The Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED) is an informal coalition of individuals and organizations interested in improving national, state, and local energy and environmental policies. Our premise is that technical matters like these should be addressed by using Real Science (please consult WiseEnergy.org for more information).

A key element of AWED’s efforts is public education. Towards that end, every three weeks we put together a newsletter to balance what is found in the mainstream media about energy and the environment. We appreciate MasterResource for their assistance in publishing this information.

Some of the more important articles in this issue are:

Wind Energy is an Attack on Rural America

As Wind Grows, So Does Its Opposition

Five Key Reasons to Pull the Plug on Wind Subsidies

Proposed US Carbon Tax — A Recipe for Disaster

The War on Affordable Electricity

Science Deniers in the Wind Industry

Short video: Poison Wind

How Would Oklahoma’s Anti-Wind Tax Affect The State’s Industry?…

“Newly confirmed EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and the Trump Administration are encouraging states to solve their own problems. Coal-related controversies like these offer many states and communities excellent opportunities to find novel solutions that recognize sound science, hidden agendas, often limited options, and undesirable repercussions of poorly informed policy decisions. Let’s hope they are up to the task.”

Preventing ruptures and spills is primarily a function of selecting, building, and maintaining the best possible ash landfill facilities. A much more vital and fundamental issue involves alleged toxicity risks. Anti-coal activists insist the risks are unacceptably high; sound science says otherwise. (Also see Part I yesterday)

Like the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), North Carolina sets allowable Cr-6 limits at 100 ppb for drinking water (equivalent to 100 seconds in 33 years or 4 cups in 660,000 gallons of water). …

“Companies have proposed turning the ash into cement blocks or gravel, for construction projects. Vocal activists quickly nixed that option, even though it would solve multiple problems and involve virtually no contamination risks. It’s becoming increasingly apparent that the real reason for all the vocal consternation is that these agitators simply hate coal and want to drive it out of business.”

“Some activists say Duke (and other companies) should simply dig up millions of tons of ash from various depositories. Not only would that involve hundreds of thousands of dump truck loads, millions of gallons of fuel, and huge dump trucks lumbering through towns and along back roads and highways. A far more basic question is: Take it where, exactly?”

Scary coal ash stories make you wonder: What energy will be left when activists are done?…

“With the climate activists out of political power, they must regroup and turn to open debate and persuasion. Alex Epstein is ready when you are, Misters Brune, Gore, Hansen, Holdren, Musk, Nye, and Romm.”

John Holdren, James Hansen, Joe Romm: Since you are sure that planetary warming necessitates government rationing of fossil fuels, why not debate and expose the fallacies of the climate optimists, or the ‘deniers’ as you like to call them?

Alex Epstein stands ready (and he tried with Holdren, who surely has more time now as a private citizen.)

I was reminded of this when Alex sent out this email last week about a twitter challenge to Bill ‘The Science Guy” Nye:

Why Bill Nye “The Science Guy”?

Because he is the most prominent opponent of fossil fuels that has shown any inclination to debate.