers. The wavenumber scale linear in energy and spans an order of magnitude in energy.

Integration of spectrum determined that water absorbed 92% of the IR light and carbon dioxide only 8 % of the IR light. Since the wavenumber scale is linear in energy, water absorbed much more IR light energy than carbon dioxide. Since the air sample was city air, it is likely that the concentration of carbon dioxide was higher than that of remote location such a rural area. Kauffman did not measure the concentration of carbon dioxide in the city air.

In 1999 at the MLO in Hawaii, the concentration of carbon dioxide in air was about 367 ppm by volume. This is only 0.721 grams of carbon dioxide per cubic meter of air. At 28 deg. C and 76% RH the concentration of water in was about 28,044 ppm by volume. This is about 22.5 grams of water cubic meter of air. For these weather conditions, water is about 98.7% of the greenhouse effect.

Based on the above analysis and calculations and on Kauffman’s essay, I have concluded that since 1988, the claim by the IPCC carbon dioxide has caused and is still causing “global warming” is a lie. Water is by far the major greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide is a very minor greenhouse gas.

put together an article about every relevant topic I have discovered.   This is a summary of articles that I think would be of interest to my readers.

I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

New York City Panel Discussion on Net-Zero Economy

Francis Menton invites folks to a panel discussion on the costs and consequences of pursuing a “net zero” economy. Experts Benny Peiser and Francis Menton will share their outlook for Europe’s present and America’s future. 

Event Details: 

Wednesday, June 12

3 West Club

3 West 51st Street

6:00 PM: Reception

7:00 PM: Program

Videos

• Tornadoes 1 – Wind Turbines 0 – Video of a tornado going through a wind farm shows the expected results.
• Practical Engineering takes on the concept of reactive power.
• Podcast – Sunblocked: Resistance to Solar in Farm Country Shepherd’s Run in Copake, NY

Vaclav Smil

Net-zero by 2050 is simply not happening.  Paul Homewood writes:

professor emeritus at the University of Manitoba and a best-selling author of 47 books. Whenever Smil publishes something new, people in the energy space pay attention. That’s certainly the case with his latest publication, a 48-page report titled “Halfway Between Kyoto and 2050: Net Zero Carbon Is a Highly Unlikely Outcome.” In the report, Smil details efforts to date by global governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and finds them wholly inadequate to achieve the goal of net-zero by 2050.

Energy Storage Issue

The LS Power Gateway Energy Storage project is located in San Diego County California.  As far as I can tell it has a 250 MW capacity and can provide 250 MWh oF energy.  The fact that it caught fire and kept re-igniting was a news story that did not get much coverage.  There have been evacuation orders because of “harmful” gases.  Here is another story.

Inverter-Based Resources

Meredith Angwin gives a great overview of wind and solar inverter-based resources and why it matters.  Spoiler – it is another complication that has already led to blackouts.  She quotes the scary bit in the NERC Odessa report that addresses an incident in Texas:

“In many cases, industry is not proactively identifying abnormal performance of inverter-based resources…the recommendations outlined in NERC reliability guidelines are not being adequately adopted….Plants stated that no mitigating actions are being done (or planned) to improve the performance of the resources involved in the event.”

Continent Sized Wind Lull

Australia example of the extent of a wind lull.  “Australia has built 11.5 GW of theoretical total wind power capacity on the National Energy Market (NEM) spread across 80 locations on the Eastern Seaboard, and at one point today only 4.1% of it was working.  Another gigawatt of generation on the Western side is only generating at 3 – 5% capacity.”

Solar Panel Trash

Harvard Business Review notes that solar panels are going into landfills.  Of course they don’t suggest that “this should raise serious doubts about the future or necessity of renewables”.   They claim “Compared with all we stand to gain or lose, the four decades or so it will likely take for the economics of solar to stabilize to the point that consumers won’t feel compelled to cut short the life cycle of their panels seems decidedly small.”  Yet another example of build as much as you can as fast as you can and hope that it all works out.

Environmental Issues are Not Simple

Lucy Biggers describes her epiphany at the Free Press – Finally, I’m admitting it out loud. “In my heart of hearts, I always knew environmental issues were more complicated than the way I sold them to my true-believer followers.”

It really wasn’t until 2021, by which time I was 31 and had left NowThis, that I was finally willing to confront the complications I’d avoided during all those years as a sustainability influencer. I began reading books and news sources that strayed from the progressive party line, titles like Unsettled by Steve Koonin, Apocalypse Never by Michael Shellenberger, and Fossil Future by Alex Epstein. I realized that the environmental causes I had so breathlessly championed were much more complicated than good versus evil. 

