“Sorry to bother you with this…. Rob is obviously not a fan of renewables or the global warming issue. Unfortunately, he works for a company that is.”
– “Rob Bradley’s Writings.” Tom White [chairman & CEO of Enron Renewables Energy Corp. ] to Ken Lay [chairman & CEO of Enron Corp.], June 8, 1998.
The Confluence, a blog advertising itself as “Democrats Putting Principle Over Party,” recently criticized a new initiative of the Institute for Energy Research, Stop the Energy Freeze. After reciting some peak-oil arguments against IER’s case for expanding access and production of domestic oil and gas resources for new jobs and greater BTUs, the post Sunday: Spreading the mess to YouTube goes after yours truly.
…I also bothered to look up who was behind this Stop the Energy Freeze campaign.
Pierre Desrochers is a scholar’s scholar. His prolific research, writing, and teaching facilitate our own research and learning. His reference and use of some of our work is a vindication of sorts.
I recently encountered Professor Desrochers syllabus for Energy and Society, a course that he is currently teaching at the University of Toronto Mississauga. Wow! Lucky are his students; this course is a model for its subject for North American and far beyond.
Desrochers sets out three main objectives for this course:
• To cover the basic physical, technical and economic issues related to energy use;
• To cover broadly the history of energy development and use;
• To introduce students to past debates and current controversies.
He describes the course as follows:
…The development of new energy sources has had a major impact on the development of both human societies and the environment.
“The cost for wind’s little or no environmental benefit is high.”
– Robert Peltier, “Chart a New Course.” POWER, September 2011, p. 6.
POWER magazine’s editor-in-chief, Dr. Robert Peltier, is in the energy reality business. An honest broker, the professional engineer and former Stanford University professor assesses rival technologies as he sees them. And so at times, he is at odds with groups such as the American Wind Energy Association that peddle uneconomic technologies.
Peltier’s lead editorial in the September 2011 issue of POWER magazine is notwworthy for its arguments and for its import in the history of energy thought.
Future scholars will look back on our present debate and assess who had the best arguments, and who was willing to take risks to advance them–and who were the for-hire millers using half-truths and PR hits to evade the implications of consumer choice, technological reality, and sound science (and yes, climate science is hardly settled in favor of alarmism but just the opposite).…