The Wall Street Journal is the nation’s most widely read and respected newspaper. It is the ‘newspaper of record’ (not the New York Times) in regard to business and has long been sound on economic public policy matters.
I reproduce two letters I have had published in the WSJ: one recent, one five years old. I believe that time will not significantly diminish either my past or present opinions because they are grounded in energy and climate reality, not hyperbole.
————–
“Doubts on Climate Are Reasonable” (May 5, 2010)
Kerry Emanuel’s letter of April 28 illustrates some of the major points of Richard Lindzen’s op-ed, “Climate Science in Denial” (April 22). It is bad enough that Mr. Emanuel refers to major misrepresentations, errors and unethical behavior among scientists involved in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports as “minor errors.”…
Continue ReadingA stand-alone floor vote on the wind production tax credit would have put an end to its nonsense, but Congress prefers instead to coddle this costly giveaway safely in the corpulent folds of other, must-pass extender language.
It’s December. The wind production tax credit (PTC) has been expired for nearly a year, and, no surprise, Big Wind and its friends in Congress are again pressing for another extension.
Our representatives know that the PTC is wildly unpopular. They’ve heard all the arguments, year-after-year: How that 23-year old subsidy has outlived its usefulness and is, in fact, harming taxpayers and our competitive energy markets. A stand-alone floor vote on the PTC would have put an end to its nonsense, but Congress preferred instead to coddle this costly giveaway safely in the corpulent folds of other, must-pass extender language.…
Continue Reading“In an unregulated market, Georgia Power’s profits would be linked to its performance. It is only through the PSC’s authorization that Georgia Power has posted such large profits for its shareholders at the expense of the Georgia ratepaying public.”
Defenders of consumer choice and free markets rarely pay attention to the technical criticisms of nuclear generation by the often hysterical opponents of nuclear power. Therefore, it is a pleasant surprise to see sensible reasoning used to oppose the spread of this cost-prohibitive, subsidized source of electrical generation.
In Georgia, the utility and its regulators have heard the charges shown below and ignored them, likely because the facts cited cannot be refuted.
Here, in its entirety, is pre-filed testimony by Nuclear Watch South in question-and-answer format.
DIRECT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS OF GLENN CARROLL ON BEHALF OF NUCLEAR WATCH SOUTH
Part I: INTRODUCTION
Please state your name, profession, and business location.…
Continue Reading