Do fossil fuels cause our planet to warm? Yes. They also make modern life possible, freeing women from hours of labor and empowering us in a million different ways. They’re singularly cost-effective and versatile as an energy source. This is something that the “keep it in the ground” climate activists never acknowledge. Nor do they admit that the promised panacea of renewable energy, like solar and wind, are nowhere near close to replacing fossil fuels and in fact, have their own dark environmental footprint. 

Bjorn Lomborg

His Newsletter cites a new op-ed for The Wall Street Journal (also accessible here) that the West should make economic growth a priority again and stop hemorrhaging their resources on climate policies that mostly enrich China.

Another editorial by Lomborg in the New York Post makes a convincing argument that Green activists don’t care how many people will die from zero fossil fuel use.  There is a discussion about it at Climate Realism.

Leisure Class Environmentalism is an Elitist Status Symbol

Thomas Shepstone describes an article from 2021 written by an Irishman named Thade Andy and published in Gript. Titled “Climate Hysterics Are An Elitist Status Symbol” :

Climate hysteria is, at its most basic level, a luxury belief that can be afforded by neurotic, well-to-do westerners. For many of those who are loudest about the green agenda, these beliefs are actually a status symbol.

Solar Energy

• Solar energy is depleting farmlands of their rich soils in the U.S. Midwest.
• Robert Bradley points out that solar has had 15 subsidy exemptions. “But nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.” (Milton and Rose Friedman, Tyranny of the Status Quo, 1983, p. 115)

Off-shore Wind

• Inflation and supply chain issues are impacting Northeastern US offshore wind
• Atlantic whale slaughter gets government approval
• David Wojick notes that the environmentalists have abandoned the whales in favor of the green nirvana.

Climate Act Progress

Marie French is a correspondent for Politico New York and notes that at the close of the New York legislative session: “Lawmakers departed Albany – 5 years after CLCPA – without any significant action this year to reduce emissions or support achievement of the state’s climate law”.

Congestion Pricing

New York City’s congestion pricing program was supposed to take effect at the end of June. Energy Mix quoted Governor Hochul: “After careful consideration I have come to the difficult decision that implementing the planned congestion pricing system risks too many unintended consequences,” Hochul said June 5. “I have directed the MTA [Metropolitan Transportation Authority] to indefinitely pause the program.”  It is all part of the political calculus and Hochul backed off due to the costs. “I can’t do anything right at this time that would also suck the vitality out of this city when we’re still fighting for our comeback,” she told reporters at a news conference.

This raises a question.  The congestion pricing plan was expected to generate $1 billion a year.  At the Energy Access and Equity Research webinar sponsored by the NYU Institute for Policy Integrity on May 13, 2024 Jonathan Binder stated that the New York Cap and Invest Program would generate proceeds of “between $6 and $12 billion per year” by 2030.  At what level will the cap and invest program suck the vitality out of New York State?

I have been so busy lately with net-zero transition implementation issues that I have not had time to put together an article about every relevant topic I have discovered.   This is a summary of articles that I think would be of interest to my readers.

I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

Videos

• Steven Koonin: Stop POLITICIZING Climate Science!
• Good electric system overviews.  If you want to know more about how the system works I recommend these
  • How the Hawaiian Electric Grid Works
  • Connecting Solar to the Grid is Harder than You Think
• Electric vehicle issues overview

Costs of the Net-Zero Transition

National Grid announced their plans to “invest an estimated $75 billion across the company’s service territory in the UK and US over the next five years, with nearly half of the funding dedicated to US energy system improvements in Massachusetts and New York.”   Their announcement includes:

In New York, National Grid is investing around $21 billion between now and 2029. Among those investments is the Upstate Upgrade which comprises more than 70 transmission enhancement projects across Upstate New York. The portfolio of projects will transform the grid, improve reliability and resilience, and enable National Grid to deliver renewable energy to homes and businesses across the state. This investment will also generate thousands of new jobs and create additional economic growth, all while ensuring the grid is able to meet the growing demand for electricity.

In New England, our five-year investment will total roughly $14 billion.  As part of this investment, National Grid will implement innovative solutions, like smart meters, to help consumers manage energy use; build modernized energy infrastructure; construct and upgrade infrastructure to make it less susceptible to extreme weather events; and maintain and improve the quality of our existing gas and transmission assets. 

Wind Energy Follies

I had intended to link to Robert Bryce’s article on last year’s wind energy but instead I suggest you check out Ron Clutz’s summary because he has some hilarious cartoons to illustrate his summary of the article. Bryce found that “Weather-dependent generation sources are…weather dependent: Last year, despite adding 6.2 GW of new capacity, U.S. wind production dropped by 2.1%.”

