“Economic planning … is sound policy” (R Street’s Hartman Outs Himself)

Update: Devin Hartman of R Street has blocked some of the links below. The debate is intellectual to me and PR/political to him. If he cannot define what a free market is in electricity, then he is not being honest with himself or the community.

“The core of [FERC] Order 1920 – economic planning – is sound policy.” (Devin Hartman, R Street Institute)

“You describe yourself as ‘pro-market,’ and R Street promotes itself as free market. What gives with central electricity planning and the ‘whole-of-government’ current federal approach? (R. Bradley, below)

R Street Institute advertises itself as “Free Markets. Real Solutions.” Devin Hartman, Policy Director, Energy and Environmental Policy; Resident Senior Fellow at R Street, advertises himself as “pro-market and environmental policy scholar and advocate” and

An established thought leader in energy and environmental policy with over a decade of experience, including nearly six years of experience at three regulatory bodies.

Ad Hominem Backfire in the Energy/Climate Debate

“Get off your high horse, all of us are ‘pro climate’, you just have a different view on how to achieve that. Mr. Bradley interacts with anyone who challenges his statements. As far as your charge that he, “declare a position”? He does so every day. Catch up….” Mark Rohrbacher to Thomas Ortman (below)

Social media exchanges between free market and government energy/climate proponents are an excellent way to understand the arguments, politics, and motivations of all involved. Cancel culture not, may the best ideas win. Here is a LinkedIn exchange of note, where I (and others) rebut a familiar ad hominem. In this case, one Thomas Ortman just … disappeared.

The exchange occurred with a post by Gavin Mooney, self-described “energy transition optimist.”. “Batteries have taken a huge leap forward in California this spring, soaking up solar during the day and discharging it when it’s needed in the evening” he wrote.…

Buzz Smith: Snake Oil EVangelism

On social media, one Buzz Smith appeared, bragging about the new EV truck he had ordered. He was getting criticism, and I chimed in. The cowboy-looking fellow has his picture and “Getting ready for the electric pickups!” But here is his normal Facebook picture:

I responded how EVs had never been competitive with this link.

He responded: “Yeah, electric technology hasn’t changed a bit in the last 120 years, GeeZ!” To which I replied that the situation was the same now as then: relative energy density and the weight of batteries. I also shared that the average price of an EV was $55,000 versus $35,000 for a conventional vehicle with this link.

He then replied: “The difference is the public now knows what Exxon knew in 1977, that their product was going to change the climate….”…

EV Forcing: 21 Problems

Alarmism Now – and Then (Modern Malthusianism in its 6th Decade)

Global Cooling and a New Ice Age: Never Forget (humility required in science, change)

Adaptation to Heat: Then and Now

Permanent Subsidy? Industrial Wind’s PTC (14 Extensions)

PhD “Data/Climate Scientist” Can’t Provide Data on Extreme Weather Events

Politico: Populist Backlash Against Climate Policy is Here