“Great work, Institute for Economic Affairs! May the honor of being on DeSmog’s hit list raise awareness of your noble mission and attract new donors.”
DeSmog’s enemies list has grown so long and distinguished that it refutes its “hit-piece” mission. Fact is, there is a vast scientifically literate middle that exposes the flawed case for climate catastrophism and forced energy transformation.
My DeSmog’s 1,000: A Badge of Honor congratulated the army of truth-seekers, while noting that many deserving individuals and groups remain. (Our Mark Krebs and Kassie Andrews are just two–all can apply.) [1]
Here are some rebuttals that mostly reprint what DeSmog has to say about its enemies as correct–and even heroic against the termite aspirations of the governmental Climate Industrial Complex.
In alphabetical order:
Robert Bryce (April 28, 2020)
John Christy (February 5, 2019)
Derrick Hollie (February 13, 2019)
Steven Koonin (December 7, 2022)
Isaac Orr (October 21, 2019)
Vaclav Smil (April 28, 2022)
and myself: Robert L.…
Solid analysis passes the test of time. I subject myself to this test regularly. So, on the 25th anniversary of my Cato Policy Analysis The Increasing Sustainability of Conventional Energy, I ask you the reader to see how my arguments from Earth Day 1999 stand up.
The executive summary and conclusion follow.
Environmentalists support a major phase‐down of fossil fuels (with the near‐term exception of natural gas) and substitution of favored “nonpolluting” energies to conserve depletable resources and protect the environment. Yet energy megatrends contradict those concerns. Fossil‐fuel resources are becoming more abundant, not scarcer, and promise to continue expanding as technology improves, world markets liberalize, and investment capital expands.
The conversion of fossil fuels to energy is becoming increasingly efficient and environmentally sustainable in market settings around the world. Fossil fuels are poised to increase their market share if environmentalists succeed in politically constraining hydropower and nuclear power.…
The perverse effort of some “free market” and “classical liberal” intellectuals to promote centrally planned electricity markets at wholesale (thus indirectly at retail) is a very curious example in the history of energy thought. Lynne Kiesling and Michael Giberson (see yesterday) are the guilty.
In AI and Economic Calculation (Substack), Kiesling explains the basics of the central-planning debate but ducks the elephant in her room, the centrally planned wholesale power market.
I have emphasized to Lynne Don Lavoie’s critique of noncomprehensive planning that went alongside his work on comprehensive planning, challenging her to forthrightly apply his argument to her beloved mandatory open access/Independent System Operator/Regional Transmission Organization (MOA/ISO/RTO) framework. The “knowledge problem” she champions reflects badly from her own mirror, if she would only see (impartial observer needed).…