ExxonMobil Strikes Back: Judge Greenlights Defamation Suit Against California AG Over Recycling Claims

California, under Attorney General Rob Bonta (and previously in broader actions with Governor Gavin Newsom), has pursued aggressive legal actions against “Big Oil” companies like ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, and ConocoPhillips.

California, under Attorney General Rob Bonta (and previously in broader actions with Governor Gavin Newsom), has pursued aggressive legal actions against “Big Oil” companies like ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, and ConocoPhillips.

  • A major 2023 lawsuit accusing these companies of decades of deception about the climate impacts of fossil fuels, seeking to hold them accountable for damages from events like wildfires, droughts, and sea-level rise.
  • A more recent September 2024 lawsuit by Bonta against ExxonMobil specifically, alleging deceptive marketing around “advanced recycling” for plastics. Bonta claimed Exxon misled consumers by promoting recyclability when less than 5% of plastics are actually recycled into new products, with much ending up in landfills, the environment, or incinerated.

These suits are part of a broader wave of climate-related litigation across states and cities, with California leading as the largest economy to take such actions.

ExxonMobil filed a defamation lawsuit in Texas federal court against Bonta (in his individual capacity) and some environmental groups. They argue that Bonta’s statementsโ€”such as in a campaign email claiming “Exxon Mobil knew, and Exxon Mobil lied”โ€”were false and damaged their business, including contracts related to advanced recycling efforts.

In a recent ruling (around February 2026), U.S. District Judge Michael J. Truncale in Texas allowed the defamation case against Bonta to proceed, denying claims of official immunity for certain statements. (Note: A separate part of Exxon’s suit against environmental groups was dismissed, but the case against Bonta continues.)

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Targeted by lawsuits and demonized, Big Oil signals itโ€™s had enough with fight against California AG

From Just The News

By Kevin Killough

California Attorney General Rob Bonta hoped to earn his anti-fossil fuel credentials when he filed a lawsuit against ExxonMobil in 2024, alleging the company was engaging in deceptive practices related to its โ€œadvanced recyclingโ€ program. 

He probably didnโ€™t expect that the company would fight back the way it has. 

For years, oil companies have been the target of vitriol and lawfare, especially in California. When Californiaโ€™s gasoline prices spiked in the summer of 2022, Gov. Gavin Newsom claimed refineries were โ€œprice gouging,โ€ even though his own energy officials disputed the claim. Newsom signed legislation requiring the refineries to be transparent so that the alleged price gouging could be revealed, but in fact no evidence of gouging was ever found. 

In most cases, oil companies stay defensive when regulations and litigation target them with accusations of wrongdoing, but Exxon didnโ€™t take Bontaโ€™s lawsuit lying down. Instead, the company filed a defamation suit against Bonta and some environmental groups. 

Going on the offensive

Bonta had sought to get the lawsuit dismissed, arguing that the statements Exxon claims were defamatory were made in the course of his duties as attorney general, and that should grant him immunity from lawsuits. A federal judge earlier this month disagreed and ruled that Exxon could proceed with its case against Bonta. 

In 2024, Energy Transfer Partners successfully sued Greenpeace, and a North Dakota jury found the group at fault for harming the pipeline company’s reputation by publishing false statements during the 2016 protests over the North Dakota Access pipeline. North Dakota Judge James Gion set a settlement amount at $345 million, which was reduced from the jury’s original amount, and the Associated Press reports that he intends to make Greenpeace pay up. The organization warns that if it’s forced to pay, it will have to cease operations. It intends to appeal the decision. 

Whether or not Exxon was inspired by Energy Transfer Partners’ success, the lawsuit against Bonta represents a rare case of Big Oil going on the offensive. โ€œI think the oil companies are sick and tired of getting beat around all the time,โ€ said John Shu, a legal scholar who served in both Bush administrations. 

Connections to climate advocacy groups

In his lawsuit against Exxon, Bonta alleges that the oil giant misled the public on the efficacy of its ability to solve the โ€œplastic waste and pollution crisisโ€ with an advanced recycling process. Advanced recycling aims to turn plastic polymers back into their original molecules so they can be processed and used again as plastics or other products, such as jet fuel. 

As is the case with lawsuits seeking damages related to climate change, Bontaโ€™s lawsuit is connected to well-funded anti-fossil fuel activist groups. In 2024, the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI), which is funded by the Rockefeller Family Fund, published a report alleging that โ€œBig Oilโ€ deceived the public for decades and caused what it calls the โ€œplastic waste crisis.โ€ Bontaโ€™s lawsuit cites the activistsโ€™ report and uses similar language.

Bloomberg Net Zero Obituary: โ€œEven at the peak of its popularity, net zero looked far-fetchedโ€

Bloomberg was until recently Net Zeroโ€™s chief champion. But now it was always obvious that Net Zero ambitions were not grounded in reality.

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

Bloomberg was until recently Net Zeroโ€™s chief champion. But now it was always obvious that Net Zero ambitions were not grounded in reality.

Net Zero Is Dead. Long Live Renewable Energy

February 25, 2026 at 2:00 PM GMT+10
By Javier Blas

Javier Blas is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering energy and commodities. He is coauthor of โ€œThe World for Sale: Money, Power and the Traders Who Barter the Earthโ€™s Resources.โ€

โ€ฆ

In diplomacy, words matter. When the worldโ€™s richest nations got together in 2022 for their biennial energy meeting, their communique mentioned โ€œnet zeroโ€ 13 times; in 2024, the references went up to 15. After last weekโ€™s gathering? Just one occurrence โ€” and that was to underline the lack of universal support. The word-count collapse is illustrative of the direction of global energy policy: Net zero is, effectively, dead.

