Ed. note: This two-part series addresses repeated media errors about the role of Charles Koch in the formation of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) in 1989. Part I yesterday covered the history of the Institute for Humane Studies–Texas, the forerunner to IER. Part II below reviews the formation and early history of IER, then based in Houston, Texas.

Q1. Roger Donway: First, briefly summarize the major point of Part I yesterday on the founding of the Institute for Humane Studies–Texas (IHS–Texas), the predecessor to the Institute for Energy Research (IER).

A1. Robert Bradley Jr.: IHS–Texas was a classical liberal organization focused on education, with Greg Rehmke focused on high school debate and the both of us on summer seminars for business people. Energy was part of it to the extent that I lectured, given my specialization, on oil and gas history and related public policy.

Ed. note: This two part series addresses repeated media errors about the role of Charles Koch in the formation of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) in 1989. Part I below covers the history of the Institute for Humane Studies–Texas, the forerunner to IER. Part II tomorrow reviews the formation and early history of IER, then based in Houston, Texas.

Q1. Robert Bradley: A recent article in the Austin American Statesman (since corrected) tied Charles Koch to the founding of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) back in 1989. Since this erroneous association is oft-repeated, I want to develop the historical record with you, the first and only employee of IHS–Texas, the predecessor to IER.

First, Greg, explain how IHS–Texas came to be founded.

A1. Greg Rehmke:  A long time ago, as I remember it, the Foundation for Advanced Studies in Liberty (FASL) and Olin Foundation put up money for three years of Economics in Argumentation.

“You may be right. 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, electricity expert (below)

The once-proud, sturdy Texas electric grid is under severe stress–yet again.

Growing demand (electricity is life!), hot (almost) summer weather, and disappearing renewables (wind in the day, solar at night) have exposed a wounded grid.

The wounds are evident in prematurely retired natural gas and coal generation capacity, as well as a lack of new capacity. Why? Renewable energy severely diminished incentives for baseload generation that would have prevailed without (government-enabled) wind and solar capacity.…

“There’s a kernel of truth to Bradley’s statement — renewable energy did falter in April due to weather patterns, and renewable energy has had an indirect impact on thermal energy investments. But the Houston Republic article [Institute for Energy Research CEO: Adding ‘unreliable’ wind, solar is ‘at the expense of the reliables‘] only focuses on these elements while ignoring the fact that nearly half of the state’s natural gas fleet was offline on April 13 for maintenance. We rate this claim Mostly False.”

Is the rating above for my statement? Or for the article in which the statement was made?

Therein lies an interesting saga of today’s cancel culture and the bob-and-weave of renewable energy proponents to separate the Texas wind/solar boom from the reliability bust.

Brandon Mulder of the Austin American-Statesman was tasked with a ‘take down piece,’ so to speak, against 1) a newspaper source in which I was quoted, 2) the Institute for Energy Research, and 3) the view that renewable energy was “to blame” for Texas’s grid problems.…