Tag: Greens

Green Attacks on Energy Guzzling Artificial Intelligence Ramp Up

Greens have noticed AI is incompatible with their beloved renewable transition. And they don’t like it one bit.

An artistic depiction of a man looking at a smartphone displaying the Meta logo, with an abstract background.

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

A smartphone displaying the Meta logo with a close-up of a serious-looking man in a suit in the background.

Greens have noticed AI is incompatible with their beloved renewable transition. And they don’t like it one bit.

Inside Meta’s fight to change climate reality… all so it can frantically expand a risky AI program

Everyone is ignoring the science on what Meta’s generative AI investment really costs, even though there’s no evidence of a single, significant societal benefit.

KETAN JOSHI
OCT 3, 2025

…

Big tech is being pulled in a few directions at once. In the US, where most tech companies are headquartered, cosying up to a fascist, climate-denying government means making hollow, technosolutionist noises about carbon capture and nuclear fusion. But for the rest of the world, and particularly in Europe, climate change still exists. Now that these companies have become existentially dependent on data centre expansionism, required to power generative systems that require far more power to deliver worse results, they have to refresh their greenwashing techniques, and that means eroding measured reality from the ground up. 

It is not clear what any of this is meant to actually be for. It was recently revealed that Meta explicitly allows its chatbots to develop “sensual” relationships with children, and offer fabricated medical misinformation. Meta illegally downloaded a torrent of millions of books (including mine), to help train its models. Private chats with chatbots were inadvertently made public, revealing sensitive information. Meta’s chatbots are designed to present as real humans, resulting in the rapid spread of mental health crises and even some tragic deaths. 

I am trying to think of a single, substantiated and significant societal benefit of Meta’s generative AI investment, and I am pretty confident that it simply does not exist.

…

If there is a neat through-line in the history of climate activism, it is the ongoing fight to connect human society to physical reality. First, the messy struggle to nurture the acceptance of the basic science of the problem, and more recently, the struggle to get everyone who says they accept the science to at least fucking act like it. With big tech, that struggle continues in the new arena of how we measure and report on who’s committing the worst climate sins.

…Read more: https://www.crikey.com.au/2025/10/03/meta-climate-change-reality-artificial-intelligence/

You know when greens trotsky out phrases like “cosying up to a fascist, climate-denying government“, I don’t get the sense they feel like winners.

Declaring AI has no societal benefit because of tragic stories of kids mistaking their chatbot for their friend is like declaring automobiles have no societal benefit because sometimes there are automobile accidents which involve children.

I absolutely agree children need to be protected – but you don’t ban automobiles because a handful of children get hurt, you make automobiles safer, to reduce the risk of accidents. Which is what needs to happen to AI chatbots.

Because AI is most definitely worth keeping, despite the harm it sometimes causes. In my own field of software development, AI has created a substantial boost in productivity. Not by replacing programmers, but by providing souped up assistant tools which are actually starting to be useful.

In mathematics and research, AI is contributing significant breakthroughs, like a recent breakthrough in fluid dynamics, which could lead to advances ranging from better aircraft, cheaper sea freight, more efficient oil and gas pipelines, better drug delivery syringes and, yes, improved control of nuclear fusion plasmas.

In biology and genetics, the ability of AI to analyse enormous quantities of raw data is leading to more rapid mapping of how DNA and genetics works, better understanding of cancer and other diseases, new cures for previously intractable medical problems, and in the tantalisingly near future, treatments which could slow ageing and improve quality of life for older people.

Where does META fit into all this? I’m no fan of Zuckerberg, on a number of occasions I think Zuckerberg’s behaviour has been abominable, but META does have a legitimate place in the business ecosystem. A lot of people use META to win business, including a friend whose growing Canadian adventure business uses advanced META features to promote her business. META’s AI investment appears to focus on how users and businesses interact with META – better analysis of marketing and campaign effectiveness, better communication with customers and potential customers, and improved workflows.

Why is author Ketan Joshi so hostile towards Meta AI, and AI in general? Only Ketan knows what is happening in Ketan’s head. But the rant I quoted appears to follow an increasingly familiar playbook of greens who refuse to admit their renewable transition is dead, but who in their hearts know their cause has failed.

Energy guzzling AI is shaping up to be a prime target of green bitterness.

Big Green Projects Hoisted By Their Own Petards

For decades environmentalists raised questionable, but often successful, objections to block mines, pipelines, nuclear power, and oil and gas operations.

Now, as Shakespeare’s Hamlet might say, they are “hoisted by their own petards,” referring to a small explosive device used in siege warfare.

From ClimateRealism

Vertical axis wind turbines generator farm for renewable sustainable and alternative energy production along coast baltic sea near Denmark. Eco power, ecology.
Guest Post by Craig Rucker and CFACT 

For decades environmentalists raised questionable, but often successful, objections to block mines, pipelines, nuclear power, and oil and gas operations.

