“The green movement calls for a shutdown of coal and gas power plants. At the same time, it demands a switch to electric vehicles, electric home appliances, and green hydrogen produced by power-intensive electrolyzers. This and the AI revolution portend a breakdown of the so-called energy transition.”

Twenty-three states have adopted goals to move to 100 percent clean energy by 2050. State governments propose to retire coal- and gas-fired power plants and adopt wind and solar systems. But these goals conflict with efforts to promote electric vehicles (EVs), electric appliances, and a new application (AI) that will increase the demand for electric power.

The green energy push seeks to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions to fight human-caused global warming. Leaders tell us that without a complete transformation of electric power, transportation, and home appliances to achieve Net Zero carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, we are doomed to suffer from increasingly severe climate change impacts.…

“This isn’t the Field of Dreams: ‘If you build it, he will come.’ …  Automakers are wrestling with the reality of the EV market as politicians continue to believe in fairy tales about them.”

A recent headline on The Drive website read: “Ford Slashes 2023 Mustang Mach-E Price by up to $8,100 With 0% APR.”  More interesting was the tagline under the headline. “Now’s a really great time to nab a solid, yet slow-selling EV.” 

Even the advertising department at Ford Motor Company cannot hide the company’s problem with EVs – “slow-selling!” Customers do not want them to the degree politicians believe and have incentivized and mandated. As a report on EV battery costs stated, technology should lead policy rather than the other way around. We are hard-pressed to cite any example of a policy leading the technology. …

Ed. Note: With the 3rd anniversary of the Great Texas Blackout (February 2021) this week, it is worth revisiting an (egregious?) forecasting error of Houston Chronicle business editorialist Chris Tomlinson. The conflicted journalist (married to a multi-millionaire renewables developer) has continued to posit the false narrative that natural gas failed, not wind, solar, and central planning in the state. This post was originally published at MasterResource.

“Fossil fuel-supporting Chicken Littles have done their best to spread fear of renewable energy, warning that relying on wind, solar and storage would lead to blackouts and economic devastation.” ( – C. Tomlinson)

Three years ago this month, Houston Chronicle business editorialist Chris Tomlinson wrote that no iceberg was ahead for the Texas grid–and concerns about the wind/solar takeover was special-interest drudge. True, the warnings from the free-market community were long in coming–but they turned out true for the right reasons.…

Ed. Note: With the 3rd anniversary of the Great Texas Blackout of February 2021, it is worth remembering the second thoughts that architects of the centrally planned state grid (ISO/ERCOT) had at the time. But have the guilty feelings resulted in a fundamental rethink of government electricity? This post is reprinted from MasterResource (August 5, 2021)

“Arranging deck chairs on the Titanic if no capacity market.” (Joe Pokalsky, here)

“I have stated earlier that the ERCOT market’s reliance on scarcity pricing did not foresee an environment with high penetration of zero-marginal cost resources. Back in 2005 I generically simulated an energy-only market to demonstrate how scarcity pricing would work. I never anticipated the mass introduction of renewables at that time.” ( – Robert Borlick, below)

“(oops!) There is now a need to revise the scarcity pricing framework in the light of recent events, and to reflect ever-changing market conditions.”