โ€ฆ

Even at the peak of its popularity, net zero looked far-fetched. One had to believe, as a matter of faith, that consumption of oil, natural gas and coal would drop following stylized cliff-like curves. With current energy-related annual CO2 emissions running above 35,000 million metric tons, reducing them to something that would equal net zero was an impossible task. On current trends, emissions are likely to remain close to current levels for the next 25 years. Even if countries adopt most of the energy policies theyโ€™ve announced โ€” a big if โ€” theyโ€™ll remain above 25,000 million tons a year until the middle of the century. 

โ€ฆ

A few nations insisted on keeping the net-zero idea alive โ€” notably the UK and Spain โ€ฆ

โ€ฆ

But donโ€™t mistake the death of net zero for the end of renewable energy. The latter is very much alive. For the foreseeable future, electricity will be the fastest growing form of energy โ€” and renewables will cover a significant chunk of the increase. The world will remain addicted to fossil fuels, but more of its additional power needs will be covered by solar, wind, hydro, geothermal and other green sources.

โ€ฆRead more: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-02-25/climate-change-net-zero-is-dead-long-live-renewable-energy

What a change a few years can make. Back in 2024, a Bloomberg columnist pronouncing the obituary of Net Zero would have been unthinkable.

So what happened to produce such a radical about face? One possibility, AI suddenly became really important in the investment landscape โ€“ and Bloomberg is a big player in the AI investment space.

And AI is incompatible with Net Zero.

Are solar panels and possibly even wind turbines here to stay? Absolutely. There are plenty of niche uses of solar energy where it makes sense, including in some cases powering remote sites, where the cost of importing energy exceeds the cost of a solar / battery system.

But until there is a major breakthrough, such as consumer acceptance of micro nuclear fission, or an energy breakthrough such as small portal nuclear fusion, or until we completely run out of recoverable fossil fuel, there will be no Net Zero.

We Didnโ€™t Just Get Expensive Electricity. We Built a System That Makes It Inevitable.

Most Americans donโ€™t think about electricity until the monthly bill arrives.

It comes once a month, often quietly, but lately itโ€™s landed like a thud. Heating your home now costs hundreds more a month than it did just a few years ago. You use the same appliances. You flip the same switches. Nothing in your daily life has changed โ€“ except the price.

Watts Up With That?

By William Murray

Most Americans donโ€™t think about electricity until the monthly bill arrives.

It comes once a month, often quietly, but lately itโ€™s landed like a thud. Heating your home now costs hundreds more a month than it did just a few years ago. You use the same appliances. You flip the same switches. Nothing in your daily life has changed โ€“ except the price.

Why would that be?

When one looks inside the electricity system, the experience is less like analyzing an immense machine than being fed into one, resembling the immortal scene in โ€œModern Timesโ€ where Charlie Chaplinโ€™s factory worker is swallowed by the equipment heโ€™s working on.

The American electricity market is not guided by an โ€œinvisible handโ€ of supply and demand, but an accumulation of misaligned rules laid down over decades. Layer upon layer of regulation, subsidy, mandate, and accounting rules to a point where the system became fixed in an upward, inflationary tilt, impervious to efforts to change.

There are at least a half-dozen federal environmental regulations that have more to do with rising electricity prices than tariffs or the data-center buildout, and a good example to start with is called Construction Work in Progress (CWIP).

As a new issue brief makes clear, it helped change who pays for Americaโ€™s infrastructure.

Chief among these contrivances was the quiet transfer of financial risk from investors to the public. Before the 1970s, utilities had to finish building a power plant before they could charge customers for it. If a company wanted to build something, it had to take the risk. Investors would put up the money. If the project succeeded, they earned a return. If it failed, they paid the price.

But during the inflation crisis of the 1970s, power plants โ€” especially nuclear plants โ€”became vastly more expensive to build. Utilities argued they couldnโ€™t afford to wait years to recover their costs. During a moment of civic weakness, state regulators started allowing utilities to charge customers while the plants were still under construction.

CWIP permanently shifted investment risk away from investors and onto ordinary people. Today, you can open your electric bill and pay for projects that donโ€™t exist yet and may be cancelled in the future.

No banker in his right mind would accept such terms voluntarily. Yet millions of Americans are compelled to do so every month if theyโ€™re served by an investor-owned electric company.

This system could have operated below the waterline indefinitely, had it not collided with the renewable energy revolution of the last 15 years. Wind and solar generation increased fourfold between 2011 and 2020, reaching record output by 2024.

These sources have advantages. But they also have a basic limitation: they donโ€™t produce power all the time.

So utilities must build backup systems. Extra transmission lines. Extra capacity.

None of this redundancy is free. Every mile of wire, every idle backup turbine, every overpriced and underutilized battery storage unit will eventually, without fail, appear on a customerโ€™s bill.

And thanks to rules like CWIP, they can charge you while you wait.

Many of these policies came from a sincere place. Beginning in the 1970s and accelerating in the decades that followed, a network of public-interest law firms and environmental advocacy groups gained enormous influence over how infrastructure gets approved.

Their goal was to protect the public.

But over time, something else happened.

They built a system where stopping projects became easier than building them. Where delay became a strategy. Where lawsuits became routine.

Each delay added to costs. Each cost increase justifies charging customers sooner. Each increase made the next one easier to accept.

