“The climate movement is dealing with a host of problems of its own making. The anti-CO2 crusade will have fewer and fewer defenders as reality continues to strike back.”
The Climate Industrial Complex wants to tax, regulate, and subsidize, not debate (“report, block, don’t engage,” says Michael Mann). But Climate Week NYC, hosted by Climate Group, allowed (a precious few) alternative voices to alarmism and forced energy transformation at its more than 600 advertised events and activities.
The hard core was upset. “Fossil Fuel Presence at Climate Week NYC Spotlights Dissonance in Clean Energy Transition,” complained Inside Climate News. “Blah, Blah, Blah,” wrote Liza Featherstone in TNR. She noted:
… instead of being an urgent call to action, it is now the closest thing the climate movement has to a trade show, a week of fancy lunches and private drinks and flashy presentations announcing new investment funds, new green pledges from businesses and states, and thought leaders taking the opportunity to show their climate bona fides.
AP described the event as a “money-focused fight ….” Time magazine called the confab “a Corporate Greenwashing Bonanza.” Remember what Enron CEO Jeff Skilling told his coal executive about the company’s interest in green energy and causes? “Mike, we are a green energy company, but the green stands for money.”
Anya Kamenetz, “award-winning journalist, former NPR correspondent, author of five nonfiction books, speaker, and consultant,” complained.
The The New York Times should be so embarrassed about platforming an oil executive during climate week, as well as Kevin Roberts of the The Heritage Foundation, the architects of Project 2025. This CEO told the reporter she wants to burn every drop of oil and gas left in the ground. She holds up the bullshit, unscaled and unscalable technology of direct air capture as her indulgence. This is textbook predatory delay. Why should it deserve a public airing? I applaud Climate Defiance and everyone working to revoke the social license of the fossil fuel industry.
She added in a comment:
To be clear, in the name of journalism, I have no problem with the New York Times interviewing oil company executives, preferably in the context of accountability stories about their lies, their persecution of their enemies, and greenwashing. Putting someone on a stage at a fancy event with finger foods during climate week is not journalism, though. It’s journalism-adjacent, at best.
Secondly, yes we all use plastic and gasoline and jet fuel today and we will probably be using it next year too. My idea would be to nationalize the oil companies and commit to a strong program of ratcheting down production, while pouring resources into real, promising alternatives. Many uses of plastic can be banned immediately. Commercial air flights could get a lot more expensive and schedules can be reduced. Etc.
Nationalization? Making transportation more expensive? What about consumers? Taxpayers? Energy freedom? My comment on all this was deleted by Ms. Kamenetz. But note how the climate movement is dealing with a host of problems of its own making. The anti-CO2 crusade will have fewer and fewer defenders as reality continues to strike back, the subject of tomorrow’s post.
You have to wonder how someone with such wildly extreme (actually crazy) views as those espoused by Ms. Kamenetz could ever be employed by the supposedly impartial, non-partisan, taxpayer-funded news organization NPR ?
In reality, NPR is, of course, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic party. It is an advocacy operation, a climate propaganda manufacturer and distributor. It is a national disgrace.
Remember Uri Berliner and what NPR did to him when he stood up and “spoke truth to power.”