Now, as Shakespeare’s Hamlet might say, they are “hoisted by their own petards,” referring to a small explosive device used in siege warfare.

In a bit of irony, the very legal and regulatory obstacles the Greens erected and deployed against fossil fuel companies they were opposed to are now coming back full circle to explode in their faces, blocking and hindering their beloved solar and wind projects. Even more poetically just, it has often been the “little guys” environmentalists have insisted they care so deeply about who are the ones wielding the weapons.

Energy expert and journalist Robert Bryce notes that farming families, small rural communities and Native American Tribes have rejected or restricted 35 wind and 58 solar projects this year, through September. Since 2015, these “little guys” have stymied a whopping 735 “renewable energy” projects across the USA.

Rural and coastal communities know those installations will be in their backyards. They apparently don’t want them impacting croplands and habitats, ruining scenic vistas, pummeling property values, killing birds and other wildlife – and creating major fire and toxic gas risks from lithium-ion electricity storage batteries.

Who could blame them? The bad news for the Greens is these locals are challenging their beloved “climate-friendly” projects, using the environmentalists’ own legal roadmaps … and winning.

In Idaho, local preservationists opposed the Lava Ridge Wind Project, which would install hundreds of 700-foot-tall turbines within eyeshot of the Minidoka National Historic Site, where a World War II Japanese internment camp was located. They have been joined by local officials, the Idaho legislature, governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general and both US senators in demanding that the US Bureau of Land Management scrap the project.

The unprecedented defiance convinced a nearby county to implement a moratorium on wind and solar farms the Biden-Harris Administration wanted as part of its climate agenda.

In next-door Oregon, Native Americans filed lawsuits to challenge a deepwater offshore wind project – which arguably makes no energy, economic, engineering or environmental sense. Even liberal Governor Tina Kotek has now changed her position on offshore wind, and an October auction was postponed because no company was interested in bidding.

In California, local officials and landowners oppose the proposed 320-MW Seguro battery energy storage facility, after a series of battery fires in EVs and at battery factories and energy storage facilities.

Heading east, after a decade-long legal battle, Oklahoma’s Osage Nation forced wind energy developers to tear down and remove dozens of turbines, because they had not obtained leases or permits to install the turbines and power lines on Native lands beforehand.

In Wisconsin, the Engelstad family and other locals are battling the Koshkonong solar project near Christiana, Wisconsin. It would blanket 6,400 acres (10 sq mi) of prime agricultural land and put a 667-MWh battery storage system hundreds of feet from an elementary school.

Along the Atlantic coast, multiple groups have helped to cancel the Ocean Wind 1 and 2 projects (NJ), put Atlantic Shores North and South (NJ) under pressure, make Skipjack Wind (MD) less promising, and subjected Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind and other offshore wind projects to litigation over harm to endangered whales.

Multi-hundred-mile transmission lines – including the Grain Belt Express (Kansas-Missouri-Illinois-Indiana) and Piedmont Reliability (Pennsylvania-Maryland-Virginia) – also face intense pushback.

The list of delayed, cancelled or stymied projects goes on and on.

Local residents, developers, regulators, permitting agencies and insurers are rightly concerned about the impacts of so-called “green” energy.  It is they who must consider its major issues that have received scant scrutiny in the past. They must address questions such as what to do with the thousands of solar panels or hundreds of wind turbines get worn out after 20 years … or maybe destroyed by hail, tornados or hurricanes. It is they who must figure out who pays for dismantling, removing and disposing the trash, and in whose backyard do those billions of pounds of trash go.

Case in point, Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird recently sued a waste disposal company for failing to cut up, transport, recycle and otherwise properly dispose of 1,300 broken and decommissioned wind turbine blades, which the company simply left piled up at multiple locations across the state.

As green ventures collapse, there’s a reckoning environmentalists must come to grips with – they no longer have the public trust. They will have to make their case to state and local officials who, to quote Shakespeare, will determine whether green energy projects are “to be, or not to be.”  This may become much more difficult to do.

This article originally appeared at NewsMax.

96% of climate policies are a waste of money says Science paper

Finally, 15 years and a trillion dollars too late, George Monbiot says what skeptics have been saying all along. Nearly every single carbon reduction scheme is a useless make-work machination that creates the illusion that the government is doing something. He calls it “perceptionware”.

From JoNova

By Jo Nova

Finally, 15 years and a trillion dollars too late, George Monbiot says what skeptics have been saying all along. Nearly every single carbon reduction scheme is a useless make-work machination that creates the illusion that the government is doing something. He calls it “perceptionware”.