Even writers like the New York Timesโ€™ Ezra Klein โ€” hardly a critic of environmental goals โ€” have begun to acknowledge the problem. He has argued that well-intentioned rules have made it far too hard to build the infrastructure society needs.

People think this is an important admission by Klein and his ilk, but it is not.

These โ€˜well-intentioned rulesโ€™ were simply created by an earlier generation of Ezra Klein โ€œAbundanceโ€ types who set up the public interest lawfare firms and NGO indulgences system in the first place.

Kleinโ€™s autopsy revealed only that the Left promotes things that make themselves feel better while making the world worse, yet their slobbering idealism protects them from feeling the shame of failed responsibility. There is a Kafkaesque process at work, filled with Orwellian word games that stymie everything. Itโ€™s a dirty, soiled, canโ€™t-do spirit masquerading as something more noble and dignified.

Because the issue isnโ€™t whether the goals were noble. Noble intentions donโ€™t matter.

Itโ€™s that the results are what matter, and the results are failures.

There is, however, a remedy โ€” not a technological breakthrough, but something far better (albeit rarer) in Washington: legislative clarity.

One promising approach is legislation such as Representative Troy Baldersonโ€™s โ€œAffordable, Reliable, Clean Energy Security Act.โ€ The bill seeks to establish clearer definitions of key terms like โ€œaffordable,โ€ โ€œreliable,โ€ and โ€œclean,โ€ ensuring that investment risks are limited to cost-effective infrastructure projects only.

By recognizing the role of dispatchable resources such as natural gas and nuclear power, the legislation would also help ensure the grid maintains the reliability necessary to support modern life, all while meeting the standards of the Clean Air Act.

These reforms would not eliminate electricity price increases overnight. But they would begin to address one of the root causes: a system in which incentives increasingly misalign diverge from the interests of customers.

Electricity is not a luxury. It is a necessity that underpins economic growth, public safety, and household stability. Ensuring its affordability requires more than promises. It requires policies that encourage efficient investment, allocate risk appropriately, and maintain reliability.

Most of all, it comes from remembering a basic principle that once guided American growth:

You should pay for things when they work.

Not before.

Until that principle returns, electricity bills will continue their quiet climb upward, and Americans will continue to wonder why modern life feels harder to afford than it used to.

William Murray is a former speechwriter for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the past editor of RealClearEnergy from 2015-2017, and currently the chief speechwriter for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.

Sunnovaโ€™s Continuing Mess: Buyer Beware (Part II)

โ€œThe Sunnova case has become a cautionary tale in the solar industry, underscoring the importance of keeping all documentation โ€ฆ researching a companyโ€™s financial health before signing contracts. understanding all terms, especially service and maintenance obligations โ€ฆ avoiding tying financing solely to the installer.โ€

From The Master Resource

By Robert Bradley Jr.

โ€œThe Sunnova case has become a cautionary tale in the solar industry, underscoring the importance of keeping all documentation โ€ฆ researching a companyโ€™s financial health before signing contracts. understanding all terms, especially service and maintenance obligations โ€ฆ avoiding tying financing solely to the installer.โ€ (below)

MasterResource has chronicled the rise and fall of Enron-ex John Bergerโ€™s rooftop solar company, Sunnova Energy International Inc. [1] The whole rooftop solar proposition was dicey, even with taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies. โ€œSubsidies like the DOEโ€™s guarantees can incentivize firms to prioritize short-term gains over long-term compliance,โ€ observed Issac Lane. โ€œSunnovaโ€™s aggressive sales tactics, which targeted vulnerable consumers, were enabled by its belief that federal backing insulated it from accountability.โ€

What is the latest, where Berger exited with millions of dollars and almost everyone else footed his bill (including taxpayers)? An AI search for โ€œCriticism of Sunnova Energyโ€ revealed:

Sunnova Energy, once one of the largest U.S. residential solar providers, has faced widespread criticism from customers, watchdogs, and industry observers following its 2025 bankruptcy filing.

Customer complaints and service issues
Homeowners have reported problems such as unfinished or delayed installations, canceled service and maintenance agreements, and ongoing loan obligations for systems that never worked orphananniesolar.com. Some customers say they were left paying for solar systems that were never completed, while others faced long delays in repairs or replacements. A Reddit homeowner even warned others to โ€œstay awayโ€ after being left with a defunct system for months The Cool Down.

Reputation damage from sales practices
Critics have pointed to allegations of misleading sales tactics and poor-quality installations by Sunnovaโ€™s third-party dealer network blog.prevostlawfirm.com. The companyโ€™s reliance on external sales teams, while helping it scale quickly, also made it vulnerable to unethical practices and inconsistent service quality. These issues have eroded consumer trust and contributed to reputational harm.

Financial and operational failures
Sunnovaโ€™s collapse was driven by massive debt (around $8.9โ€“10.67 billion), high interest rates, regulatory uncertainty, and declining residential solar demand EnergySage+1. The bankruptcy came after a $3 billion Department of Energy loan guarantee was terminated, and the company had already laid off over half its workforce EnergySage. Critics argue that aggressive growth and heavy debt loads without sufficient safeguards left the company exposed to market shocks.

Industry and legal scrutiny
Legal experts and consumer protection advocates have highlighted that Sunnovaโ€™s bankruptcy raises questions about contract enforcement, warranty rights, and consumer protection in the solar sector orphananniesolar.com+1. Some warn that customers may face long delays in resolving disputes or receiving service, and that future claims could be complicated by the bankruptcy process.

