It is factually correct and mainstream that both oil-and-gas production and energy demand are increasing. But here comes climate alarmist Bill McKibben, climate writer at the New York Times, promoting a false narrative of fossil fuels declining in supply and in demand.
It is a strange development. McKibben previously ranted about the lack of climate action in the face of a crisis. He seemed ready to throw in the towel if the political world would not get better. But what is a spent climate alarmist to do? Create a message of hope.
McKibben’s is an old page from the energy-subtraction Progressive Left. Remember what Amory Lovins stated nearly a half-century ago?
“The long-term prospects of selling more electricity are dismal.” [1]
… Continue Reading“Prominent exploration experts have recently predicted that total world production of liquid oil will peak by about the end of this decade-or a few years later if production does not rise much-and will decline thereafter.”
“Upstream fossil fuel extraction productivity … gains are sufficient to outweigh much larger improvements in renewables generation. [R]enewables productivity gains must exceed fossil gains by approximately 4–5× for net emissions to break even: each 1% marginal productivity gain in fossil fuels requires 4–5% gains in renewables.” (Nature Portfolio, below)
When the climate alarmists/forced energy transformationists bow to reality, it is worth noting. The latest example is a setback to the governmental push for wind, solar, and batteries in place of consumer-driven oil, gas, and coal. Instead of “energy transition” and “Net Zero,” the reality is, to use a term of Alex Epstein, fossil future.
“AI-driven Productivity Gains Enable More CO₂ Emissions than They Avoid in a Global Energy–Economy Model,” (Nature Portfolio: August 4, 2026) goes from climate alarmism to energy reality.…
Continue Reading“Absent [climate] policy steering [intervention], AI’s modeled effects increase the carbon intensity of the global economy and reinforce fossil fuel incumbency—outcomes that current analytical and governance frameworks do not fully capture.” (Nature Portfolio, below)
Age-old fears of declining fossil fuel supply and falling demand have, once again, been upended by the engines of progress. The anti-CO2 crusade, futile and wasteful, has been set back again. Tsvetana Paraskova’s “AI Could Make Big Oil Even Bigger” (OilPrice.com: August 18, 2026) gives the supply-side story:
AI could strengthen fossil fuels, with oil and gas productivity gains potentially outweighing emissions savings from renewables.