“This house believes that subsidizing renewable energy is a good way to wean the world off fossil fuels.”

– ECONOMIST magazine, Online debate, November 8–18, 2011

[Ed. Note: Six years ago, the prestigious Economist magazine held an on-line debate on the future of energy policy. Despite a loaded affirmative motion (above), an upset victory was achieved with 8,916 votes opposed and 8,346 in favor of the proposition. The third most votes of 92 such debates, 70,000 visits produced 448 comments. Jon Boone’s writeup of the debate is reproduced below.]

Last month, The Economist magazine conducted a two-week Oxford style online debate over the proposition “that subsidizing renewable energy is a good way to wean the world off fossil fuels.”

“Renewable” in this case is really politically correct renewables: basically wind power, with some solar and a bit of of biofuel/geothermal thrown in.…

“At the end of the day, it seems that smaller markets are clustered at the higher end of the EV penetration ranking. This suggests it will be much more difficult to mandate and effect massive vehicle fleet shifts in favor of EVs in much larger markets without significant government subsidies and/or mandates, as well as significant infrastructure investment in EV charging facilities.”

“Tesla had about 80% of the EV market in Hong Kong. The cessation of the subsidy in April has raised the cost of Tesla cars by between 50% and 80%. Will Hong Kong’s EV penetration rate follow the others who have ended subsidies, and fall?”

The US Congress is hammering out the details of tax reform proposals from the House and Senate. At risk is a continuation of the subsidies for clean energy investments—investments in new wind turbines and solar panels, along with the subsidies for electric vehicle (EV) purchases.…

The Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED) is an informal coalition of individuals and organizations interested in improving national, state, and local energy and environmental policies. Our premise is that technical matters like these should be addressed by using Real Science (please consult WiseEnergy.org for more information).

A key element of AWED’s efforts is public education. Towards that end, every three weeks we put together a newsletter to balance what is found in the mainstream media about energy and the environment. We appreciate MasterResource for their assistance in publishing this information.

Some of the more important articles in this issue are:

Wind and Solar Power Advance, but Carbon Refuses to Retreat

Wind & Solar are Less Efficient Decarbonizers than CC Gas Turbines

Maine DEP Issues Draft Wind Energy Rules (two VERY good parts)

Grid-Scale Storage of Renewable Energy: The Impossible Dream

Tesla battery production releases as much CO2 as 8 years of gasoline driving

Report by head of German Wildlife Foundation: Truly Green?…

“President Trump was right to pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement. When withdrawing the Clean Power Plan, Pruitt should make it clear that, independent of its other problems, the Paris Agreement violates the will of Congress and is a betrayal of the American people.”

In explaining why he is withdrawing the Clean Power Plan (CPP), Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt told Fox News’ Neil Cavuto on October 17 that, under the Paris climate change agreement, “China and India don’t have to take any steps with CO₂ [carbon dioxide] reductions until the year 2030.”

In fact, developing countries never have to make emission cuts.

What the climate treaty really says

The Paris Agreement starts:

“The Parties to this Agreement,

• Being Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC]…

• In pursuit of the objective of the [UNFCCC] Convention, and being guided by its principles….”