Key takeaways for consumers
The Sunnova case has become a cautionary tale in the solar industry, underscoring the importance of:

  • Researching a companyโ€™s financial health before signing contracts.
  • Understanding all terms, especially service and maintenance obligations.
  • Avoiding tying financing solely to the installer.
  • Keeping all documentation in case legal action is needed orphananniesolar.com.

In short, Sunnovaโ€™s criticism centers on poor customer service, questionable sales practices, and financial mismanagement, which together contributed to its downfall and left many homeowners in a difficult position.

It is very peculiar for rooftop solar advocates to raise their heads today. But so-called distributed generation is still in the plannersโ€™ plans. Elisa Wood, energy writer and editor, wrote:

A 75-year-old science group offers a new direction following the Trump administrationโ€™s climate rollback. Hereโ€™s why the plan features rooftop solar, batteries, microgrids and other forms of distributed energy.

I challenged her with the Sunnova example, and she responded:

Logical fallacy here. One companyโ€™s bankruptcy doesnโ€™t damn a whole technology.

And I answered with a long, long list of U.S. solar bankruptcies that exceeded the word limit, so it is in two parts (here and here).

Final Comment

Journalists stuck in the climate alarmist, forced energy transformation mode are in a pickle. One hopes they can find another employment short of changing their views internally, a very difficult process. But Ms. Wood is at the beginning of her career. Maybe watching this video of Richard Feynman, โ€œThe Easiest Person to Fool Is Yourselfโ€œ, will help the process. And as Milton and Rose Friedman noted (Free to Choose (1979), p. xii.):

The only person who can truly persuade you is yourself. You must turn the issues over in your mind at leisure, consider the many arguments, let them simmer, and after a long time turn your preferences into convictions.

[1] Previous posts have been:

The four rooftop-solar posts this week are:

No, Earth.com, Climate Change Isnโ€™t Causing Dangerous Fungus Outbreaks

In the Earth.com article โ€œDeadly fungus that will โ€˜eat you from the inside outโ€™ is quickly spreading around the world,โ€ Eric Ralls presents a dramatic warning that Aspergillus fungi are expanding their range due to climate change and threatening millions of people. This is false. The storyโ€™s most alarming claims are not based on observed fungal spread, but on model projections under a carbon dioxide high-emissions scenario. The articleโ€™s tone suggests ongoing, measurable expansion, but the underlying study only models hypothetical future distributions.

From The Climate Realism

By Anthony Watts

In the Earth.com article โ€œDeadly fungus that will โ€˜eat you from the inside outโ€™ is quickly spreading around the world,โ€ Eric Ralls presents a dramatic warning that Aspergillus fungi are expanding their range due to climate change and threatening millions of people. This is false. The storyโ€™s most alarming claims are not based on observed fungal spread, but on model projections under a carbon dioxide high-emissions scenario. The articleโ€™s tone suggests ongoing, measurable expansion, but the underlying study only models hypothetical future distributions.

The headline claims a โ€œDeadly fungus that will โ€˜eat you from the inside outโ€™ is quickly spreading around the world.โ€ That false and inflammatory phrase appears in the title โ€” not in the scientific content itself. Nowhere in the body of the article does the phrase โ€œeat you from the inside outโ€ appear in a clinical or epidemiological context. This suggests it is clickbait framing layered onto a modeling paper.

The central numbers driving the alarm come from a carbon dioxide high-emissions scenario, specifically a derivative of RCP 8.5, an assemblage of computer model outputs that most scientists have abandoned as being highly unrealistic or unlikely. The National Center for Atmospheric Research says that RCP 8.5 is โ€œnot considered a likely scenario,โ€ and Climate Realism has repeatedly debunked its continued use, here, here, and here, for example, pointing out that it is more than just unlikely but rather that based on the carbon stored on land and in oceans, it is probably impossible.

Still, the authors of the study used the problematic high-emissions scenario to project that the range of A. flavus in Europe could expand by about 16 percent. Under this projection, an additional one million people across Europe could possibly be placed at risk of fungal infection. That is not an observation of current spread. It is a conditional projection based on modeled climate inputs.

There is no presentation of observational data showing that Aspergillus infections have increased over the past 40-plus years of documented global warming. No infection-rate time series is shown. No continental trend data are cited. No public health surveillance datasets are presented demonstrating a statistically significant upward trajectory correlated with temperature.

This distinction matters.

Species distribution modeling, often using tools such as MaxENT, estimates habitat suitability under assumed climate inputs. It does not demonstrate present-day expansion. It produces scenario-based suitability maps. Modeling hypothetical future habitat changes is not the same as documenting real-world spread.

If warming temperatures over the past 40 years were already driving dangerous fungal expansion, we would expect to see documented increases in infection incidence correlated with temperature over decades. Instead, risk factors for aspergillosis are overwhelmingly clinical and environmental. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) explains on its Aspergillosis Overview page that infection primarily affects individuals with weakened immune systems and is commonly associated with hospital construction dust exposure, organ transplantation, and severe immunosuppression. Climate change is not identified as a primary driver of current case incidence.

The Earth.com article also highlights antifungal resistance. Yet azole resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus has been strongly linked to agricultural fungicide use, as summarized by the CDC in its page on Azole-Resistant Aspergillosis. That is a pharmaceutical and agricultural stewardship issue, not evidence of climate-driven geographic spread.

