This post excerpts energy and climate material from the Media Balance Newsletter, a free fortnightly published by physicist John Droz Jr., founder of the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions. Droz is also the author of the popular Substack Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues.
Greed Energy Economics:
*** The Ongoing Fiction of Cheap Wind and Solar
Unreliables (General):
*** Electricity generated from wind and solar cannot replace fossil fuels!
*** How to Fix Renewable Energy’s Hidden Infrastructure Problem
CFACT delivers important renewable energy message to ALEC attendees
BP Abandoning Renewables
Wind Energy — Offshore:
New York halts offshore wind power line approvals, citing Trump opposition
Wind Energy — Other:
*** FWS is violating its own eagle-kill regulations
*** The Ugly Truth About Wind: Environmental Disaster Masquerading as Clean Energy
Solar Energy:
SUNBLOCK: The Global Fight To Save Farmland From Big Solar (short video)
Nuclear Energy:
*** Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are a game-changer for the world
*** How to unleash Small Modular Reactors (Alex Epstein)
Asia’s Pivot Toward Nuclear Energy
The Future of Nuclear in Texas
Startup begins work on US fusion power plant.…
Ed. Note: With the multi-decade climate movement in crisis, the blame game is on. Today’s post follows a similar one earlier this week, Climate Messaging: The Alarmists are Alarmed.
Nathan Truitt, executive vice president of climate funding at the American Forest Foundation (a ‘carbon management’ entity), explained his “theory of what’s wrong with the climate action community and how to fix it.” He began:
First off, why do I think something is wrong? Well, we are facing an existential threat to human civilization, but the community that works to promote climate action is riven with internal disagreements, easily spending more time arguing with itself than trying to convince others.
Really? An existential crisis? Will he read the new DOE report on climate science and economics? Truitt continues in fantasy land:
… Continue ReadingThis shouldn’t be the case.
“This report supports a more nuanced and evidence-based approach for informing climate policy that explicitly acknowledges uncertainties…. [I]t will be important to make realistic assumptions about future emissions, re-evaluate climate models to address biases and uncertainties, and clearly acknowledge the limitations of extreme event attribution studies … for informed and effective decision-making.”
The Climate Working Group of the U.S. Department of Energy (John Christy, Ph.D.; Judith Curry, Ph.D.; Steven Koonin, Ph.D.; Ross McKitrick, Ph.D.; Roy Spencer, Ph.D.) published a new study that injects realism and humility into the politicized, climate-model-driven debate. This 141-page summary of CO2 science, climate science, climate economics, and related public policy reverses the John Holdren et al. bias of prior like reports.
The executive summary and conclusion from “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S.…
Continue Reading