A new paper was released in Science pointing out that in the last 25 years, barely 4% of climate policies in 41 countries have made any real difference. And by “real difference” we mean reducing a useful fertilizer, so it’s a good thing that 96% of the ploys failed, but a tragedy that a thousand billion dollars was stolen from decent people.

In any case, finally Monbiot sees the tip of the iceberg of grift and graft, but doesn’t realize his own role in it, doesn’t realize the same failures of journalists like him also failed the science world where 96% of papers have achieved nothing they set out to do as well — like predicting the climate. Climate science has been spinning its wheels, creating perceptionware and failing to figure out the climate for fifty years, but George hasn’t noticed.

Monbiot hasn’t even taken the obvious leap: Where were the Greens, the people who supposedly were the smart ones who cared the most? Most of these carbon reduction failures were obvious to anyone who owned a calculator. Could it be George, that the Greens were the dumb ones wrapped up in their own perceptionware game, pretending to care about CO2 to impress their friends at dinner parties but not actually giving a damn? Or worse, could it be that some Greens were bought off by industries and foreign countries that profit from the carbon grift?

Who stood up for the poor, the workers, and the taxpayers who were being shafted — only the skeptics.

Out of 1,500 global climate policies, only 63 have really worked.

That’s where green spin has got us

George Monbiot, The Guardian
“Grand schemes, many backed by governments, masquerade as positive action on the environment. They should be disowned”.

Let’s talk about perceptionware. Perceptionware is technology whose main purpose is to create an impression of action…

Monbiot zeroes in on the endless fantasia that is the quest for airline biofuel:

…perhaps the clearest example of perceptionware is the repeated unveiling, across the past 25 years, of mumbo-jumbo jets. Throughout this period, fossil fuel and airline companies have announced prototype green aircraft or prototype green fuels, none of which has made any significant dent in emissions or, in most cases, materialised at all. Their sole effect so far has been to help companies avoid legislative action.

Now he worries the poor are starving as we burn their food, and chop down forests so we can fly to Bali:

But never mind, this perceptionware is now Labour policy too. Failure is baked in. Even with restrictions on which feedstocks can be used, any significant deployment of biofuels for aviation will increase total demand, which means either that agricultural crops are removed from human consumption, raising the price of food and therefore increasing global hunger, or that wild ecosystems are destroyed to make way for agricultural expansion.

George still doesn’t realize the root of the problem is Big Government itself. In the crazy biofuel market, it was the government that “picked the winner” and decided we should burn food to save the world, not the free market.  Who could have guessed that convenient high energy plant matter would also be the same stuff people wanted to eat?

As for using waste, this promise is repeatedly rolled out to justify disastrous policies. Biodiesel would be made from used cooking oil, but as soon as production increased, new palm oil was used instead. Biomass burners would mop up forestry waste, but soon started taking whole trees and, in some cases, entire forests. Biogas would be made from sewage and food waste, but operators quickly discovered they could produce more with dedicated crops like maize and potatoes. Why? Because waste is generally low in energy, variable and expensive to handle. Already, there’s intense competition for the small portion of waste that might be commercially useful, as companies chase carbon payments: so much so that fresh palm oil has been sold as waste oil, as this attracts a higher premium.

The government funded monopoly in science created a fake crisis that parasites could feed off, and he is surprised that parasites turned up to dinner.

Where were all our expert climate scientists, George, while 25 years of money and time was wasted? Did they or did they not want to save the world, or were they too stupid, or too scared to say the obvious?

REFERENCE

Stechemesser et al (2024) Climate policies that achieved major emission reductions: Global evidence from two decades, Science, 22 Aug 2024, Vol 385, Issue 6711,pp. 884-892, DOI: 10.1126/science.adl6547

Guardian: Tackling Climate Change in Films is an Ethical Responsibility, Like Ending Slavery

Greens equating their cause to the role of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” in the liberation of the slaves.

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

Greens equating their cause to the role of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” in the liberation of the slaves.

‘It affects everything’: why is Hollywood so scared to tackle the climate crisis?

David Smith in Washington
Sat 20 Jul 2024 20.06 AEST

Twisters is the latest in a long line of movies that fail to address the environmental emergency – experts say it’s a missed opportunity.

…

A study published by the nonprofit consultancy Good Energy and Colby College’s Buck Lab for Climate and Environment analysed whether the climate crisis was present in 250 of the top-grossing fictional films between 2013 and 2022. In only 32 of the films (12.8%) was it clear that climate change exists, and in only 24 of them (9.6%) was it clear that a character knows it.

…

“We’re talking about 8 billion people reacting to oil companies destroying the entire livable climate. We need stories in hundreds of different languages, reflecting a thousand times more cultures experiencing varying degrees of awareness and emotional processing.”

He adds: “But if a film-maker is reluctant to let climate be in some way a part of their movie, I always tell them that it’s a guarantee within the next five years their film will play as irrelevant as movies do today about how noble the war against the ‘American Indians’ was.”