The article references Candida auris as an example of climate-linked emergence. The hypothesis suggesting a warming connection was published in mBio by the American Society for Microbiology in โ€œOn the Emergence of Candida auris.โ€ That paper proposed thermal adaptation as a possibility. But, most importantly, it did not establish causation. Hypothesis is not proof.

Even the Earth.com piece concedes that fungi remain โ€œrelatively under-researched compared to viruses and parasites.โ€ That admission undercuts the certainty implied by the headline. If surveillance gaps exist, projections should be framed cautiously โ€” not amplified into declarations of rapid global spread.

There is no quantified demonstration in the article that infection incidence per capita has increased in Europe in step with observed warming of roughly 1ยฐC since the late-twentieth century. If warming over the past four decades were already driving continental fungal spread, robust surveillance data would demonstrate it. It doesnโ€™t. Invasive aspergillosis case numbers are influenced by chemotherapy prevalence, organ transplantation rates, improved diagnostics, hospital practices, and antifungal resistance โ€” all confounding variables absent from the Earth.com narrative.

None of this minimizes the seriousness of fungal infections in vulnerable populations. Aspergillus can be life-threatening for immunocompromised patients. Antifungal resistance is a legitimate concern. The Earth.com headline declares a deadly fungus is โ€œquickly spreading around the world.โ€ By contrast, the research it references says nothing about any ongoing expansion of the disease. Earth.comโ€™s conflating modeled habitat suitability under extreme emissions scenarios with present-day spread has resulted in an inaccurate, unjustifiably alarming story.

Presenting overhyped projections about future infections as if it represented an ongoing global fungal expansion is lying, not reporting and certainly not trustworthy journalism. Earth.com should be ashamed of framing this non-issue as a clickbait story designed to scare people.

Three Times the Cost, Causes Earthquakesโ€“Roll on the Green Powerย Revolution!

Economically attractive, he says! What a joke. It is only viable because of the ยฃ3 million a year CfD subsidy plus that ยฃ1.8 million bung. And all for a miniscule contribution to UK electricity supply. The 3 MW quoted might generate 25,000 MWh a year, compared to total UK demand of 300,000,000 MWh.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

h/t Ian Magness

More naive reporting from Matt Oliver:

The promise of underground riches is nothing new in Cornwall. But on Thursday, the region will plumb new depths in the quest to harness Britainโ€™s natural resources.

For the first time, the United Downs deep geothermal power plant will start generating 24/7 electricity at a site near Redruth.

With an output of around three megawatts, enough to power roughly 10,000 homes, the plant cannot exactly be described as game-changing.

Yet experts believe it will help pave the way for similar projects across Britain aimed at tapping into the vast thermal resources below our feet.

The United Downs project, developed by Geothermal Engineering Ltd (GEL), will draw water at temperatures of around 190C from underground reservoirs that sit approximately five kilometres beneath the surface.

It takes advantage of a natural fault line using two wells, one that draws water up and one that pumps it back into the granite rock formations. Water that is brought above ground is run through a heat exchanger which uses another liquid with a lower boiling point to make steam and drive a turbine.

The result is power that is nearly always on โ€“ whatever the weather โ€“ save for short maintenance periods, says Ryan Law, the chief executive of GEL.

โ€œOnce you have done your drilling and the rest of it, the plant then runs 24/7 for about 96pc of the year,โ€ he says.

In renewable energy, these kinds of numbers are virtually unheard of. Utility-scale solar tends to only push 25pc of the year while wind farms tend to land somewhere between 20pc and 40pc.

Full story here.

Iโ€™m not sure who these โ€œexpertsโ€ are. They would not be paid by GEL, by some chance?

The article also contains serious errors, not least the claim that solar power works at 25% efficiency. The true number is half that.

Bot the biggest error is this:

Matt Oliver obviously does not realise that ยฃ119/MWh is at 2012 prices! The current strike price is ยฃ170.50/MWh, three times the price of gas power:

Economically attractive, he says! What a joke. It is only viable because of the ยฃ3 million a year CfD subsidy plus that ยฃ1.8 million bung. And all for a miniscule contribution to UK electricity supply. The 3 MW quoted might generate 25,000 MWh a year, compared to total UK demand of 300,000,000 MWh.

But it gets much worse! The process has been causing earth tremors, as Oliver reports:

Like fracking, however, this kind of drilling can cause unnerving mini-earthquakes.

In Britain, ministers effectively outlawed fracking for oil and gas when they limited operations that create tremors of more than a 0.5 magnitude.

There are no such rules for geothermal, even though it has caused mini-tremors that were three times more powerful than this, with the industry instead regulated based on its surface vibrations. Law argues that this is more sensible because it measures the actual effects above ground.

So itโ€™s OK to have earthquakes three times as powerful as from fracking, because geothermal is โ€œgoodโ€ and fracking โ€œbadโ€.

FOOTNOTE

I have left comments for Matt Oliver, pointing out his CfD strike price error, but so far, the article still has not been corrected.

Former Radical Green New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern is Relocating to Australia

This isnโ€™t fair โ€“ take her back New Zealand, sheโ€™s your problem.
Jacinda inflicted some impressive damage on the New Zealand economy, during her term of office

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

This isnโ€™t fair โ€“ take her back New Zealand, sheโ€™s your problem.

Dame Jacinda Ardern is moving to Australia.

โ€ฆ

In a statement, a spokesman for Dame Jacinda said her family had been travelling โ€œfor a few years nowโ€.

โ€œFor the moment, theyโ€™re basing themselves out of Australia โ€” they have work there, and it brings the added bonus of more time back home in New Zealand,โ€ the spokesperson said.

