[Ed. note: On August 27, 1997, the Cato Institute published Policy Analysis #280, which criticized the government push to subsidize politically correct renewable energies. This review by Jon Boone, published ten years ago, is reprinted below.
“The policy implication of [a thorough examination of renewable technologies] is, stop throwing good money after bad. All renewable energy subsidies from all levels of government should cease.”
Such is the conclusion voiced today by a rising chorus of energy experts, economists, even politicians, after many years of failed renewables projects and more expensive utility bills in the growing shadow of a $16 trillion national debt ($140,000 per taxpayer). But, remarkably, fifteen years have passed since Rob Bradley crafted this statement for the Cato Institute as the bottom line of his comprehensive six-part policy alarum, Renewable Energy: Not Cheap, Not ‘Green’
An Opening Shot
Few knew about or shared Bradley’s concerns at the time.…
Continue Reading“… there is ample evidence that CO2 mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities. There is no climate emergency.”
There are a lot of very smart people in the world. And most do not work at colleges and universities and pressure groups. They are curious free agents, free to think and even be politically incorrect.
When the history of climate alarmism is written decades from now, there will be recognition about how a very able undercurrent of thought kept check on an intellectual/political/media elite declaring a dire emergency from the human influence on climate. Sites such as WUWT–“the world’s leading climate website”–will be acknowledged. So will the sober commentary of Judith Curry at Climate Etc.
And so more than a thousand intellectual, critical thinkers have signed a manifesto challenging the current orthodoxy that remains in political power.…
Continue Reading“Among the 867 findings extracted from the analysed publications [regarding offshore wind], 72% reported negative impacts, while 13% were positive.”
“The progressive expansion of OWFs [Offshore Wind Farms] to meet energy production objectives, including floating devices in deeper areas and farther offshore, faces relevant technical, economic, social, and ecological concerns worldwide.”
– “Reviewing the Ecological Impacts of Offshore Wind Farms,” npj Ocean Sustainability (2022).
Deep ecologists and rank-and-file environmentalists should shudder at the thought of industrial wind turbines talking over the coastal waters. The massive structures and electric cables to shore are bad enough. But the machinery’s low average-capacity factors and susceptibility to bad weather make for a very risky economic/ecological deal.
But economics scarcely matters to the Church of Climate. Carbon dioxide and fossil fuels are always worse.…
Continue Reading