The media bias in favor of industrial wind turbines is a sight to behold. Simple reporting of the facts, from costs to environmental tradeoffs, could inform the public and voters to quite possibly eliminate the government gravy train that disadvantages virtually all of us. That is, everyone except for wind developers and other constituencies of the Climate Industrial Complex.

It is uncommon to see a break in the narrative of “the energy transition.” This was recently done at E&E News’s Energywire, “‘Wake effect’ could drain 38% of offshore wind power, study says“. This piece by Heather Richards (May 5, 2024) is worth revisiting at length. Key quotations follow:

The findings from national lab and university researchers upend assumptions about how turbines interact with each other.

Wind turbines off the East Coast might significantly drain energy from each other, lowering the power output of an offshore farm by up to 38 percent, according to a new study that challenges early assumptions about the nascent industry’s electricity contribution.

The perverse effort of some “free market” and “classical liberal” intellectuals to promote centrally planned electricity markets at wholesale (thus indirectly at retail) is a very curious example in the history of energy thought. Lynne Kiesling and Michael Giberson (see yesterday) are the guilty.

In AI and Economic Calculation (Substack), Kiesling explains the basics of the central-planning debate but ducks the elephant in her room, the centrally planned wholesale power market.

I have emphasized to Lynne Don Lavoie’s critique of noncomprehensive planning that went alongside his work on comprehensive planning, challenging her to forthrightly apply his argument to her beloved mandatory open access/Independent System Operator/Regional Transmission Organization (MOA/ISO/RTO) framework. The “knowledge problem” she champions reflects badly from her own mirror, if she would only see (impartial observer needed).…

“Our utilities are working in collusion with NGOs and ENGOs that promote decarbonization over affordability and reliability. Compromised utility board members will waste no time using this change in statute to gaslight everyone around them into believing this is what is best for them.”

The short title of Alaska’s SB 257 – Electric Utility Regulation refers to a monstrous process of government-on-government:

“An Act relating to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska; relating to public utilities; relating to electric reliability organizations; relating to the Alaska Energy Authority; relating to the Railbelt Transmission Organization; and providing for an effective date.”

This bill was introduced by the Alaska Senate Resources Committee on March 1, 2024. Per the sponsor statement, “Senate Bill 257 lays the groundwork for an electric system that is more affordable, more sustainable, more equitable, a grid that can power a prosperous future for generations of Alaskans to come.”…

“The prospect of Alaska becoming Germany energy-wise is a troubling concept to imagine. At least Germany had industry and an economy to destroy…. It’s up to us to elect common-sense realists instead of ideologues.”

Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy’s plan for a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to mandate unreliable and costly sources of energy has stalled out, thanks to Jesse Bjorkman, Chair of the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee. But sinister private interests and ethically corrupt bureaucrats are out to force a Green New Deal on taxpayers and ratepayers under a new guise.

Governor Dunleavy has now teamed with the Alaskan House Energy Committee to push for an equally bad Clean Energy Standard (CES). Introduced February 20, House Bill 368 is titled “An Act relating to clean energy standards and a clean energy transferable tax credit; and providing an effective date.”…