Dame Jacinda, Mr Gayford and their seven-year-old daughter, Neve Gayford, had been living in the United States where Dame Jacinda was working for Harvard University.

โ€ฆ

She also released a memoir, A Different Kind of Power, last year and a childrenโ€™s book, Mumโ€™s Busy Work.Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02-26/former-new-zealand-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-moves-australia/106392862

Jacinda inflicted some impressive damage on the New Zealand economy, during her term of office;

Jacinda Ardern leaves mixed legacy as she resigns as New Zealand prime minister

By Praveen Menon

January 19, 20238:04 PM GMT+10Updated January 19, 2023

Jan 19 (Reuters) โ€“ Jacinda Ardern has put tiny New Zealand on the map in her five years as prime minister, becoming a global icon for left-leaning politics and women in leadership, even as she struggled at home with the economy and COVID-19 restrictions.

โ€ฆ

Launching a global campaign to end online hate, she has often herself been a target of right-wing extremists online.

โ€ฆ

While Ardernโ€™s popularity rose internationally, at home she has faced growing political headwinds, struggling to prove that her leadership extended beyond crisis management and kindness.

Her ratings have dropped in recent months on a worsening housing crisis, rising living costs and mortgage rates, and growing concerns about crime. She remains, however, more popular that her rivals.

Despite her promises of transformational leadership, Ardernโ€™s affordable housing programmes have been set back by blunders. โ€ฆ

โ€ฆRead more: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/new-zealands-ardern-leaves-legacy-kindness-disappointments-2023-01-19/

For me the low point of the Jacinda age was her attempt to link the horrific Christchurch gun massacre to a failure to censor climate skeptics.

โ€ฆ

The lessons of COVID are in many ways the same as the lessons of climate change.

When crisis is upon us, we cannot and will not solve these issues on our own.

The next pandemic will not be prevented by one countryโ€™s efforts but by all of ours. Climate action will only ever be as successful as the least committed country, as they pull down the ambition of the collective.

I am not suggesting though that we rely on the goodwill of others to make progress. 

We need a dual strategy. One where we push for collective effort but we also use our multilateral tools to make progress.

Thatโ€™s why on pandemic preparedness we support efforts to develop a new global health legal instrument, strengthened international health regulations and a strong and empowered World Health Organization.

โ€ฆ

On March 15, 2019, New Zealand experienced a horrific terrorist attack on its Muslim community. 

More than 50 people were killed as they prayed. The attack was live-streamed on a popular social media platform in an effort to gain notoriety, and to spread hate.

At that time, the ability to thwart those goals was limited. And the chances of Government alone being able to resolve this gap was equally challenging. 

Thatโ€™s why, alongside President Emmanuel Macron, we created the Christchurch Call to Action.

The Call community has worked together to address terrorism and violent extremist content online. As this important work progresses, we have demonstrated the impact we can have by working together collaboratively.

โ€ฆ

This week we launched an initiative alongside companies and non-profits to help improve research and understanding of how a personโ€™s online experiences are curated by automated processes. This will also be important in understanding more about mis and disinformation online. A challenge that we must as leaders address.

โ€ฆ

As leaders, we are rightly concerned that even those most light-touch approaches to disinformation could be misinterpreted as being hostile to the values of free speech we value so highly.

But while I cannot tell you today what the answer is to this challenge, I can say with complete certainty that we cannot ignore it. To do so poses an equal threat to the norms we all value.

After all, how do you successfully end a war if people are led to believe the reason for its existence is not only legal but noble? How do you tackle climate change if people do not believe it exists? How do you ensure the human rights of others are upheld, when they are subjected to hateful and dangerous rhetoric and ideology?

The weapons may be different but the goals of those who perpetuate them are often the same. To cause chaos and reduce the ability of others to defend themselves. To disband communities. To collapse the collective strength of countries who work together.

But we have an opportunity here to ensure that these particular weapons of war do not become an established part of warfare.

โ€ฆRead more: https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/09/full-speech-jacinda-ardern-addresses-un-general-assembly.html

A video of Jacindaโ€™s speech is available here.

And now sheโ€™s coming to Australia to work. While relocating to Australia is the choice of many New Zealanders fleeing their train wreck economy, including some good friends, I think I speak on behalf of a large number of Australians in saying weโ€™ve already filled our quota of radical green lunatics.

AI may bring a cognitive renaissance to human thinking

By โ€œAIโ€ I mean the amazing chatbots that emulate reading and reasoning. There is a lot more to AI but that is how the term is being used these days.

There are a couple of reasons why these powerful AI tools may greatly improve human thinking. Simply put they can save a lot of search time and they find better stuff. This gives people more time to think and better information to think with.

From CFACT

By David Wojick

By โ€œAIโ€ I mean the amazing chatbots that emulate reading and reasoning. There is a lot more to AI but that is how the term is being used these days.

There are a couple of reasons why these powerful AI tools may greatly improve human thinking. Simply put they can save a lot of search time and they find better stuff. This gives people more time to think and better information to think with.

Most jobs involve looking stuff up and many require a lot of this search work. Sometimes it is interesting but often searching is tedious, laborious or even frustrating. This is especially true when the stuff sought is hard to find.

AI often produces answers in seconds that would take humans many minutes or even hours to find. This frees up a lot of human time for doing what often comes after searching, which is thinking about what one has found. Searching is often just part of a cognitive production process.

Moreover one often has limited time for searching so makes do with what they find in that time. Only a small number of documents are looked at. AI looks at thousands of relevant documents so can often find much better answers in no time at all.

