“Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.”

– Milton Friedman

It was supposed to be a ten year window to allow commercial nuclear power to prove its economy and safety. But the Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act of 1957 (Price-Anderson Act), capping damage claims and establishing a fund “to protect the public and to encourage the development of the atomic energy industry,” is still with us today, some two-thirds of a century later.

The 1957 law’s limit of $60 million per plant (about 10x in today’s dollars) was supplemented by an up-to-$500 million indemnification guarantee per accident. [1] These provisions, vetted among the parties, was just enough to remove a major barrier to the commercialization of nuclear power for electric utilities and for Westinghouse, GE, and others to build.…

Ed. Note: This post excerpts energy and climate material from the Media Balance Newsletter, a free fortnighly published by physicist John Droz Jr., founder of the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions. The complete Newsletter for this post can be found here.

Greed Energy Economics:
*** Report 1: The High Cost of 100% Renewable Electricity by 2040
*** Report 2: The High Cost of 100 Percent Electric Home Heating
*** Report 3: The High Cost of 100 Percent Electric Vehicles
*** New study warns of soaring energy bills
How Renewables Obligation Certificates (ROCs) Rip Us Off

Unreliables (General):
*** Renewables: an expensive nightmare to nowhere
*** JUICE (Episode 1) – Texas Blackout
*** Michael Bloomberg’s $1 Billion Assault on the Electric Grid
*** Green Crime: An Electric Car, Wind and Solar Crime Wave

Wind Energy — Offshore:
*** Orsted announces withdrawal of plans to build wind turbines off MD coast
*** Comments requested on draft law to promote offshore wind
Energy developer delivers major blow to Maryland’s climate agenda by canceling offshore wind contracts
Groups Investigating Death Of Critically Endangered Whale Take Wind Industry Money
Dominion wind project gets final 2 permits

Wind Energy — Other:
*** Taking the Wind Out of Climate Change (referencing 60± studies)
*** The Death of a Wind Project (Minnesota)

Solar Energy:
Killing fields fear solar will destroy locals’ livelihoods
Europe’s solar panel manufacturers ask EU for emergency support

Nuclear Energy:
Lessons to be learned from Fukushima
The U.S.…

“Senator Jesse Bjorkman is up against an army of eco-activists and lobbyists.  We Alaskans have the responsibility to hand down the legacy of an affordable and reliable energy system. A Renewable Portfolio Standard is not that.”

The Camel’s Nose metaphor goes: “Don’t allow even small malpractices, because they will grow big eventually.” Realized or not, the major malpractice in question at this very moment is Alaskans being forced into anti-energy “decarbonization.”

The political war against carbon dioxide (CO₂), the building block of life, has wreaked havoc on humanity throughout the world. The implementation of this decarbonization plan is the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). This post updates the issues and what can be done to save Alaska’s largest population center from political plunder. 

Background

In early 2022, Governor Mike Dunleavy introduced legislation for an RPS with the press release: “House Bill 301 and Senate Bill 179 will allow Alaska to join 30 states and two territories in creating a renewable portfolio standard in the Railbelt.…

Editor’s Note: The following is the first part in a three-part series by the Energy Alliance, a project of the Texas Business Coalition, examining how the Public Utility Commission of Texas has violated consumer choice and market forces in the Texas electric market. MasterResource presents this analysis as an example of the perils of central planning and government monopoly.

On January 30, the Texas Supreme Court will hear arguments to determine the legality of a 2021 Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) rule that effectively imposed a $26 billion monopoly tax on buyers of electricity during Winter Storm Uri. The lawsuit to overturn the PUC’s decision was filed by electricity generator Luminant and others who lost money because of the PUC’s decision. [1] The Texas Third Court of Appeals found in favor of Luminant, ruling last year that the PUC’s price-setting rule was illegal.…