{"id":456573,"date":"2026-07-19T11:04:04","date_gmt":"2026-07-19T18:04:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=456573"},"modified":"2026-07-19T11:04:06","modified_gmt":"2026-07-19T18:04:06","slug":"the-desperate-attempt-to-save-the-climate-alarm-narrative","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=456573","title":{"rendered":"The Desperate Attempt to Save the Climate Alarm Narrative"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

From Tilak\u00b4s Substack<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Tilak Doshi<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Aaron Regunberg\u2019s essay \u2018Why Climate Politics Can\u2019t Wait<\/a>\u2019 published last week in Boston Review<\/em> reads as an anxious sermon aimed at wavering Democratic strategists as the mid-term elections approach. Its target is what the party\u2019s own consultants now call \u2018climate hushing\u2019 \u2013 the quiet retreat from apocalyptic messaging.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Matt Huber recently wrote<\/a> in the New York Times<\/em>, \u201cThe Democratic Party remains deeply unpopular. The way out is to stop elevating a litany of single-issue policies that appeal to the already converted. When it comes to climate change, for now, it might be better to say nothing at all.\u201d Huber, like his compatriots on the Left, argues that Democratic advocacy on climate has pushed working people away from the party and that rebuilding a working-class base requires dropping the fight for climate action. New York\u2019s Kathy Hochul, California\u2019s Gavin Newsom, and a growing list of other Democrats \u2013 the party\u2019s hitherto leading climate change ideologues \u2013 have concluded that talking incessantly about decarbonisation is an electoral liability rather than an asset for the party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Boston Review<\/em> is not some marginal activist newsletter. Founded in 1975 and published in partnership with MIT, it has spent five decades as one of the American Left\u2019s most serious intellectual addresses \u2013 the venue where figures like Martha Nussbaum, Amartya Sen and Cornel West have published, and where the \u2018Boston Review Forum<\/em>\u2019 format has shaped how progressive policy elites argue with each other. When something appears there, it is aimed not at swing voters but at the strategists, academics and staffers who set the intellectual agenda for the Democratic Party\u2019s activist wing. That is what makes Aaron Regunberg\u2019s essay worth taking seriously. It is not a fringe complaint. It is the progressive intelligentsia\u2019s own attempt to talk its elected officials out of the very retreat from climate messaging that voters have been rewarding at the ballot box.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regunberg\u2019s essay leans heavily on the idea that this year\u2019s Strait of Hormuz war has finally handed climate advocates the perfect argument: \u201cSunlight does not have to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, and nobody ever went to war over wind.\u201d He catalogues three arguments for \u201chushing\u201d and sets out to demolish each. He fails at all three rebuttals, and the manner of his failure is instructive: concede a little ground to reality, then argue with great sophistication that nothing should actually change with respect to aggressive decarbonisation policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rebuttal One: \u201cAmericans care more than the hushers admit\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regunberg leans heavily on the Yale Programme on Climate Change Communication\u2019s findings<\/a> in a 2026 survey that majorities of voters blame global warming for rising grocery and utility bills, and that a majority say they would prefer a candidate who supports climate action:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

The survey further shows that many climate policies poll very well. Some 77% of voters support regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant, while 65% support transitioning the US economy from fossil fuels to 100% clean energy by 2050. More than half of registered voters (58%) think that developing clean sources of energy should be a \u201chigh\u201d or \u201cvery high\u201d priority for the President and Congress, and the same percentage reported that they would prefer to vote for a candidate who supports action on global warming, compared to only 14% who\u2019d prefer a candidate who opposes climate action.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Citing overly broad polling data is the oldest trick in the alarmist playbook: polling on abstract sentiment is worthless once you ask people what they are actually willing to pay. The University of Chicago\u2019s Energy Policy Institute, in its most recent AP-NORC survey<\/a>, found that fewer than four in ten Americans would accept even a token one-dollar-a-month carbon fee, a figure that has been falling for years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The claim that public concern for climate is deeper and more actionable than the \u201chushers\u201d admit leans heavily on surveys showing majorities agree the climate is changing and support vague goals such as regulating carbon dioxide or expanding renewables. Yet these numbers evaporate when respondents are asked what they are prepared to pay. As critics have long noted, abstract support for environmental goals collapses once trade-offs in household budgets are introduced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regunberg\u2019s own preferred source, the Searchlight Institute<\/a>, found that only 17% of battleground voters say climate change affects their family \u201ca great deal\u201d. Caring about climate change in the abstract, the way one cares about world peace, costs nothing. Caring enough to accept higher energy bills is a different matter entirely, and it is the only kind of caring that determines whether a policy survives contact with a legislature. Regunberg never asks his readers to pay anything; he asks them only to vote for politicians who promise, vaguely, to make polluters pay.