“The forced ‘energy transition’ is in trouble despite huge government commitments to wind, solar, batteries, and EVs. Each of the three fossil fuels is experiencing a global boom, and, as Politico reports, politicians are backing away from energy taxes in favor of the cheaper, reliable, convenient mass energies consumers demand.”

Uncompetitive energies need government, studies, and ceaseless PR. Competitive energies need free markets where consumers vote with their dollars and taxpayers are spared. Increasingly, the price verdicts of (not so) green energies are coming in, and the public is not happy.

This development is evident in a recent Politico article, Republicans are trying to snuff out climate embers around the country,” subtitled “Conservatives are aggressively targeting efforts to reduce carbon emissions across the continent.”

Co-authors Jordan Wolman, Marie French, and Zi-Ann Lum begin:

Conservatives are aggressively targeting efforts to reduce carbon emissions across the continent.

“Enron was the ‘greens’ favorite company, remember? Enron, in the words of a Greenpeace ex, was ‘the company most responsible for sparking off the greenhouse civil war in the hydrocarbon business.'”

Greenpeace was a fan of “green” Enron in the old days. Today, a Greenpeace UK leader has been trying to debunk me, based on my prior association with Enron and Ken Lay. And it has backfired with him just like it backfired when Joe Romm of Climate Progress tried the same thing 15 years ago.

Here is our exchange. I report, you decide. My final comment follows.

Martin Porter: so, tell us what it was like working for one of the most corrupt companies in US history? Did you ever visit your old Enron boss in jail??!?

Porter: … Do you miss those Enron days Rob Bradley??!?…

“Rob, your question makes zero sense & and I don’t have the patience to deal with people like you. Please crawl back under the rock you emerged from or I’ll ban you from my substack. Seriously: your next comment that displeases me is your last, so make sure it’s a doozy.” (Andrew Dessler, below)

Climatologist Andrew Dessler, a leading figure on the alarmist side of the debate, is a piece of work–extremely smart and knowledgeable but biased and short-tempered. His personality is akin to that of Joe Romm of yesterday and Michael Mann today–arrogant, condescending, petty. Dessler is certain that he knows what is to be known about all things climate and energy. But, really, he does not know what he does not know. (Yes, climate science is highly uncertain, and climate models are a mess.)…

“In order to solve the climate problem, the first thing we need to do is ignore the economists.” – Andrew Dessler, May 14, 2022

“If you’re pushing fossil fuels at this point, you’re anti-human.” – Dessler, June 28, 2022

Andrew Dessler is the alarmist’s alarmist, joining Michael Mann and others who have declared war not only against fossil fuels but also against anyone who thinks otherwise. The two bring to mind the infamous Joe Romm, who carried the ugly torch back in his heyday.

Dessler is angry. His message of doom-and-gloom is not convincing many outside of the Church of Climate. And his emotions and disrespect work against his (hyped) activism. Consider his sarcastic paraphrase of the IPCC Summary for Policymakers:

Hey assholes. We’ve been telling you for decades that this was going to happen if we didn’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions.