“So the U.S. is about one percent, with six years to go, toward meeting the Biden/Harris goal for offshore wind of 30 GW. Just another rank exaggeration, another energy fantasy, in the undoing.”

It should simply be worded “The Offshore Wind Rescue Act.” Instead, the Reinvesting in Shoreline Economies and Ecosystems Act (S. 373: 118th Congress) reads:

To modify the disposition of certain outer Continental Shelf revenues and to open Federal financial sharing to heighten opportunities for renewable energy, and for other purposes.

A BILL
To modify the disposition of certain outer Continental Shelf revenues and to open Federal financial sharing to heighten opportunities for renewable energy, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1.…

“Construction of the advanced ‘European Pressurized Reactor’ (EPR) at Flamanville began in 2007. It was projected to come into service in 2012 at a cost of $3.4 billion. The final cost, according to (Électricité de France) is about $13.7 billion.”

Last month (December 21), the 1,600-MW Flamanville nuclear power plant near Normandy (below) began delivering electricity to the French and European grid. It became the first new unit in France’s once-aggressive nuclear power program since 1996. The new reactor becomes the 57^th in the French fleet.

EDF (Électricité de France) the French state-owned electric utility, was once seen as at the forefront of nuclear power, ahead in many ways of even the U.S., which has had its own troubles moving beyond its initial nuclear boom times. No more.

Construction of the advanced “European Pressurized Reactor” or EPR at Flamanville began in 2007.…

It is painfully obvious what has happened in the Green Energy State (and DEI State). The Wall Street Journal editorial, California’s Climate Time for Choosing (January 10, 2025), subtitled “Sacramento tilts at reducing temperatures while its cities burn from failure to adapt to a variable climate,” fairly described the quandary of the (now) Smoke State.

“Democrats blame the L.A. blazes on the changing climate, which is a convenient excuse as citizens rage against the failures of state and local government.” Continuing:

The evidence doesn’t support the climate explanation since (among other reasons) California has had a dry climate and Santa Ana winds, even with hurricane-force gusts on occasion, for centuries. If the Democrats who run the state believe their own advertising, why not spend money in useful ways rather than on a green-energy transition to nowhere?

“In a rational and moral world, the catastrophe of the Los Angeles fires, fueled in part by climate change, would be one of many climate ‘Pearl Harbors’ that might help wake up the public to the urgent need for climate action.” (- Joe Romm, last week)

“Is it just a coincidence that the worst of the worst happened in California, the Climate State? The Green State? The DEI State? Joe, the mainstream is not buying your ‘Climate Ate My Homework’ reasoning.” (below)

Just add “policy” in two places in Romm’s quotation above, and substitute “inaction” for “action” at the end, and his conclusion can be fixed. But who is Joe Romm? And what is his track record? I have tangled with Angry Joe for decades (I am a ‘sociopath’ to him) and can address these questions.…