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rebuttal Two: \u201cClimate action is compatible with a working-class agenda\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here Regunberg invokes Franklin Roosevelt\u2019s Civilian Conservation Corps and Bernie Sanders\u2019s 2016 campaign to argue that green politics and working-class politics have always been natural allies. The historical analogy is entirely beside the point. Roosevelt\u2019s New Deal conservation programmes planted trees; they did not attempt to re-engineer the physical basis of an industrial economy inside a single generation. The obstacle facing today\u2019s energy transition is not rhetorical positioning but arithmetic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the International Energy Agency\u2019s own reckoning<\/a>, renewables \u2013 after decades of subsidy, mandate and moral exhortation \u2013 are on track to reach barely a fifth of global final energy consumption by 2030, up from 13% in 2023. Heat, which the IEA notes accounts for almost half of final energy demand, remains overwhelmingly fossil-fuelled; aviation and shipping remain, in the IEA\u2019s own words, almost entirely dependent on oil. Something on the order of four-fifths of global energy demand simply cannot be electrified on any timeline that a democratic electorate would tolerate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rebuttal Three: \u201cFighting fossil fuels strengthens democracy\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The most revealing of Regunberg\u2019s three rebuttals is the one that abandons economics altogether and retreats into conspiracy. He traces the Supreme Court\u2019s \u2018shadow docket\u2019, the erosion of trust in science and the broader crisis of American democracy back to a decades-long fossil-fuel plot, and concludes that defeating authoritarianism therefore requires defeating Big Oil. This is a threadbare piece of institutional scapegoating of exactly the kind that has kept the climate-industrial complex solvent for 30 years: every inconvenient political development, from populist scepticism to judicial conservatism, is retrofitted into evidence of fossil-fuel malfeasance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It conveniently ignores that the scientific foundation for the \u2018existential threat\u2019 framing Regunberg still leans on has itself been abandoned by the very institutions that built it. The IPCC\u2019s own modelling community has spent the past several years quietly retiring RCP8.5, the extreme \u2018business as usual\u2019 emissions pathway that underwrote a generation of doomsday headlines, on the grounds that it was never a plausible outcome. The pattern now unfolding across the climate Establishment is not retreat but re-armament: concede that the worst-case scenario was fiction, then insist the emergency remains exactly as urgent as before. Regunberg\u2019s essay performs the identical manoeuvre but with democracy in place of temperature. He cites floods, droughts, storms and heatwaves as proof of accelerating catastrophe, but conveniently ignores the empirical record which shows deaths from extreme weather have fallen by more than 96%<\/a> since the 1920s, even as the global population has quadrupled and the planet has warmed. That is not a world lurching towards fascism-by-heatwave. It is a world getting steadily better at surviving weather, principally because fossil-fuelled economic growth financed the air -conditioning, the flood defences and the early-warning systems that did the actual work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The institutional tell<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What makes Regunberg\u2019s essay worth dwelling on is not its argument but its inadvertent honesty about the state of the climate Establishment itself. He reports, almost in passing, that Politico <\/a><\/em>is folding<\/a> its climate-focused E&E News<\/em>, that NPR has shut its climate desk<\/a>, that the Washington Post<\/em>\u2019s climate team was laid off<\/a>, and that even Bill Gates has pivoted<\/a> to arguing that decarbonisation is not the primary threat to the world\u2019s poor. These are not the actions of an institution confident in the durability of its narrative; they are the retreat from a story that has stopped generating returns, whether in terms of finance, engagement or votes. Regunberg\u2019s response is to insist that the retreat is a political mistake rather than a rational adjustment to changed facts on the ground \u2013 falling public willingness to pay, a discredited emissions scenario and an energy transition that, on the IEA\u2019s own numbers, is decades behind the schedule its advocates promised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The same tell appears in Regunberg\u2019s own choice of evidence for public concern. He cites the 2026 World Risk Poll\u2019s finding that Americans dramatically underestimate how many of their fellow citizens see climate change as a serious threat, and reads this as an untapped reservoir of latent support waiting to be unlocked by braver messaging. A less generous, and I think more accurate, reading is that the gap between stated concern and perceived social consensus reflects exactly the phenomenon that pollsters call preference falsification: people tell survey-takers what sounds civically responsible, while quietly declining, at the ballot box and the checkout counter, to bear any cost for it. Hochul, Newsom and McKee are not misreading their constituents. They are reading them more accurately than the pollsters Regunberg prefers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What a rational alternative looks like<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

None of this is an argument for cruelty towards the genuinely poor communities most exposed to weather variability. It is an argument for the kind of policy humility that Friedrich Hayek would have recognised: the refusal to substitute the \u201cfatal conceit\u201d of central planners \u2013 in this case, a coalition of activists, editors and consultants convinced they can engineer both a household\u2019s energy budget and its political loyalties through sufficiently alarmist climate messaging \u2013 for the dispersed knowledge embedded in market prices and household choices. Voters are not failing to grasp the moral stakes of climate change, as Regunberg supposes; they are making entirely rational trade-offs between an abstract, long-horizon risk and the concrete, immediate cost of heating their homes and filling their tanks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Democrats who have noticed this are not cowards captured by fossil-fuel money as the \u2018climate hushing\u2019 slur implies. They are instead turning \u201cminimally pragmatic to keep their votes<\/a>\u201d \u2013 which, in a democracy, is meant to be the whole point. Regunberg wants Martin Luther King\u2019s urgency applied to carbon dioxide. What he actually needs, and what Boston Review<\/em>\u2019s readers deserve, is arithmetic: how much energy the world actually consumes, how little of it can currently be electrified, and how little the public \u2013 asked honestly, in dollars rather than sentiment \u2013 is prepared to pay to close that gap. Until that reckoning arrives, climate politics can wait. The physics of a functioning economy, unlike the politics of a mid-term cycle, cannot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A version of this article was first published in the Daily Sceptic https:\/\/dailysceptic.org\/2026\/07\/17\/the-desperate-attempt-to-save-the-climate-alarm-narrative\/<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Aaron Regunberg\u2019s essay \u2018Why Climate Politics Can\u2019t Wait\u2019 published last week in Boston Review reads as an anxious sermon aimed at wavering Democratic strategists as the mid-term elections approach. Its target is what the party\u2019s own consultants now call \u2018climate hushing\u2019 \u2013 the quiet retreat from apocalyptic messaging.