This fortnightly Master Resource post will excerpt energy and climate material from the Media Balance Newsletter, published every other week by physicist John Droz Jr., founder of the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions. The complete MBN for this post can be found here.
The first story, from Minnesota, suggests what might happen if the advocates of renewables had to prove their case in a forum bound by objective evidence. (Hat tip to the Heartland Institute.)
Wind Energy:
Minnesota Court Rules Natural Gas More Environmentally-Friendly than Solar or Wind
Wind turbine makers struggle to profit from wind energy boom as costs rise
Turbine noise goes on trial
Group files lawsuit against US offshore wind project
Trump adviser involved in Offshore Vineyard Wind opposition
Nuclear Energy:
Germany Flirts With Power Crunch in Nuclear and Coal Exit
New school year, new Classroom Resources for Navigating Nuclear!…
“But in the nearly 4,000-page study, skeptics note, the term “low confidence” — jargon for findings where there is conflicting evidence — occurs almost 1,400 times. The term “likely” — which could mean a degree of certainty as low as 66 percent — appears thousands of times, including as to whether major hurricanes have increased in frequency since the 1980s.” (Jim Osborne, Houston Chronicle below)
The title of the featured story is loaded. The interview started from the premise of climate alarmism. But one Jim Walzel, 84 years young, did just fine in making the point that climate science is quite unsettled and not indicative of crisis–just like previous scares he has witnessed in his long lifetime.
James Osborne’s “These skeptics believe in climate change. Why is it so hard to convince them catastrophe is coming?”…
Continue Reading