…

Asked whether film-makers have an ethical responsibility to tackle the subject, Lipsky identifies a parallel with slavery: “The model is Uncle Tom’s Cabin. That issue had to be addressed and so Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote that novel. When Lincoln had an audience with her at the White House, he said, so you’re the woman who caused this civil war of ours. Sometimes the expression of something can be so astonishing and so direct that it makes people take action.

…Read more: 

https://www.theguardian.com/film/article/2024/jul/20/hollywood-climate-crisis

It is difficult to overstate the cultural and political influence of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin“. The book sold millions of copies. The portrayal of the main character, Uncle Tom, as a decent Christian man who helps his friends and steadfastly lives by his beliefs, in the face of unspeakable cruelty, brutality and betrayal, had a profound impact on people’s attitude towards slavery in the United States.

We’re used to green arrogance, but in my opinion this effort to equate their climate pseudoscience propaganda with such an important historical work is unconscionable.

“It’s Nonsensical”: Greens Wail at Trump’s Hostility to Climate Action

“… he highlighted the expanding assault he and Republicans are launching against even the most obscure environmental policies – a push that’s starting to influence voters.”

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

“… he highlighted the expanding assault he and Republicans are launching against even the most obscure environmental policies – a push that’s starting to influence voters.”

‘It’s nonsensical’: how Trump is making climate the latest culture war

The ex-president is ranting about low water pressure and attacking mundane rules and technologies – and Republicans in Congress are now following his lead

Oliver Milman Wed 3 Jul 2024 20.00 AEST

When Donald Trump embarked upon a lengthy complaint at a recent rally about how long it takes to wash his “beautiful luxuriant hair” due to his shower’s low water pressure, he highlighted the expanding assault he and Republicans are launching against even the most obscure environmental policies – a push that’s starting to influence voters.

In his bid to return to the White House, Trump has branded Joe Biden’s attempt to advance electric cars in the US “lunacy”, claiming such vehicles do not work in the cold and that their supporters should “rot in hell”. He’s called offshore wind turbines “horrible”, falsely linking them to the death of whales, while promising to scrap incentives for both wind and electric cars.

But the former US president and convicted felon, who has openly solicited donations from oil and gas executives in order to follow industry-friendly priorities if re-elected, has also spearheaded a much broader attack on a range of mundane rules and technologies that enable water and energy efficiency.

At a June rally in Philadelphia, Trump claimed Americans are suffering from “no water in your faucets” when attempting to wash their hands or hair. “You turn on the water and it goes drip, drip,” he said. “You can’t get [the soap] off your hand. So you keep it running for about 10 times longer.” Trump complained it takes 45 minutes to wash his “beautiful luxuriant hair” and that dishwashers don’t work because “they don’t want you to have any water”.

…

But Republicans in Congress are now following Trump’s lead, introducing a flurry of recent bills in the House of Representatives targeting energy efficiency standards for home appliances. The bills – with names such as the “Liberty in Laundry Act”, “Refrigerator Freedom Act” and the ‘Clothes Dryers Reliability Act’ – follow a conservative furore over a confected, baseless claim the Biden administration was banning gas stoves, which prompted further GOP legislation.

…

A new poll, released by the Pew Research Center on Thursday, underscored this trend – support for new solar farms has slumped to 78% across all Americans, down from 90% just four years ago. Backing for expanding wind power has dropped by a similar amount, while interest in buying an electric vehicle is significantly lower than a year ago, with just 29% of people saying they would consider an EV, down from 38% in 2023.

…Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/03/trump-climate-culture-war

No wonder greens are panicking. I wonder how many Americans are realising they’ve just woken from a nightmare, that the USA their forefather’s built, a land of opportunity which rewards hard work and effort, which they thought was gone forever, is still there, just waiting for them to make the right decision on November 5th.

Exxon CEO: “The people who are generating those [CO2] emissions need to … pay the price”

Green energy is not cheap, it is hideously expensive. You just need to look at runaway energy prices in California and Europe, both champions of green energy, to know how expensive real world green energy is.

Exxon CEO Darren Woods

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

Exxon CEO Darren Woods has incensed greens by suggesting end users are responsible for generating emissions.

Fury after Exxon chief says public to blame for climate failures

Darren Woods tells Fortune consumers not willing to pay for clean-energy transition, prompting backlash from climate experts

The world is off track to meet its climate goals and the public is to blame, Darren Woods, chief executive of oil giant ExxonMobil, has claimed – prompting a backlash from climate experts.

As the world’s largest investor-owned oil company, Exxon is among the top contributors to global planet-heating greenhouse gas emissions. But in an interview, published on Tuesday, Woods argued that big oil is not primarily responsible for the climate crisis.

The real issue, Woods said, is that the clean-energy transition may prove too expensive for consumers’ liking.