Environmentalism is Dead

I admire the work of Robert Bryce.  In this post he argues that concerns for the environment that “once aimed to protect landscapes, wildlands, whales, and wildlife — has morphed into the NGO-corporate-industrial-climate complex. Rather than preserve wildlands and wildlife, today’s “green” NGOs have devolved into a sprawling network of nonprofit and for-profit groups aligned with big corporations, big banks, and big law firms” pushing “climatism and renewable energy fetishism.”  He documents the “anti-industry” industry money and finds it is a $4.7 billion-per-year business.  He concludes:

America needs a new generation of activists who want to spare nature, wildlife, and marine mammals by utilizing high-density, low-emission energy sources like natural gas and nuclear energy. We need advocates and academics who will push for a weather-resilient electric grid, not a weather-dependent one. Above all, we need true conservationists who promote a realistic view of our energy and power systems. That view will include a positive view of our place on this planet, a view that seeks to conserve natural places, not to pave them.  

EPA Clean Power Plan

Before retirement I would have been very involved in the response to these new regulations.  I am very happy that I don’t have to try to respond because this is madness.  This summary of the rule explains:

Coal and natural gas plants provide 60% of the U.S.’ affordable, reliable, and baseload power. In a time of increased electricity demand, America needs to double down on harnessing these sources—not abandon them.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s recently finalized Clean Power Plan 2.0 (CPP) rule, however, takes the country in the wrong direction. Under this regulation, one that is arguably illegal, existing coal and new natural gas power plants will be mandated to install emissions control technologies that aren’t yet commercially viable. Plants that don’t comply risk permanent closure. This unrealistic mandate is advanced under the guise of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 90% by 2032.

If this initiative was accompanied by an announcement of a nuclear renaissance it would be one thing.  However, the worst thing about this is that the Biden Administration apparently believes that these resources can be replaced by wind and solar.  That will never work.

Net-Zero Challenges

Ed Reid describes the all-electric experiment.  He runs the numbers and finds that the costs of storage could be between 7 and 70 times the cost of wind and solar.

Climate Change Debate

Everything Climate covers both sides of the climate debate.

Another Offshore Wind Problem

Bud’s Offshore Energy describes the glauconite challenge.   When pile drivers attempt to drive the monopiles for wind turbines into sediments with the mineral glauconite transforms them into a sticky, clay-like sediment that can “cause pile refusal or difficulty installing the foundation to its target depth”. This mineral has been identified in the lease area for the recently approved Empire Wind project off Long Island. Not to worry New York has plenty of money to cover any unforeseen construction problems.

Energy and the Economy

Gail Tverberg notes that “Energy and the economy work together in very strange ways” in her recent article about offshored industrialization.  This article notes that:

Industry is based on the use of fossil fuels. Electricity also plays a role, but it is more like the icing on the cake than the basis of industrial production. Industry is polluting in many ways, so it was an “easy sell” to move industry offshore. But now the United States is realizing that it needs to re-industrialize. At the same time, we are being told about the need to transition the entire economy to electricity to prevent climate change.

I find her work fascinating but, in my opinion, her emphasis on finite resources does not account enough for technical innovation. Nonetheless, I agree with her point that maintaining fossil fuel supply should be a priority over trying to move away from them because of the importance of fossil fuels to today’s society.  She argues that:

The feasibility of moving away from fossil fuels without killing off a very major portion of the world’s population seems to be virtually zero. The world economy is a dissipative structure in physics terms. It needs energy of the right kinds to “dissipate,” just as humans are dissipative structures and need food to dissipate (digest). Humans cannot live on lettuce alone, or practically any other foodstuff by itself. We need a “portfolio” of foods, adapted to our bodies’ needs. The economy is similar. It cannot operate only on electricity, any more than humans can live only on high-priced icing for cakes.

I have been so busy lately with net-zero transition implementation issues that I have not had time to put together an article about every relevant topic I have discovered.   This is a summary of articles that I think would be of interest to my readers.

I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

Videos

• The Heart of Climate Deception Temperature.  Good summary of the issues related to global temperature measurements
• Roger Pielke, Jr. on the best kept secret of climate science
• Mapping Offshore Wind Projects And Critically Endangered Whales Robert Bryce produced a four-minute video that clearly shows:

The Biden administration has approved a slew of projects that could result in hundreds of offshore wind turbines being placed right in the middle of the North Atlantic Right Whale’s habitat. As you likely know, the North Atlantic Right Whale (Eubalaena glacialis) is one of the world’s most endangered whales. Only about 360 individuals are left. So why are so few climate NGOs speaking out against the industrialization of our oceans and the danger that offshore wind poses to the whale?

The Climate Industry’s Misdirection Campaign

Jessica Weinkle has written a highly recommended description how institutions are being delegitimized in the name of climate catastrophism. She concludes:

Dark money may or may not be a problem the public wants to address.

