Installing 500 million solar panels within a few years with a goal to meet all residential demand with zero-carbon energy by 2030 is an exorbitant pipe dream.
Even the Brexit debate reflected a retreat from climate mania.
The whole global oil market and certainly the domestic market is in a bad way now because of too much in the supply.
As has been the case for decades, a large contingent of environmentalists treat oil and natural gas as inherently villainous. Yet, these fuels are integral to modern prosperous societies, have lifted billions out of poverty and offer the chance for health and economic growth in the poorest countries on the earth.
If Americans care about restraining this lawless assertion of federal regulatory power, the most important bill in Congress right now is H.R. 3880, introduced late last year by Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.).
While Democrats are in hock to radical environmentalism, Steve Moore and Kathleen Hartnett White’s Fueling Freedom, perhaps the most important book of this otherwise dismal election yea?r, provides the ideas around which Republicans can unite and regroup.
A problem with much of the energy-policy discourse on the Presidential stage now is that many of the policies proposed actually present Americans with less energy availability — and at sharply higher prices.
The mainstay of base load electric generation at the lowest cost, coal provides social benefits to billions of people and offers the only affordable alternative for the more than 1 billion people who still lack access to electricity.
What will be labeled a global triumph will in reality likely be, if actually implemented, a tragedy for rich and poor countries alike and especially for the poor wherever they reside. The Paris agreement represents the first energy regression in mankind’s history.
For a dose of reality, consider master energy number-cruncher Vaclav Smil's estimate of a cost approaching $2.5 trillion to build enough new wind and solar facilities in the United States to replace the 1,100 gigawatt (GW) generating capacity of our fossil-fueled electric system.
At this point in time, the intermittent, and far more expensive, renewable energies cannot provide the countless energy services on which our long, healthy, affluent, and comfortable lives with personal freedom depend.
If the Supreme Court wants to preserve the legal force of judicial review, stay of the rule is essential to prevent the EPA's increasingly successful circumvention of the court's restraints.