“The dirty secret nobody talks about is how much all this is going to cost and who’s willing to pay for it,” he told Fortune last week. “The people who are generating those emissions need to be aware of and pay the price for generating those emissions. That is ultimately how you solve the problem.”

…

“It’s like a drug lord blaming everyone but himself for drug problems,” said Gernot Wagner, a climate economist at Columbia business school.

…

Wagner said that Exxon was touting its ambition to slash the emissions of its own operations while also betting that the rest of the world won’t do the same, in order to continue selling oil.

“He can’t have it both ways in saying ‘we are an energy company’ but then basically ignoring the cheapest source of electricity in history as something Exxon should be investing in,” he said.

…Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/04/exxon-chief-public-climate-failures

A video of CEO Darren Woods being interviewed by Fortune Magazine.

The “Dirty Secret” comments are made around 18:43. Woods also said that “Today’s technology will not solve this problem”, and emphasised the importance of getting the cost down, and the need for cost transparency with end users – and how important getting the cost down is for people’s willingness to pay for Net Zero.

Woods called for a carbon price (23:10 minutes).

30:55 “I will tell you today, there is not a viable market where consumers step in and are willing to pay a premium for low carbon products. That is the reality of what we face today. I can’t drive demand, and I can’t make consumers pay more for low carbon products”.

The big question – why are Greens so upset with what Exxon CEO Darren Woods said? Darren’s responses to questions in the video amounted to suggesting the government needs to do more to make low carbon options palatable, by putting a price on carbon, by supporting efforts to bring down the price of green solutions, or both.

I think what upset Greens is the Exxon CEO’s suggestion that Greens have to take personal responsibility for their piece of the Net Zero transition.

And of course, greens were likely upset by the Exxon CEOs suggestion that green energy is expensive – which contradicts Columbia Business School Gernot Wagner’s claim that Exxon is “ignoring [renewables] the cheapest source of electricity in history” – at least I presume he is talking about renewables.

Wagner’s inference that renewables are cheap is absurd.

Green energy is not cheap, it is hideously expensive. You just need to look at runaway energy prices in California and Europe, both champions of green energy, to know how expensive real world green energy is.

Even worse, the cost of energy in places like California and Europe is not a problem with implementation. Google admitted Net Zero is impossibly expensive in 2014, with an article published in Spectrum, about their failed attempt to discover an economically viable path to Net Zero. “Renewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach.“. The Google team failed to find an economically viable path to replacing coal with renewables, even when they added science fiction assumptions to their models, like wind towers which erect themselves without human assistance. The Google study authors were not advocating giving up, they were just saying more or less the same as Exxon CEO Darren Woods said in the video above. Today’s green energy technology is not a viable solution to the world’s energy needs.

Can you think of a more woke, leftist, green leaning company than Google? If even Google say green energy with current technology cannot work, perhaps Google are also part of Wagner’s conspiracy of energy company capitalists who are plotting to reduce their own profits?

Blaming Exxon, weaving bizarre big oil conspiracy theories, and responding with fury to the suggestion that greens themselves have to take personal responsibility – well I guess we’re all used to seeing that from greens.

We are also used to seeing lots of hypocrisy from greens. Greens have not exactly been champions of the lifestyle choices they want to inflict on everyone else, somehow the special people usually give themselves a moral pass from the rules they want to inflict on the rest of us.

I don’t know if Gernot Wagner is personally a green hypocrite, but plenty of his fellow travellers are. I mean, how often have we seen greens jetting off to climate conferences and making pathetic excuses for why they should be allowed to fly, while demanding everyone else have their flights rationed for the sake of the planet?

Who can forget embarrassing failures of greens to follow their own policy prescriptions, like the German Green Party’s hilariously expensive failure to install a functioning heat pump in their own headquarters, despite demanding Germany immediately pass laws which make such heat pumps mandatory for office buildings?

If Greens want the rest of us to even consider following their lead, they need to start practicing what they preach, by showing us through personal example that Net Zero is viable and affordable, instead of blaming others like Exxon CEO Darren Woods for their own personal failure to transition to a greener lifestyle.

Greens sue to keep Virginia in RGGI

In a move that came as no surprise to anyone who has followed the knock-down, drag-out fight over Virginia’s participation in a controversial multistate carbon credit-trading scheme, environmental groups are suing to block the Old Dominion’s withdrawal from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

From  CFACT

By Bonner Cohen, Ph. D. 

In a move that came as no surprise to anyone who has followed the knock-down, drag-out fight over Virginia’s participation in a controversial multistate carbon credit-trading scheme, environmental groups are suing to block the Old Dominion’s withdrawal from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

On August 21, the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), on behalf of several Virginia green groups, filed suit in Fairfax County Circuit Court to prevent Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) from having the state part company with RGGI. RIGGI is an 11-state compact of northeastern and mid-Atlantic states to cap and reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants. Its current members are Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia.