Todayโ€™s world is a world of thinking so spending a lot less time searching while also getting better information should make a huge difference. A city full of office buildings mostly produces thinking. Many people, perhaps most, think for a living.

I call it cognitive production. America is a huge cognitive production system. Calling it paperwork masks this fundamental fact.

That we do a lot of thinking and a good bit of searching online is also true of our personal lives. Spending less time searching while also getting better information could make a big difference outside of work.

By way of scale consider that if a hundred million Americans save an average of just one hour a week thanks to AI searching that is around five billion hours saved a year. These huge time savings could generate a lot of additional thinking.

Moreover the time savings could be a lot bigger than this, which is an interesting research question. How much time do people now spend searching online?

When you add in getting better information the potential benefits of AI get even bigger. Imagine being able to read thousands of relevant documents when you do a search instead of the few you can now read. This is just what the reading and reasoning chatbots do.

Estimating the benefits of all this better information is likely impossible. What is called the diffusion of knowledge is in fact a diffusion process so it is impossible to track where knowledge goes and what it does when it gets there. But there might be indicators which makes this a grand research challenge.

For example there is something called the โ€œcrocodile effectโ€ in scholarly publishing. Journal articles are rapidly increasingly appearing in search results but click throughs to them are rapidly decreasing, which worries publishers. These two diverging trends are likened to a crocโ€™s open mouth.

There is a good article โ€œResponding to the Threat of Zero-Click Search and AI Summaries: How Do We Tame The Crocodile?โ€ with a great graphic here. The term for using the AI summary is โ€œzero-click search.โ€

The rapid divergence is attributed to AI search. The reading bot finds the relevant journal articles that conventional search would not find. But then the AI summaries make reading these time consuming articles unnecessary. So people are getting better information with far less effort. This is happening everywhere not just in scholarly publishing.

It is conceivable that the growing revolutionary combination of Americans getting better information with more time to think will lead to a cognitive renaissance. It is certainly worth watching for.

Energy Dominance 2.0: LNG Edition

Nine years ago, when U.S. LNG exports were in their infancy, I authored this post:

Can the U.S. Become the Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas?

In April 2017, I noted that the total capacity of existing, under construction, approved and proposed LNG export facilities was 44 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d). This is the energy-equivalent of 7.8 million barrels of crude oil per day (mmBOE/d). At the time, Saudi Arabia was exporting about 7.4 mmbbl/d.

Well, the U.S. is still on track to become the Saudi Arabia of natural gasโ€ฆ

From Watts Up With That?

Guest โ€œMaking American Natural Gas Great Again!โ€ by David Middleton

Glossary of Natural Gas Nomenclature

  • LNG = Liquified Natural Gas
  • mcf = thousand cubic feet
  • mmcf = million cubic feet
  • Bcf = billion cubic feet
  • Tcf = trillion cubic feet
  • mmBTU = million BTU, generally equivalent to mcf
  • bbl = Barrel โ€“ Standard measurement of crude oil. 1 bbl = 42 gallons
  • BOE = Barrels of Oil Equivalent. The energy 6 Bcf of natural gas is roughly equivalent to 1 million bbl of crude oil

Making American Natural Gas Great Again โ€“ MANGGA!

Nine years ago, when U.S. LNG exports were in their infancy, I authored this post:

Can the U.S. Become the Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas?

In April 2017, I noted that the total capacity of existing, under construction, approved and proposed LNG export facilities was 44 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d). This is the energy-equivalent of 7.8 million barrels of crude oil per day (mmBOE/d). At the time, Saudi Arabia was exporting about 7.4 mmbbl/d.

Well, the U.S. is still on track to become the Saudi Arabia of natural gasโ€ฆ

Ten years ago, on February 24, 2016, the first liquefied natural gas (LNG) cargo from the Sabine Pass Terminal was exported from the United States, marking the beginning of a new era in U.S. LNG exports. Today, the United States is the worldโ€™s largest LNG exporter, ahead of both Australia and Qatar. LNG exports surged from 0.5 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) in 2016 to 15.0 Bcf/d in 2025, and in our February Short-Term Energy Outlook, we forecast U.S. LNG exports to exceed 18.1 Bcf/d in 2027. LNG exports from the United States increased for several reasons, including abundant natural gas supply and reserves, flexible LNG export contracts, and relatively low feedgas costs. In addition, increasing international demand and a favorable investment climate have supported LNG infrastructure expansions in the United States.

EIA

18.1 Bcf/d is equivalent to 3.2 mmBOE/d

Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Short-Term Energy Outlook, February 2026 (EIA)
The EIA expects this capacity to double by 2031โ€ฆ

The United States has eight operational LNG export terminals, and by 2031 we expect export capacity to nearly double compared with December 2025. Most recently, an expansion of the Corpus Christi LNG facility shipped its first cargo in March 2025, following the startup of the Plaquemines LNG facility in late December 2024, and Golden Pass LNG is expected to ship its first cargo in early 2026.

EIA

This could take LNG exports up to 30 Bcf/d (5.3 mmBOE/d) in just five years. The current total of existing and under construction facilities is 33.67 Bcf/d (5.95 mmBOE/d). An additional 10.25 Bcf/d (1.81 BOE/d) of export capacity is currently approved for construction. In most cases, FEED (front-end engineering design) has been completed and construction contracts have been awarded. This would bring total LNG export capacity up to 43.92 Bcf/d (7.76 mmBOE/d).