Concerning however is the extent to which the sprawling empire of the multifaceted climate industry has managed to discredit critique of its methods.

Those who do are dubbed obstructionists, and in no insignificant part by the billionaires moving money around in opaque ways.

Policymakers unwilling to acknowledge this dynamic are also turning their back on genuine problems in scientific integrity, misleading policy, courts, public health research, and threatening food security and development. The public is left with a sea of technocratic propaganda and limited ways to engage because the expertise barrier is too high.

Robbins claimed that “it is not what you look at that matters… It’s what you see.” All around us we look at the massive influence of the climate industry on climate change science and public messaging. But what most see are flashy graphs, dire futures, and get rich quick investment opportunities.

All the while, the legitimacy of our democratic and scientific institutions are being snatched before our very eyes.

Climate Change Reality

The CO2 Coalition published a paper prepared by Richard Lindzen, William Happer, Steven Koonin on April 16, 2024 titled Fossil Fuels and Greenhouse Gases Climate Science that is an excellent summary of reasons why there is no climate crisis.  Three sections are included: There will be disastrous consequences for the poor, people worldwide, future generations and the west if fossil fuels, co2 and other ghg emissions are reduced to “net zero”; The IPCC is government controlled and thus only issues government opinions, not science; and Science demonstrates fossil fuels, CO2 and other GHGs will not cause catastrophic global warming and extreme weather.  John Robson at Climate Discussion Nexus also praises the paper: “The paper does not break new ground, but summarizes the grounds for skepticism about the real impact of climate policy, the credibility of the IPCC, the reliability of climate computer models and claims that CO2 has made the weather worse and will only continue to do so”.

Judith Curry gave a great presentation Climate Uncertainty and Risk to the Global Warming Policy Foundation.  Video of the presentation [here].  Powerpoint slides can be downloaded here [ GWPF uncert & risk (2)].  She makes the point that the political strategy by the UN and New York’s Climate Act is “deeply polarizing, whereas the strategy on the right seeks to secure the common interest of communities.”  She concludes that:

Once you separate energy policy from climate policy, the way forward for energy policy is fairly straightforward. A more pragmatic approach to dealing with climate change drops the timelines and emissions targets, in favor of accelerating energy innovation.  The goal is abundant, secure, reliable, cheap & clean energy.

The problem with climate policy is that it is a “wicked problem” that necessitates an approach that recognizes the deep uncertainties we have associated with climate understanding.  Of course those concerns are routinely ignored by the advocates for the Climate Act.

Social Cost of Carbon

The Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) is a contrived parameter used to justify policies that are designed to eliminate fossil fuels.  It is a difficult parameter to describe and show how it is used.  Jonathan Lesser from the National Center for Energy Analytics wrote an excellent article that describes it well. 

Electric Vehicles

Ford lost a lot of money on each electric vehicle it sold in the first quarter of 2024.  CNN claimed that Ford sold 10,000 electric vehicles for a loss of $132,000 per vehicle but Robert Bryce said Ford sold 20,233 electric vehicles for a loss of “only” $65,272 per vehicle.  Words fail to describe this madness.

Chinese EV manufacturers are poised to flood the American car market with cheap, high-quality SUVs by exploiting loopholes in tariff laws utilizing plants built in Mexico as the jumping-off point.  This will happen even sooner.  Chinese-owned carmaker Volvo (a subsidiary of China’s Geely) is about to beat the competition as soon as this summer with the introduction of a small battery electric SUV, the EX30, in the US. 

The EX30 will directly compete with the Tesla Model Y in terms of performance and features, but at a price tag of $35,000, $8,000 less than the Model Y’s current cost. Reuters writes that, “[t]he competitive price reflects an unusual combination of Geely’s China-specific cost advantages and Volvo’s ability to skirt US tariffs on Chinese cars because it also has US manufacturing operations.” Even better, Volvo says that, even at that market-undercutting price, it expects to realize a 15-20 per cent profit margin on the EX30, meaning it has room to cut the price further should Tesla or other companies find ways to meet its initial price tag.

Used EV timebomb – Many EVs could become almost impossible to resell because of their limited battery life.

Experts said that the average EV battery guarantee lasts just eight years. After this time, the battery may lose power more quickly and so reduce mileage between charges.  Many EVs will lose up to 12 per cent of their charge capacity by six years. Some may lose even more.

The cost of a replacement battery can be more than the value of the car.  As a result used EVs have little value which increases the total lifetime cost of an EV compared to a internal combustion engine.