Virginia joined RGGI in 2021 after Democrats, who controlled the General Assembly and the governor’s mansion at the time, passed a sweeping energy/climate measure that called for the state to phase out carbon-based fuels. Youngkin, who was elected governor later that year, came into office vowing to take Virginia out of RGGI.

That has been easier said than done, in large part because Democrats remain in control of the state Senate, where they have killed Republican-backed legislation to exit the compact. Unable to do the deed legislatively or through an executive order, Youngkin pursued his goal through regulatory means. In June, the State Air Pollution Control Board – with a majority of member appointed by Youngkin – voted to begin the process of exiting RGGI. After a 30-day review period, the governor officially filed a notice of withdrawal at the end of July, with an effective date of Dec. 31.

“A Regressive Tax”

“RGGI remains a regressive tax that does not do anything to incentivize the reduction of emissions in Virginia,” Travis Voyles, state secretary of natural and historic resources, said in an Aug. 21 statement. He noted that the board “believes that Virginia is not required to be in RGGI” and that state Attorney General Jason S. Miyares (R) has issued an opinion that the board has the authority to act, The Washington Post (Aug. 23) reported.

The forthcoming legal battle will focus on what the Democrat-passed 2021 energy law said about Virginia joining RGGI. Environmental groups – as well as Democratic lawmakers – contend that the Youngkin administration exceeded its authority in overriding an act passed by the Assembly. But the Youngkin administration argues that the 2021 energy law “authorizes” Virginia to join RGGI, but does not compel it.

Youngkin’s claim that RGGI is a regressive tax was confirmed by Dominion Energy, the states largest utility, which said it added about $2.39 to the average customer’s monthly utility bill to cover the cost of complying with RGGI. “The State Corporation Commission suspended that surcharge last year in anticipation of Virginia withdrawing from RGGI and at Dominion’s request during a time when rising fuel charges were increasing customer costs,” the Post reported. “But Dominion succeeded in getting a slightly higher surcharge returned this summer, arguing that it has continued to accrue costs from RGGI even as fuel costs have come down.”

The lawsuit spearheaded by SELC was filed against the State Air Pollution Control Board, the Department of Environmental Quality, and the department’s director, Michael Rolband. It argues they lack authority to Remove Virginia from RGGI. A court ruling in the case is not expected for several months.

Author


Bonner Cohen, Ph. D.

Bonner R. Cohen, Ph. D., is a senior policy analyst with CFACT, where he focuses on natural resources, energy, property rights, and geopolitical developments.

Articles by Dr. Cohen have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Investor’s Busines Daily, The New York Post, The Washington Examiner, The Washington Times, The Hill, The Epoch Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Miami Herald, and dozens of other newspapers around the country.

He has been interviewed on Fox News, Fox Business Network, CNN, NBC News, NPR, BBC, BBC Worldwide Television, N24 (German-language news network), and scores of radio stations in the U.S. and Canada.

He has testified before the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, and the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee. Dr. Cohen has addressed conferences in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Bangladesh. He has a B.A. from the University of Georgia and a Ph. D. – summa cum laude – from the University of Munich.

Germany’s Ministry Of Economic Projects Gas, Electricity Prices To Rise To Painful Levels

Germany’s so-called Energiewende is leading to lots of economic pain as energy prices are projected to keep rising until 2040.

From NoTricksZone

By P Gosselin on 26. August 2023

Germany’s so-called Energiewende is leading to lots of economic pain as energy prices are projected to keep rising until 2040.

Some 20 years ago, the German Greens and Socialists, who were in power, promised green energies, primarily from wind and sun, would be cheap, plentiful and clean in the future. In 2004, then Environment Minister Jürgen Trittin (Green Party) even promised that green energy wouldn’t rise more than the cost of a single scoop of ice cream per month. A fairy tale.

Since then, electricity prices have skyrocketed. A typical German household is now paying nearly 1,800 euros annually:

Electricity price for private households in Germany with an electricity consumption of 4,000 kWh in the years 2004 to 2022. Source: Statista. Published by n V. Pawlik, August 1, 2023.

Today, Germany’s energy costs are among the highest in the world, and there’s no relief in sight. Moreover, the majority of Germany’s total energy needs still remains supplied by fossil fuels, like coal, natural gas and petroleum.

40 cents a kwh

Blackout News here reports that Germany’s  Ministry of Economics, headed by Robert Habeck (Green Party, now projects “the price of electricity will initially drop a little, but over time, it is expected to gradually rise to as much as 40 cents per kWh over the next few years.”