Can the U.S. produce enough natural gas to export 44 Bcf/d?

Without breaking a sweatโ€ฆ

November 7, 2025

Three U.S. regions each produce more natural gas than most countries

Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook and Short-Term Energy Outlook

  • The United States produced 104 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of natural gas, 75% more than the worldโ€™s second-largest natural gas producer, Russia, in 2023, the most recent year for which we have comprehensive worldwide data on natural gas production.
  • The United States has been the worldโ€™s largest producer of natural gas since 2009. More recently, U.S. natural gas production has increased further, averaging 106 Bcf/d for the first half of 2025 (1H2025).
  • Three regions in the United States are among the top 10 natural gas-producing areas in the world when ranked independently against other natural gas-producing countries:
    • The Appalachia region, in the northeastern United States, encompasses the Marcellus and Utica shale plays and ranked as the second-largest producer with 33 Bcf/d in 2023. More recently, production from the region has continued to average 33 Bcf/d in 1H2025.
    • The Permian region, in Texas and New Mexico, ranked fifth worldwide with 21 Bcf/d in 2023. Production from the Permian has since increased to average 25 Bcf/d in 1H2025.
    • The Haynesville region, in Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas, ranked as the eighth-largest natural gas-producing area with 15 Bcf/d in 2023. Production from the Haynesville has declined slightly to average 14 Bcf/d in 1H2025.

EIA

Brown = Annual Production (mmcf). Blue = Annual Consumption (mmcf).
Green = Proved Reserves (Bcf). EIA

In 2024 marketed production was 41,383,893 mmcf (41,384 Bcf, 113 Bcf/d), domestic consumption was 33,055,901 mmcf (33,056 Bcf, 91 Bcf/d). Production exceeded consumption by about 21 Bcf/d. At year-end 2024, proved reserves stood at 603.6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf)โ€ฆ A reserves/production (R/P) ratio of 14.5.

LNG exports drive up natural gas pricesโ€ฆ Right?

Wrong!

Natural gas prices were much higher before we began exporting LNG.

EIA

Prior to the โ€œshale revolution,โ€ we were a net importer of natural gas.

Blue = Natural Gas Price ($/mcf).
Brown = Natural Gas Imports (mmcf). Green = Natural Gas Exports (mmcf). EIA

The U.S. can export LNG without driving up prices because we produce far more natural gas than we consume and the delta between production and consumption is widening. MANGGA!!!

Now for the coup de grรขce!

Saudi Arabiaโ€™s New U.S. LNG Deal Marks a Stunning Geopolitical Reversal

Simon Watkins

Mon, 23 February 2026

The signing of a 20-year agreement for U.S. gas producer Caturusโ€™s Commonwealth liquefied natural gas (LNG) division to supply one million tonnes per โ€Œannum of LNG to Saudi Arabiaโ€™s Aramco is enormously significant both inside and outside the energy market. At a time when LNG has become the worldโ€™s most flexible instrument of energy statecraft, the decision by Aramco to lock in U.S. supply for two decades may speak to a deeper geopolitical recalibration underway in Riyadh. For Washington, meanwhile, the agreement offers a rare opportunity to re-anchor influence in a region where China and Russia have made rapid inroads over the past decade.

[โ€ฆ]

For Washington, this latest LNG supply deal to Saudi Arabia marks an extraordinary reversal of its previous energy dependency on the Kingdom. Since the end of the 2014-2016 Oil Price War, the U.S. has not only become the worldโ€™s number one crude oil producer by a long way, but its top natural gas producer, and LNG producer too. In an irony unlikely to be lost on President Trump, U.S. firms have been providing assistance to Saudi Arabia in the development of its landmark Jafurah shale gas development since around 2019. 

[โ€ฆ]

Oil Price Dot Com

Saudi Aramco is buying U.S. LNG!

SCOTUS TO KILL CLIMATE LAWSUITS? โ€“ The Climate Realism Showย #192

On Episode 192 of The Climate Realism Show, The Heartland Instituteโ€™s Anthony Watts, Linnea Lueken, Jim Lakely, and special guest Steve Milloy explain whatโ€™s at stake in this case and how it might (or should) go. We will also cover the Crazy Climate News of the Week, including a curtain to stop the โ€œDoomsday Glacier,โ€ climate change supposedly causing more people to be eaten by tigers, and what Trump said about the future of energy in his State of the Union address.

The Heartland Institute

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that could end the practice of cities suing energy companies, claiming their businesses harm the public by increasing greenhouse gas emissions and causing global warming. In 2018, Boulder County, Colorado, sued ExxonMobil and Suncor, blaming them for contributing to worldwide emissions, with the aim of collecting a massive damage award. If this case goes against Boulder County, it could be a landmark decision that clarifies that national energy policy is set by the federal government through the peopleโ€™s elected representativesโ€”not radical activists who find a friendly court.

On Episode 192 of The Climate Realism Show, The Heartland Instituteโ€™s Anthony Watts, Linnea Lueken, Jim Lakely, and special guest Steve Milloy explain whatโ€™s at stake in this case and how it might (or should) go. We will also cover the Crazy Climate News of the Week, including a curtain to stop the โ€œDoomsday Glacier,โ€ climate change supposedly causing more people to be eaten by tigers, and what Trump said about the future of energy in his State of the Union address.

Join us LIVE at 1 p.m. ET on YouTube, Rumble, X, and Facebook. Participate in the show by leaving your comments and questions in the chat.

Visit our sponsor, Advisor Metals: https://climaterealismshow.com/metals