Irina Slav describes the possible last straw for EV that i wrote up for Watts Up With That.  She notes that governments need to start thinking about a tax to replace their lost income from fuel duty collection when EVs predominate.  There is no option that will not either add to the purchase price or be regressive.  Her conclusion sums it all up:

For the umpteenth time, then, we have our dear Western governments try to have their transition cake and eat it, too, and not gain a single ounce of extra weight. They wanted combustion engine cars out but forgot that these cars bring in billions in tax income. They wanted a fully electrified transport but forgot it wouldn’t bring in money unless they made it more expensive. They wanted a revolution but forgot rule #1 for revolutions: the successful ones never start from the top. They start from the bottom.

I have been so busy lately with net-zero transition implementation issues that I have not had time to put together an article about every relevant topic I have discovered.   This is a summary of articles that I think would be of interest to my readers.

I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

Videos

• Good news about climate  Judith Curry explains why the climate and environment is going fine.
• More praise for Climate Change the Movie.   Fergus Kelley writes “A rare and refreshing rebuttal of that incredibly powerful climate change conspiracy.”
• Climate Discussion Nexus has a “backgrounder” video look at “how scientists use temperature proxies to estimate past climate conditions … and in some cases misuse them because they’re so sure what the evidence should say that they ignore what it does say.”
• Steve Milloy discusses the economy-killing ‘climate’ agenda with Stuart Varney on FOX Business.

Zero-Emissions Freight Sector Fantasy

Charles Rotter wrote a masterful takedown of the latest net-zero transition fantasy – the national goal of a zero-emissions freight sector. 

The Biden-Harris zero-emissions freight initiative, with its lofty ambitions and sweeping promises, is emblematic of a broader trend in contemporary environmental policymaking: prioritizing grandiose goals over grounded feasibility studies and economic realism. This plan, rather than being a practical roadmap for any type of environmental improvement, is a political statement intended to signal virtue rather than effectuate its stated goals.

In summary, this “strategy” is nothing more than a modern-day environmental quixote, tilting at windmills of pollution with a lance of impracticality and a shield of buzzwords like “environmental justice.”

The Climate Act is no different than this strategy.

Impact of NYS GHG Emissions on Global Temperature

Parker Gallant Energy Perspectives published Actual Impact of CO2 Emissions On Global Temperature that was written and researched by Pav Penna.  Penna researched the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most recent teport:

IPCC estimates that the impact on temperature of a trillion tonnes of atmospheric CO2 emissions is “likely in the range of 1.0 to 2.3°C” – a very broad range indeed. This is equivalent to 0.00001 to 0.000023°C per megatonne. IPCC’s “expert opinion” suggests a “best estimate” of 1.65°C per trillion tonnes of CO2.

Using that number, if New York’s 2021 GHG emissions were eliminated the impact on global temperature would be 0.00044 deg C.  A quantity that cannot be measured.

Net-Zero Transition Issues

Epic Emissions Engagement:  Irina Slav describes the inevitable collision of the Big Tech companies who are counting on carbon credits to achieve net-zero status and the staff at the Science Based Targets initiative that these companies fund.  She concludes:

It’s a catastrophe unfolding in slow motion and it was unavoidable. Call it a case of Frankenstein’s monster and while the monster of climate activism cannot run away from its corporate creators and wreak havoc on the global village, taming it has become increasingly hard. The monster has developed an overwhelming sense of mission that has trumped any and all other considerations, including survival. The fight between green money and green muscle may end up being the show of the decade.

Mark P. Mills – When Politics and Physics Collide.  The belief that mandates and massive subsidies can summon a world without fossil fuels is magical thinking. 

While policies can favor one class of technology over another, neither political rhetoric nor financial largesse can make the impossible possible. Start with some basics. It’s not just that currently over 80 percent of our energy needs are met directly by burning oil, natural gas, and coal—a share that has declined by only a few percentage points over the past several decades; the key fact is that 100 percent of everything in civilized society, including the favored “green energy” machines themselves, depends on using hydrocarbons somewhere in the supply chains and systems. The scale of today’s green policy interventions is unprecedented, targeting the fuels that anchor the affordability and availability of everything.

Bjorn Lomborg explains that Trillions in taxpayer subsidies haven’t made wind and solar power cheaper or better for Americans:

A new study looking at the United States shows that to achieve 100% solar or wind electricity with sufficient backup, the US would need to be able to store almost three months’ worth of annual electricity. It currently has seven minutes of battery storage.  Just to pay for the batteries would cost the US five times its current GDP. And it would have to repurchase the batteries when they expire after just 15 years.

Francis Menton describes a report by Thomas Pyle of the Institute for Energy Research put out a list of “200 Ways the Biden Administration and Democrats Have Made it Harder to Produce Oil & Gas.”  He goes on to show there is not much to show for all those efforts.  He concludes: “Our current rulers think that they have infinite ability to tell the people how to live, and infinite money to force the people to change their ways. They are wrong, and reality will catch up to them, if only gradually.”

