Germany was the first major economy to make a big shift in its energy mix toward low carbon sources, but Germany is failing to meet its climate goals of reducing harmful carbon-dioxide emissions even after spending over $580 billion by 2025 to overhaul its energy systems. Germany’s emissions miss should be a “wake-up” call for governments everywhere.
Concerns over impacts from energy projects disappear where “green” energy is involved.
CFACT barnstormed CPAC, The Conservative Political Action Conference, this weekend with a series of activities that culminated in a light saber duel between “Green Energy” Darth Vader and the “Reliable Energy” Jedi!
New Zealander Bryan Leyland and Canadian Tom Harris, both of the International Climate Science Coalition, argue that the United States is setting a bad example and harming its own people -- and those in developing nations -- by continuing the EPA's war on coal, nuclear energy, and natural gas. Wind and solar have major problems with reliability, cost, and adverse health and environmental impacts that their proponents gloss over, whereas emissions from modern, highly efficient coal-fired power plants with stack gas cleanup consist almost entirely of water, CO2, and nitrogen.
West Virginia University professor James E. Smith and graduate student Alex Hatch report that the United States economy has begun to grow steadily despite falling oil consumption. Moreover, worldwide energy demand dropped significantly between 2013 and 2015 and the trend is continuing despite growing world populations and expanding energy availability. They note that , worldwide (not just in today's rich countries), the only thing limiting our future progress and comity is our imagination and ingenuity.
Paul Driessen, author of "Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death," explains the vast difference between Real Sustainability, which implies wisely using our resources and always looking to innovate, and Politicized Sustainability, a radical policy that focuses on focuses on ridding the world of fossil fuels, regardless of any social, economic, environmental, or human costs of doing so -- and regardless of whether supposed alternatives really are eco-friendly and sustainable.
CFACT Senior Policy Analyst Paul Driessen corrects some assumptions in an earlier article about the energy, land, and materials requirements for creating a totally wind-powered United States. The numbers are staggering -- even though based on best-scenario assumptions. The real world situation would likely be much worse. Simply put, the goal of a 100% wind powered nation is a pipe dream.
Californians are in danger of losing their homes after defaulting on loan payments from a government program meant to encourage individual investment in green technology.
CFACT Senior Policy Analyst Paul Driessen explains how life without fossil fuels will not be the utopian adventure that advocates for banning them claim. For starters, there would be no more wind turbines or solar arrays because fossil fuels are needed to construct, transport, and install them. Worse, the rest of the world will laugh as we turn backwards to the dark ages.
To function, power grids require demand to exactly match supply, which is an enormous problem for variable wind and solar power.
CFACT Senior Policy Advisor Paul Driessen urges EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to revise the review process for threatened and endangered species to include broad-based Extending the review beyond the litigants and the agencies to include all parties impacted by the designation to have a voice. Only then can the review incorporate all the topics addressed by experts and affected parties -- people who can help evaluate the science and policy implications for the affected species, as well as for farming, construction, jobs, families, and other species. This article focuses on recent designations of bumble bees.
April 22 is Earth Day, the March for Science, and Lenin’s birthday (which many say is appropriate, since environmentalism is now green on the outside and red, anti-free enterprise on the inside). April 29 will feature the People’s Climate March. The Climate March website says these forces of “The Resistance” intend to show President Trump they will fight his hated energy agenda every step of the way. Science March organizers say they won’t tolerate anyone who tries to “skew, ignore, misuse or interfere with science.” After eight years of government policies that killed jobs and economic growth – and skewed, ignored, [...]
According to CFACT Senior Policy Analyst Paul Driessen, a modern billionaires' club of left-wing radicals is funding fake conservative groups to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars to try to shift public support away from fossil fuels and nuclear energy to wind and solar -- all the while their companies are receiving hundreds of millions in subsidies from the federal government for their inferior energy products. Had these billionaires actually cared about the poor, they could have used that money to stimulate economies and create jobs that would put food on tables across the U.S. and around the world.
A botched green energy subsidy scheme will cost U.K. taxpayers more than $1.4 billion, or more than 45 times its initial cost projections, according to a whistleblower.
Shady cash from Vladimir Putin’s Russian energy oligarchs and other rich donors is being laundered through Bermuda-based lawyers and middlemen to “green” pressure groups, lobbyists, and spinmeisters – to promote “green energy” schemes that bring billions of dollars from government agencies (and thus from us taxpayers and consumers) to a cabal of billionaires and crony companies. At the epicenter are hedge fund millionaire Nathaniel Simons, his wife Laura Baxter-Simons, and their secretive Sea Change Foundation. “Investors” become even wealthier, as billions of dollars are transferred annually to environmentalists, scientists, politicians, bureaucrats, and crony-corporatists in Renewable Energy & Climate Crisis, Inc. The [...]