… Continue Reading“This is a very simple issue. We have a new industry operating infrastructure that some people say is making them sick. There is insufficient research of the type needed to determine the validity of these claims. … [T]he precautionary principle requires that all future wind farm development should be put on hold, pending the outcome of the study.”
“At the end of the day these people don’t care if wind farms make people sick. They just want them built due to their obsession with climate change. How else to explain the deeply shameful attacks by Greens politicians and other activists on the people who say they are getting sick. Throughout the inquiry I chaired these people were relentlessly mocked, labelled ‘flat earthers’ and alien abductees, by the Greens, their activist supporters and sections of the media.”
“The bulk of AWEA’s presentation was designed to show how many and diverse are the offshore wind projects under way. Other than Deepwater Wind and the likely dead Cape Wind projects, all the other projects or possible projects are living on government grants and/or remain little more than speculative research projects. [AWEA head Tom] Kiernan acknowledged that the problem for offshore wind is its cost, likely three to five times that of onshore wind projects.
At last month’s National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA) annual meeting, the Offshore Renewables Committee hosted a breakout-session presentation by Tom Kiernan, chief executive officer of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). With him was research analyst Celeste Wanner who presented a rundown of the status of offshore wind projects. [1]
As one would expect, Mr. Kiernan presented all the positives for wind energy – its cost has declined to where it is now competitive with coal and natural gas generated electricity, there are no emissions since there is no fuel burned to generate electricity.…
Continue Reading“I will not support or endorse a carbon tax!”
– Trump Tweet, May 13, 2016
“A Donald Trump presidency would be an environmental disaster.”
– League of Conservation Voters, May 5, 2016
The other side is screaming already. The presumptive Republican nominee for the next president of the United States is proving himself to be better than some Republicans, and even a few self-styled libertarians, in his wholesale rejection of climate alarmism and its public-policy corollary, government-forced energy transformation. (For Trump’s broader energy views, see here.)
Trump’s unequivocal policy follows another development: the rejection of a carbon tax as trade bait for abolishing climate regulation (see Robert Murphy’s post, Vox Admits There Will Be No Carbon Tax Deal).
Right and left–CO2 emission taxation deserves a speedy burial at the (misnamed) Niskanen Institute, where libertarian scholarship seems to be missing.…
Continue Reading