Electric Vehicles

Robert Bryce has been skeptic about electric vehicles for 14 years and prepared ten charts that explain the current situation.  Also of note is that electric car demand plunges across Europe.

Natural Climate Change

One of the main points in Climate the Movie is that clouds are a major driver of climate change.  This article describes a theory that explains long-term solar variation and its effects on clouds. Javier Vinós concludes that there are two pieces of good news.

The first is that solar activity cannot rise above the 20th century maximum. It is not like CO₂, which can keep going up. The Sun’s activity can stay high or go down, but it cannot go up, so the warming should not accelerate and should not be dangerous.  The second piece of good news is that if much of the 20th century warming is due to the Sun, then there is no climate emergency.

I have been so busy lately with net-zero transition implementation issues that I have not had time to put together an article about every relevant topic I have discovered.   This is a summary of articles that I think would be of interest to my readers.

I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

Videos

• Weekly dose of climate insanity – electric logging trucks
• John Robson at Climate Discussion Nexus has prepared a new video that addresses why loony climate decisions keep getting made. In his latest “Fact Check” video “When Backroom Met Zealot” he shows how green zealots spewed misinformation at an Ottawa City Council committee that then voted unanimously and without debate in favour of their proposal. He debunks the zealots, so you will know what to say when they show up in your town.
• Hurricane threats to offshore wind turbines  There is a summary of the video and links to documentation available here.  Spoiler – The New Jersey  Board of Public Utilities in charge of permitting offshore wind projects said that the Atlantic hurricanes are a significant potential threat.  More alarming is that the BPU has stated that there’s been really little technical research um about the effects of hurricanes on the offshore wind projects.

State of the Climate

Honest Story of Climate Change Guus Berkhout & Kees de Lange explain why there is no climate crisis.

Proposed Alternate Strategy Guus Berkhout & Kees de Lange propose a gradual energy transition to nuclear

Swiss Climate Decision

According to a recent decision by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) Switzerland has failed to comply with its duties to stop climate change.  Chris Morrison makes the case that:

The “real plaudits for the recent idiotic climate change verdict from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) belong to the elite billionaire paymasters behind lawfare activists such as Greenpeace and Client Earth. Greenpeace bankrolled the Swiss ladies and Client Earth supplied some of the legal arguments. The case is likely to throw a spotlight on the role that a few moneyed forces are playing in using the judicial system to enforce their insane Net Zero collectivisation on populations around the world. 

Always insightful and rational, Judith Curry has prepared a response “to help innoculate us from this fresh new climate hell of litigation.”.  The entire article is worth a read.  Her summary states:

There will be a continuing need for fossil fuels.  Rapid restrictions to fossil fuels before cleaner energy is available interferes with more highly ranked sustainability goals – no poverty, no hunger, affordable and clean energy, and industry-innovation-infrastructure. There is no human right to a safe or stable climate. Apart from the lack of an international agreement, such a “right” contains too many contradictions to be meaningful.

Defending the Narrative

When it comes to reporting on climate-related issues please be aware that the Associated Press makes no attempt to provide any information that contradicts the climate alarmist narrative.

Facebook Censorship due to a Science Feedback: “Fact Check”  Andy May notes that Facebook’s “independent and nonpartisan fact checks” of “Climate: The Movie.” is totally out of hand.

Reality is the Narrative is Falling Apart

Illustrating The Absurdity Of New York’s Energy Transition: Francis Menton highlights some of my findings from a lengthy blog post at this site and a somewhat different version that also appeared on Watts Up With That at about the same time. Tom Shepstone also re-published the article.

The Absurdity of the Electric Vehicle Transition:  The Institute for Energy Research explains the flaws in the Biden Administration emissions tailpipe rule that will force electric vehicles on us all.  To which I can add an anecdote.  I have a friend in the car business who is familiar with the electric vehicle market.  He told me this weekend that Tesla announced a 50% increase in the cost of replacement batteries.  This makes buying a new one more viable and fosters the sales of EVs.  All the regulations require new EV sales but there are no incentives to keep them on the road. 

Joke of the Week – well maybe a tragic commentary on these times.  ‘Spirit Whales’ (which ‘no-one believes exist’) hold up Australia’s most expensive energy project.  “If the gas project was to go ahead, the Spirit Whales would be endangered. And if the Spirit Whales were killed, none of the creatures of the sea would know what do to. Short of Aqua Man stepping in to save the day, the planet would be sunk. How did the Federal Court know all of this? Raelene Cooper! Ms Cooper, or as her activist friends like to call her, the Custodian of Whale Dreaming, speaks to the Spirit Whales. And they speak to her. Seriously. This was in evidence presented to the Federal Court.”