“So far, Economics Minister Robert Habeck has repeatedly emphasized that electricity will become cheaper again with the expansion of renewable energies. However, the forecasts from his own ministry contradict this,” reports Blackout News. “For the years 2024 and 2025, the ministry expects a price of exactly 37 cents per kWh. Thereafter, a moderate increase is expected, eventually reaching a peak of 40.27 cents per kWh in 2042.”

Natural gas prices are also projected to rise to painful levels. The are forecast to rise to 16.56 cents per kWh by 2040.

Masses Fightback: Germans Mobilize Against €Trillion Wind & Solar ‘Transition’ Disaster

You can fool some of the people, some of the time. But Germany’s wind and sun cult are struggling to fool all of the people, for all time.

From STOP THESE THINGS

You can fool some of the people, some of the time. But Germany’s wind and sun cult are struggling to fool all of the people, for all time.

Slowly but surely, the average German is working out that they have been played for fools. As Charles MacKay observed: “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” And so it goes in Germany.

The economic and social costs of Germany’s grand wind and solar transition – aka the ‘Energiewende’ – have already taken their toll, with much worse to come. As Charles Rotter details in the first piece below.

However, in the second, Pierre Gosselin reports on the growing tide of anger and resentment being displayed by ordinary Germans who recognise that they’ve been taken for a ride.

Remarkably this mass movement is being led by a German noble, Gloria von Thurn und Taxis, once dubbed the ‘Punk Princess’ but who, now, is calling the grand green transition for what it is: an expensive failure.

Germany’s Costly Energy Conundrum: Poor Planning and Bad Choices, 1 Trillion Dollars Needed
Watts Up With That?
Charles Rotter
14 June 2023

Germany finds itself facing an astronomical challenge of plugging a massive power gap, one according to BloombergNEF that could cost the country over $1 trillion by 2030 . The urgency to address this energy crisis stems from a combination of factors, including the aftermath of the war in Ukraine and the dubious choice to transition away from nuclear and coal power plants. However, the predicament Germany now faces is largely a consequence of poor planning and inadequate foresight in the energy sector. As the nation scrambles to find solutions, it becomes evident that crucial opportunities were missed, poor decisions were made, and the costs of this oversight are now mounting.

Underestimating the Scope of the Challenge
One of the fundamental failures in Germany’s planning was underestimating the scale of the energy transition required. The political decision to phase out nuclear and coal power plants, coupled with increased demand from electric vehicles, heating systems, and economically suicidal climate commitments, has created an overwhelming demand for new generation and upgraded power grids. The sheer magnitude of the undertaking, requiring the installation of solar panels equivalent to 43 soccer fields and 1,600 heat pumps daily, indicates a severe lack of anticipation and preparedness.

Germany has set aside more than €260 billion ($275 billion) to deal with the immediate risks of an energy crisis triggered by Russia’s war in Ukraine, but the ultimate fix will be much costlier — if the country can pull it off at all.

https://www.tbsnews.net/bloomberg-special/germany-faces-1-trillion-challenge-plug-massive-power-gap-590590

BASF SE‘s plans to cut 2,600 jobs as it faces strains from the energy crisis is a sign of the urgency. The chemical giant’s operations in Germany swung to a loss during the second half, and it’s now closing a number of energy-intensive factories, including two ammonia plants and related fertilizer facilities, resulting in 700 job cuts at its main Ludwigshafen site.

https://www.tbsnews.net/bloomberg-special/germany-faces-1-trillion-challenge-plug-massive-power-gap-590590

Lack of Clarity in Replacing Energy Sources
Germany’s dilemma is exacerbated by its unclear path for replacing phased-out energy sources. With nuclear and coal off the table, the country is heavily reliant on importing liquefied natural gas, which comes at a higher cost. The transition to electric cars, heat pumps, and hydrogen production further adds to the energy demand. Yet, there is a lack of concrete plans for generating electricity during periods of low renewable production. The reliance on future gas plants running on hydrogen faces significant hurdles, including a lack of willing investors, the reliance on nonexistent and potentially never existent technology, and the high costs involved, if those problems were to ever be solved.

Insufficient Investment and Unclear Regulations
The lack of funding and investment in the energy sector can be attributed to high market uncertainty and unclear regulations and, of course, the dubious prospects of profitability of intermittent wind and solar without major subsidies. These issues hamper the development of necessary infrastructure. Investors remain hesitant to commit to costly projects, leaving Germany in a state of flux. The need for clear regulations and financial incentives is essential to attract private sector participation at all.

Conclusion
Germany’s $1 trillion energy challenge serves as a stark reminder of the consequences that poor planning can have on a nation’s energy future. The failure to accurately anticipate the scope of the transition and the absence of a clear path to replace phased-out energy sources have created a significant hurdle. Addressing this crisis requires a comprehensive reassessment of energy policies, including rethinking some of the politically motivated retirement of nuclear power, enhanced investment in research and development, and the establishment of clear regulations and financial incentives. Germany must learn from its past oversights and rectify them swiftly to ensure a resilient energy future for the country. Time is of the essence.
Watts Up With That?

