“Obama’s green energy agenda meant advancing wind interests at any cost, and it shows. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) now estimates the total cost of the wind production tax credit in the years 2016–2020 at $23.7 billion.”
“Public opposition to projects has significantly intensified as turbines standing over 500-feet tall were repeatedly sited near homes and sensitive natural habitats. Still, the [Obama] administration remained unequivocal in its advocacy.”
Land-based wind energy experienced the fastest growth in installed capacity under the Obama presidency, achieving a three-fold increase from 25,000 megawatts (MW) in 2008 to over 75,000 megawatts today. By the end of 2016, wind represented about 5.5% of total U.S. generation (megawatt hours). [1]
The Obama White House, in concert with Senate Democrats, systematically pushed through regulation that dramatically raised wind subsidies, fast-tracked project development, funded policy reports that benefited the sector, and generally placed industry interests ahead of public interests and assets.…
Continue Reading“On climate science, our members and supporters cover a broad range of different views, from the IPCC position through agnosticism to outright scepticism…. We regard observational evidence and understanding the present as more important and more reliable than computer modelling or predicting the distant future.”
The UK-based Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) is a growing force in UK (and US) climate scholarship and related public policy. Given their relevance in the Trump era, a short history from GWPF’s website follows:
—————
The Global Warming Policy Foundation was launched by Lord Lawson and Dr Benny Peiser on 23 November 2009 in the House of Lords – in the run-up to the Copenhagen Climate Summit.
Introducing the new think tank, Lord Lawson explained its origin:
“Last year I brought out a book on global warming which (rather to my surprise) generated an enormous feedback, almost all of it positive.…
Continue Reading“Perhaps most important is the self-fulfilling prophesy: if renewables are made to look more attractive, they’ll increase in actual use. As they increase in use, according to the EERE Guidance document but not reality, they look more favorable. Rinse and repeat.”
“The net effect of the “guidance” is to artificially discriminate against one of America’s most abundant and cleanest energy forms, natural gas.”
“… we believe DOE should rescind this report and any applications of it within Federal policies and regulations.”
Part 2 identifies some of the more egregious technical flaws in EERE’s “Accounting Conventions for Non-Combustible Renewable Energy Use.” Part I yesterday discussed process deficiencies.
Despite the innocuous appearance of an RFI, what EERE ultimately did was to issue a “Technical Report” which, in fact, is more far-reaching than just “guidance” and would impact a multitude of state and federal programs.…
Continue Reading