I have been so busy lately with net-zero transition implementation issues that I have not had time to put together an article about every relevant topic I have discovered.   This is a summary of articles that I think would be of interest to my readers. One recommendation, please watch the video “Climate the Movie”.

I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

Podcast/Videos

I highly recommend watching this video “Climate the Movie”.  It exposes the climate alarm as an invented scare without any basis in science. It shows that mainstream studies and official data do not support the claim that we are witnessing an increase in extreme weather events. It emphatically counters the claim that current temperatures and levels of atmospheric CO2 are unusually and worryingly high. On the contrary, it is very clearly the case, as can be seen in all mainstream studies, that, compared to the last half billion years of earth’s history, both current temperatures and CO2 levels are extremely and unusually low. We are currently in an ice age. It also shows that there is no evidence that changing levels of CO2 (it has changed many times) has ever ‘driven’ climate change in the past.

The film explores the nature of the consensus behind climate change. It describes the origins of the climate funding bandwagon, and the rise of the trillion-dollar climate industry. It describes the hundreds of thousands of jobs that depend on the climate crisis. It explains the enormous pressure on scientists and others not to question the climate alarm: the withdrawal of funds, rejection by science journals, social ostracism.

But the climate alarm is much more than a funding and jobs bandwagon. The film explores the politics of climate. From the beginning, the climate scare was political. The culprit was free-market industrial capitalism. The solution was higher taxes and more regulation. From the start, the climate alarm appealed to, and has been adopted and promoted by, those groups who favour bigger government.

Today’s technology impresses me.  In particular, the ability to do a pod cast in New Zealand from my house.  Reality Check radio interviewed me on the folly of a net-zero transition.

Climate Discussion Nexus has a new “Fact Check” video on heat waves “Dousing The Hot Hype”, that refutes the alarmist claims that they are becoming more common or more severe or even that the models expect

Alex Epstein notes that the world faces a serious crisis, one that will ruin whole economies and lead to needless suffering and death. The crisis is related to climate change, but not in the way you’re probably thinking.  It’s the global energy crisis—a man-made crisis created by climate change policies.

Climate Act

This is a very nice letter to the editor arguing that the Climate Act should not be rushed.

Dennis Higgins comments on the State’s proposed public relations campaign asking: ”Will the public fall for NYSERDA’s efforts to put lipstick on this pig?”

One usually overlooked feature of the Climate Act is the requirement to try to minimize impacts to disadvantaged communities.  The Climate Act requires the State “to invest or direct resources in a manner designed to ensure that disadvantaged communities receive at least 35 percent, with the goal of at least 40 percent, of overall benefits of spending.”  Essentially that means that everybody else will be subsidizing that constituency.  Potentially that could lead to something like a California electric rate structure initiative or here to “charge people based on their income rather than what they actually just use.”

In New York there is tremendous pressure to shut down existing natural gas fired power plants and the mere suggestion of building a new facility brings howls of outrage.  In Europe 72 GW of gas plants are being built as nations realize the cannot power an electric grid on solar and wind alone.

One of the greatest misleading claims for the transition to wind and solar is that it will be more resilient.  I don’t agree with that because they are relatively fragile sources of power.  I feat that when New York becomes reliant on offshore wind that a hurricane will eventually damage those facilities. In Texas theory and reality collided as a hail storm caused major damage at a 3,300 acre 350 MW solar project. There are fears of toxic pollution too.

The failure of New York to acknowledge the problems observed in Europe can only mean that the state will have the same problems.  The German energy transition threatens to be an unaffordable, unrealizable disaster, according to the government’s own independent auditors

At this time the New York State plan is to build as much wind and solar as possible as fast as possible.  In order to expedite this development the concerns of local communities and environmental issues have been squashed with the passage of laws slipped into the budget negotiations.  Now there are rumblings that “comprehensive permitting reform” is needed to expedite construction of green energy projects.  However, Democrats in Washington have not been able to agree on how this should be done.  Incredibly, Democrat-backed permitting reform bill unveiled in December would hand out billions in grants for eco-activist nonprofits to conduct environmental reviews on green government projects.  Always follow the money.

State of the Climate

Although it gets into the weeds an article by Javier Vinós at Climate Etc. raises some important issues.  Vinós notes that “Beginning in June 2023, the last seven months of the year marked the warmest period on record, significantly exceeding previous records.”   Dr. Vinós downplays the role of the current El Niño that is usually associated with an uptick in temperatures.   He says that the January 2022 Hunga Tonga underwater volcanic eruption, that boosted upper atmospheric water vapor by a remarkable 10%, is the most likely cause of the recent warming.  As the excess water leaves the atmosphere, observes Vinós, it will induce a cooling effect at the surface potentially lowering temperatures for the next three to four years.  Importantly, neither the El Niño nor the volcano effect are represented in the climate models that claim that CO2 is the control know for climate.