Ulrike von Waitz, Mitglied der Gruppe Mothers for Nuclear vor dem Gelaende des ehemaligen Versuchsatomkraftwerk Kahl

German Princess Gloria On Green New Deal: “Going To Be Worse Than Communist East Germany”!
No Tricks Zone
Pierre Gosselin
18 June 2023

Normally I don’t put much stock in European royalty and what they have to say. But when it comes to Princess Gloria von Thurn und Taxis of Germany, she has the unique ability to say what millions of people are thinking.

Germans rising up, turning out in masses to protest government’s outrageous energy proposals and policies

Recently she was interviewed as a guest on Youtube channel “Achtung, Reichelt!” where she spoke about the demonstration that had taken place in Erding last weekend (see image above). An estimated 13,000  people protested to protest the government’s heat pump madness. Normally when it comes to climate, getting even a hundred people to show up to protest against government policies would be quite a feat. But now as the economic pain sets in, there are real signs that the masses are finally beginning to wake up.

Princess Gloria told Achtung Reichelt: “Berlin is making policies against us citizens. But politicians are there for the people, not the other way around. Her verdict: “The transition to green energies has failed, failed, failed!”

Germans realizing they’ve been taken for a ride
When asked why the people are just now turning out to demonstrate, Gloria von Thurn und Taxis says they are being driven firstly by the fact that “everything has gotten more expensive” and that the people have realized they “have been taken for a ride.”

“Worse than communist East Germany”
“But climate change is a huge swindle. It’s a method of extracting money out of the people’s pockets, and they are supposed to feel good about it. The feeling good now ends at the end of the month when they see there’s no longer any buying power, when the restaurants close, when the airline trips can no longer be booked,” says Princess Gloria. “And what’s good is that the Greens have come out and been very open about this agenda: We may no longer travel, we should eat only certain things, we may not heat. It’s going to be worse than [communist] East Germany.”

“Before this is really put into place, we the people have the chance to rise up and to protest together, and foremost – very important – to go out and vote,” she adds.
No Tricks Zone

German Princess Gloria On Green New Deal: “Going To Be Worse Than Communist East Germany”!

“Climate change is a huge swindle” and green policies will make it “worse than Communist East Germany”, Princess Gloria warns. 

From NoTricksZone

By P Gosselin on 18. June 2023

“Climate change is a huge swindle” and green policies will make it “worse than Communist East Germany”, Princess Gloria warns. 

Normally I don’t put much stock in European royalty and what they have to say. But when it comes to Princess Gloria von Thurn und Taxis of Germany, she has the unique ability to say what millions of people are thinking.

Germans rising up, turning out in masses to protest government’s outrageous energy proposals and polices. Image cropped from Achtung Reichelt here. 

Recently she was interviewed as a guest on Youtube channel “Achtung, Reichelt!” where she spoke about the demonstration that had taken place in Erding last weekend (see image above). An estimated 13,000  people protested to protest the government’s heat pump madness. Normally when it comes to climate, getting even a hundred people to show up to protest against government policies would be quite a a feat. But now as the economic pain sets in, there are real signs that the masses are finally beginning to wake up.

Princess Gloria told Achtung Reichelt: “Berlin is making policies against us citizens. But politicians are there for the people, not the other way around. Her verdict: “The transition to green energies has failed, failed, failed!”

Germans realizing they’ve been taken for a ride

When asked why the people are just now turning out to demonstrate, Gloria von Thurn und Taxis says they are being driven firstly by the fact that “everything has gotten more expensive” and that the people have realized they “have been taken for a ride.”

“Worse than communist East Germany”

“But climate change is a huge swindle. It’s a method of extracting money out of the people’s pockets, and they are supposed to feel good about it. The feeling good now ends at the end of the month when they see there’s no longer any buying power, when the restaurants close, when the airline trips can no longer be booked,” says Princess Gloria. “And what’s good is that the Greens have come out and been very open about this agenda: We may no longer travel, we should eat only certain things, we may not heat. It’s going to be worse than [communist] East Germany.”

“Before this is really put into place, we the people have the chance to rise up and to protest together, and foremost – very important – to go out and vote,” she adds.

Broad political ties, from Bannon to Clinton

Formerly a jet-setting socialite, according to Wikipedia, Princess Gloria today is “a devout Catholic” and works closely with “conservative traditionalist Catholic leaders” – including Steve Bannon.

“Her palatial home, Schloss Thurn und Taxis was suggested by Bannon as a potential site for a school to educate and train right-wing Catholics, although no firm plans have been made,” Wikipeida adds. “Gloria is a personal friend of Hillary Clinton, and was one of a dozen women to attend her 2016 birthday party.”