“Thus, as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris Accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country. This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund which is costing the United States a vast fortune.” – President Trump, below

President Joe Biden should immediately announce that the U.S. plans to withdraw from the United Nations Paris Climate Accord. Just put it in his teleprompter someone, and it will happen. But short of this, a new President should withdraw from the Treaty–again.

On June 1, 2017, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would exit from the Paris Climate Accord. Formal withdrawal began on November 4, 2019, with notification to the UN.…

“Getting wind projects built is getting a lot harder. The low-hanging fruit, the easier access places are gone.” (Sandhya Ganapathy, EDP Renewables North America, quoted below)

The New York Times article, “As Solar Power Surges, U.S. Wind Is in Trouble” (June 4, 2024), discussed the problems of wind problems, such as site depletion. But the article has nary a quotation, much less mention, from the legion of critics of the aged, doomed technology for economical, reliable grid power.

In order of appearance, the seven chosen by authors Brad Plumer and Nadja Popovich were:

Trevor Houser, Rhodium Group; Sandhya Ganapathy, EDP Renewables North America; Matthew Eisenson, Columbia University; Ben Haley, Evolved Energy Research; Michael Thomas, energy writer; John Hensley, American Clean Power Association; Ryan Jones, Evolved Energy Research.

Where were the real critics on industrial wind’s cost, aesthetics, health, and ecological issues?…

Update: Devin Hartman of R Street has blocked some of the links below. The debate is intellectual to me and PR/political to him. If he cannot define what a free market is in electricity, then he is not being honest with himself or the community.

“The core of [FERC] Order 1920 – economic planning – is sound policy.” (Devin Hartman, R Street Institute)

“You describe yourself as ‘pro-market,’ and R Street promotes itself as free market. What gives with central electricity planning and the ‘whole-of-government’ current federal approach? (R. Bradley, below)

R Street Institute advertises itself as “Free Markets. Real Solutions.” Devin Hartman, Policy Director, Energy and Environmental Policy; Resident Senior Fellow at R Street, advertises himself as “pro-market and environmental policy scholar and advocate” and

An established thought leader in energy and environmental policy with over a decade of experience, including nearly six years of experience at three regulatory bodies.

In conclusion, the article ends, “the journey towards adopting electric vehicles as a sustainable alternative to fossil fuel-powered transportation is fraught with complex challenges, particularly concerning the environmental and ethical implications of battery production.”

Thomas Edison strongly advised Henry Ford to go internal combustion engine (ICE), not electric vehicles (EVs) in the late 19th century. EVs dominated the market until the advantages of ICE prevailed more than a century ago. Yet multi-pronged government intervention at the expense of taxpayers and ICE owners is desperately trying to create an industry that consumers do not like.

The economic and environmental problems of EVs are on full display–and the mainstream press is not afraid to report on them (unlike with on-grid wind and solar). A shining example of this was a recent article in Auto Overload (May 11, 2024): “21 Unfortunate Electric Vehicle Flaws That No One Is Discussing.”…