A new report published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation challenges the popular but mistaken belief that weather extremes – such as flooding, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes and wildfires – are more common and more intense today because of climate change.

End Game

Ronald Stein argues that “renewables will destroy America’s lifestyle back to the pre-1800s”.

At the same time, World Health Organization “Special Envoy for Climate Change & Health” Vanessa Kerry, daughter of multi-millionaire John Kerry, says: “We must accept that there is no other way forward than to phase out our reliance on fossil fuels”.  My comment to her: you go first and get back to me when your carbon footprint is lower than mine.

Emissions in China

China’s energy sector CO2 emissions increased 5.2% in 2023.  Based on the following figure I estimate that the average increase in emissions over the 2020 to 2023 time frame was 404.548 million tons from the energy sector.  Total New York GHG emissions for all greenhouse gases and all sectors in 2021 was 268.302.  Anything we do in New York will be subsumed by Chinese energy sector emission increases in less than a year.

I have been so busy lately with net-zero transition implementation issues that I have not had time to put together an article about every relevant post I have read. This is a summary of posts that I think would be of interest to my readers.

I have been following the. Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed and most of the articles described below are related to the net-zero transition.  I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in this article do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, these comments are mine alone.

Videos

Temperature Trend Manipulation

Frightening Data

US Debt Clock  Debt is $34.2 trillion for a debt of over $260,000 per taxpayer

NY Debt Clock Debt is $409.9 billion and spending is ahead of revenue over $100 billion

Electrify Everything Slammed by Court

Robert Bryce describes a court case which could have implications to New York:

Last month, the Ninth Circuit denied the city of Berkeley’s petition to re-hear its case after the city’s ban was ruled illegal last April. The January 2 ruling has national implications and is an enormous loss for the electrify everything movement, the lavishly funded campaign that seeks to ban natural gas stoves, water heaters, and other gas-fired appliances in the name of climate change.

He explains the history of gas bans and the dark money subsidizing the campaign then goes into the details of the case.  He concludes with reference to New York State because there is a similar case under consideration here.

On October 12, Jorgenson filed suit on behalf of a group of plaintiffs, including propane dealers, homebuilders, and plumbers. In a press release, Jorgenson’s firm said the “The drastic step of requiring ‘all-electric’ new buildings despite an already-strained electric grid stands at odds with the public’s need for a reliable, resilient, and affordable energy supply. New York’s gas ban is preempted by federal law, is contrary to the public interest, and harms plaintiffs and the members they represent.”

If Jorgenson prevails in New York, and she should, the next stop on the litigation is the U.S. Supreme Court, which should weigh in and declare that the electrify everything effort, is, as Jorgenson says, “contrary to the public interest.”

 Ontario Generation Costs

Parker Gallant summarizes what each generation source actually cost Ontario ratepayers/taxpayers to see if the claims that wind and solar are cheap are true.  He found:

The only energy source cheaper than natural gas is hydro.  Natural gas, hydro, and nuclear are all cheaper than wind and solar.

Electric Vehicle Stories of the Week

Ford Lost $4.7B On EVs Last Year, Or About $64,731 For Every EV It Sold – How is this supposed to work out?

EV transition is coming undone  Jo Nova note that sales of EVs are slowing down

Energy Transition Status

Francis Menton at the Manhattan Contrarian updates news on the supposed energy transition is going. 

Natural Gas Is the Indispensable Resource

Tom Shepstone notes that the American Gas Association has put up a nice web page illustrating the numerous reasons why “natural gas has quickly become the indispensable energy source for America’s energy system.” 

Mann – A Bad Day for America

You may have heard about this recent court decision:

As many of you already know, a Washington, DC jury today found the Defendants (Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg) liable for defamatory speech and reckless disregard of provable facts. Putting aside the monetary damages, the real damage done by this case is to every American who still believes in the First Amendment.

The precedent set today, and as alluded to by Justice Alito when the case was petitioned before the U.S. Supreme Court, means that disagreement and/or criticism of a matter of public policy — the founding principle of this country — is now in doubt. And should you choose to give voice to any dissent, you can be brought before a jury, held responsible, and fined.

I recommend Judith Curry’s two articles on the science behind the claims and Dr. Mann’s behavior towards her.  In short his science deserved ridicule and the man has no ethics.

Cooking the Books

Tony Heller has a stunning graphic that shows the games played to contrive the answer that CO2 affects temperatures.