“Affordable energy brings jobs, improved living standards, and pursuit of happiness. But across the globe, nearly three billion people – almost half the world’s population – still lack regular, reliable electricity. Nearly 1.3 billion people have no access to electricity.”
[Part II and Part III of this series follow.]
For 16 years, in a scene out of pre-industrial America, Thabo Molubi and his partner made furniture in South Africa’s outback, known locally as the “veld.” Lacking even a stream to turn a water wheel and machinery, they depended solely on hand and foot power. But then an electrical line reached the area.
The two installed lights, and power saws, and drills. Their productivity increased fourfold. They hired local workers to make, sell, and ship more tables and chairs, of better quality, at higher prices, to local and far away customers.…
Continue Reading“Science is science and facts are facts. My administration will ensure that there will be total transparency and accountability without political bias. The American people deserve this and I will make sure this is the culture of my administration.”
– Donald Trump, quoted in “What Do the Presidential Candidates Know about Science?” Scientific American, September 13, 2016.
In the “Presidential Science Debate 2016,” a science literacy project with media partner Scientific American, candidate Donald Trump gave answers that continue to elucidate his views on energy and the environment. (Answers were also provided by Hillary Clinton and Jill Stein, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson did not choose to participate in the questionnaire.)
Trump’s energy/climate policy views have been previously chronicled here:
Trump’s energy views, below, are not quite free-market or libertarian with a seeming role for nuclear power despite its non-competitiveness and a possible continuation of renewable-energy subsidies.…
Continue Reading“Profile costs exist due to the fact that wind has bad timing; when the wind is blowing strongly the market isn’t demanding high amounts of electricity and vice-versa.”
With nearly a century of federal government oversight in electricity markets, one might expect the regulatory equivalent of a well-oiled machine, in this case the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
To its credit, FERC has generally given favorable treatment to market-based solutions opposed to top down control. [1] However, the push for green energy has changed how many markets behave for the worse. Far from a well-oiled regulatory machine, we have a Rube Goldberg device that produces curious outcomes. One great example is the way utilities gladly overpay for wind power.
In “Profile Costs as a Component of Integration Costs in Wind Energy”, published in Stanford University’s Comparative Advantage (Vol.…
Continue Reading