“Increasing the affordability of both U.S. and global energy is an important economic and humanitarian objective. Policy makers heeding the time-honored healer’s maxim, ‘First, do no harm,’ should reject policies to tax and regulate away mankind’s access to affordable energy.”

It is titled Free to Prosper: Energy and Environment: A Pro-Growth Agenda for the 116th Congress. It is the work of the energy and environmental stalwarts at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the organization long led by Fred L. Smith Jr. and now directed by Kent Lassman. And as always, it is reliable scholarship to inform both sides of the political aisle.

The energy White Paper is part of a broader book, Free to Prosper. The eight areas other than Energy and Environment are Regulatory Reform and Agency Oversight; Trade; Banking and Finance; Private and Public Lands; Technology and Telecommunications; Labor and Employment; Food, Drugs, and Consumer Freedom; and Transportation  That’s a lot of the federal matrix of public policy.…

“The story of the carbon tax’s fading appeal, even among groups that like it in principle, shows the difficulties of crafting a politically palatable solution to one of the world’s most urgent problems — including greenhouse gas levels that are on track to reach a record high this year. ‘This aversion to taxes in the U.S. is high and should not be underestimated,’ said Kalee Kreider, a former Gore adviser and longtime climate activist. ‘I have a lot of scars to show for that’.”

“‘You do have this irony, and that is the policy that is overwhelmingly endorsed by economists of the right, the center, and the left as the best way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is inverse with what is politically feasible,’ said Barry Rabe, a University of Michigan professor who has studied carbon taxes.”…

“Interestingly, (otherwise greenwashing) BP led the fight against the Washington State carbon-tax initiative, donating $9.5 million. It would be far more honest and effective for Big Oil (including Exxon Mobil) to come out against any and all carbon tax schemes in the name of consumer sovereignty.”

“Overall, free-market energy policy had a good day yesterday. The fossil-fuel boom in the marketplace has a political corollary. Call it a victory for blue-collar energy. And may it be another wake-up call that climate alarmism/forced energy transformation is a siren song, a futile crusade, of all cost and no benefit.”

Overall, yesterday was a good election for consumer-first, taxpayer-neutral, market-order energy policy. According to the American Energy Alliance,  “the 2018 midterms were mostly positive for the cause of affordable, abundant energy through freer markets.”…

“The Trump folks seem to believe that anything that has Obama’s fingerprints on it, no matter how sensible, they’re going to rescind, revoke and demolish, and it makes no sense at all.”

“[The climate conundrum] is scary and I’m not sure we’re gonna be able to turn it around.”

– John Holdren, December 2017.

This is Part II of a transcribed interview with John Holdren, leader of the energy/climate Malthusian school, by Climate One. Yesterday’s post critically assessed Holdren’s views on federal energy research and development, the Paris withdrawal, and China’s energy policy. Today’s post looks at his views on most other issues in the “energy sustainability” debate.

Holdren quotations are below in red, followed by my rebuttal comments indented in black (subtitles added).

Technology Boom in Renewable Energies

“… there have been huge improvement in battery technology.…