“FERC appears to have ignored the track record of top-down state and regional climate policies, which have increased costs and negligibly impacted the environment.”

“Prior to providing a blanket endorsement for state carbon pricing, the commission needs to hear from families, small businesses, and workers who will pay substantially more for electricity.”

Last week, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) announced that President Trump had replaced then-Chairman Neil Chatterjee with Commissioner James Danly. Media reports suggested that the President’s decision to swap Republican Commissioners – both of whom he had nominated – was driven by dissatisfaction with Chatterjee’s push to accommodate state carbon dioxide (CO2) taxation.

Background

The change followed an unusual move by FERC to host a September 30 Technical Conference on Carbon Pricing in Organized Wholesale Electricity Markets.…

“After a dozen extensions and nearly three decades on the books, it’s time to end the Production Tax Credit….”

Thirteen extensions of a 1992 tax credit for a supposedly infant industry in need of start-up aid. A subsidy has risen with inflation and become more lucrative with new technological design.

Little wonder that wind power can be “predatory” by under-pricing conventional electrical generation that does not get the subsidy. As in negative, zero, or small-positive prices. Little wonder that firm, dependable power sources are leaving the market–or require a corrective subsidy to continue to compete (a second wrong).

It’s a racket. And so 41 free market groups have aligned to urge the U.S. Senate to end the racket. The full letter, organized by the American Energy Alliance, follows.…

“This year’s races are the first major electoral test for the Green New Deal, which was thrust into the national spotlight following the 2018 midterm elections. And so far, few Democrats in the most competitive races think it’s a winner.”

“… Democrats in close races are denouncing both the Green New Deal and quickly banning hydraulic fracturing when they get the opportunity, and are instead laying out their own, less aggressive plans to fight climate change.” (E&E News, below)

In a ‘Campaign 2020’ essay (October 20, 2020), Timothy Cama of E&E News indirectly documents the obvious: Americans like their energy affordable convenient, and reliable. And what is true today will always be, putting the Green Agenda of energy scarcity and inconvenience on the defensive against nature and reality.

Jerry Taylor–libertarian-turned-statist (see here and here)–warned back in March 2019 when the Green New Deal emerged:

… the strategies and tactics you are pursuing through the Green New Deal amount to political malpractice.

“The bill would significantly increase logging across America’s federal forests, convert millions of acres into industrial tree plantations, increase carbon emissions, increase wildfire risk, and harm wildlife and watersheds.” (Re: Progressive Letter of Opposition to The Trillion Trees Act, February 25, 2020)

Planning the climate means planning the economy, from energy production and usage to forestry and agriculture. With three trillion trees on earth, and each involved with the carbon cycle, there is much to do for climate planners.

A Republican-introduced climate bill—the 59-page Trillion Trees Act (H.R. 5859)—has rightly been criticized by conservatives and libertarians. But its major thrust and specifics have also attracted trenchant opposition from the Left.

The Proposal

The Trillion Trees Act, introduced by Congressman Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), and promoted by President Trump himself, is subtitled

To establish forest management, reforestation, and utilization practices which lead to the sequestration of greenhouse gases, and for other purposes

H.R.…