“What we have is one-way bureaucratic command-and-control making poor decisions with funding derived from captive consumers and one-sided radical agendas. Accordingly, the environmental zealots demonize fossil fuels, while maintaining that only wind and solar are ‘green’ enough to ‘save the planet.’ This itself is greenwashing.”
Like Rob Bradley’s “Renewable Energy: Not Cheap, Not ‘Green’” (see Part I), my colleague Tom Tanton wrote a major piece about the over-regulation of the rare-earth extraction industry in the U.S.: “Dig it! If you want more information on the importance of rare earths within the U.S economy, this would be a good place to start.
The long-term feasibility of this transition to renewables simply assumes sufficient raw materials exist for it at all. Professor Michaux of the Geological Survey of Finland (GTK) has studied these issues, probably more extensively than anyone else and thinks not. Professor…
Continue Reading“Climate deniers are often simply awful people.”
Michael Mann, September 15, 2019
An army of climate denier bots & trolls have been released to deflect attention from the unprecedented climate change-fueled extreme weather we’re witnessing. If you encounter, report first. Then block. Don’t engage!
Michael Mann, July 19, 2022
Not people. Mostly bots. July 19
In response to a Sierra Club study, “Climate Deniers Are More Likely to Be Racist. Why?” Michael Mann answered: “Because, in general, they’re pretty awful people. Racism, misogyny, climate denial often come bundled: September 3, 2019.
Jonathan Watts, “Climatologist Michael E Mann: ‘Good people fall victim to doomism. I do too sometimes‘” The Guardian, February 27, 2021.
The Victim
“For more than two decades I was in the crosshairs of climate change deniers, fossil fuel industry groups and those advocating for them – conservative politicians and media outlets.…
Continue Reading“Commercial nuclear power is and always has been a government-subsidized, government-dependent industry. That nuclear proponents today will not trade government for the private insurance market is telling that the technology is inherently flawed in terms of cost versus safety.”
Nuclear proponents have a hard time arguing their position. They say that nuclear is a failsafe technology but refuse to consider an end to the Price Anderson Act of 1957 (U.S.) and other national laws that shield the industry from liability in case of an accident. Proponents also get vague on the cost of new nuclear capacity today, a very strange thing given 70 years since the “Atoms for Peace” speech of President Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Here is an exchange I unearthed from a while back that should be part of the public record.…
Continue Reading