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":456585,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"jetpack_seo_schema_type":"","_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_wpcom_ai_launchpad_first_post":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"Aaron Regunberg\u2019s essay \u2018Why Climate Politics Can\u2019t Wait\u2019 published last week in Boston Review reads as an anxious sermon aimed at wavering Democratic strategists as the mid-term elections approach. Its target is what the party\u2019s own consultants now call \u2018climate hushing\u2019 \u2013 the quiet retreat from apocalyptic messaging.","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691844151,691818994,691819134,691818056,691836889,691818087,691825929,691818154,691819137,691843901,691820304],"class_list":["post-456573","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-aggressive-decarbonisation-policies","tag-climate-action","tag-climate-alarmism","tag-climate-change","tag-climate-messaging","tag-global-warming","tag-left-wing","tag-net-zero","tag-rcp8-5","tag-the-democratic-party","tag-united-states","fallback-thumbnail"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/0-ChatGPT-The-Desperate-Attempt-to-Save-the-Climate-Alarm-Narrative.png?fit=1536%2C1024&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1UM5","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":324431,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=324431","url_meta":{"origin":456573,"position":0},"title":"Legal Absurdities in Climate Policy: A Critical Review of Tilak Doshi\u2019s Analysis","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/27\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"In his recent Forbes article,\u00a0Tilak Doshi criticizes a landmark ruling by Europe\u2019s highest human rights court, which mandates countries to protect their citizens from the consequences of climate change.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0njmptva.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0njmptva.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0njmptva.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0njmptva.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0njmptva.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":373457,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=373457","url_meta":{"origin":456573,"position":1},"title":"President Trump\u2019s Energy Dominance Agenda Leaves Climate Juggernaut on Brink of Collapse","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/03\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"It has taken President Trump and his \u2018energy dominance\u2019 agenda less than 60 days to put the entire edifice of the climate juggernaut \u2013 over 30 years in the making \u2013 at risk of collapse. As with much of the President\u2019s agenda in foreign policy, economic policy and the culture\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmism\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0Cipher_Illustration_11_5_U_S_President_Clean_Energy_Donald_Trump_1500x1000_v3.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0Cipher_Illustration_11_5_U_S_President_Clean_Energy_Donald_Trump_1500x1000_v3.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0Cipher_Illustration_11_5_U_S_President_Clean_Energy_Donald_Trump_1500x1000_v3.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0Cipher_Illustration_11_5_U_S_President_Clean_Energy_Donald_Trump_1500x1000_v3.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0Cipher_Illustration_11_5_U_S_President_Clean_Energy_Donald_Trump_1500x1000_v3.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":348450,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=348450","url_meta":{"origin":456573,"position":2},"title":"The Irrationality of Western Energy Policies","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/22\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"What leads a country to begin\u00a0winding down\u00a0domestic oil and gas production while promoting the use of\u00a0imported wood\u00a0\u2013 a wasteful and inefficient fuel \u2014 for power generation?","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmism\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/0-The-Irrationality-of-Western-Energy-Policies.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/0-The-Irrationality-of-Western-Energy-Policies.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/0-The-Irrationality-of-Western-Energy-Policies.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/0-The-Irrationality-of-Western-Energy-Policies.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/0-The-Irrationality-of-Western-Energy-Policies.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":337700,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=337700","url_meta":{"origin":456573,"position":3},"title":"I Wrote an Article for Forbes Defending J.D. Vance From Accusations of \u2018Climate Denialism\u2019. Forty Eight Hours Later, Forbes Un-Published the Article and Sacked Me as a Contributor","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"07\/27\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Within a day of ex-President Trump\u2019s announcement of \u201cclimate denier\u201d Mr. J. D. Vance as the Republican Vice Presidential nominee, the climate industrial complex and supportive mainstream media had the knives out.","rel":"","context":"In \"cancel culture\"","block_context":{"text":"cancel culture","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=cancel-culture"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/0TS_EP08_PREM.01_28_54_14.Still016.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/0TS_EP08_PREM.01_28_54_14.Still016.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/0TS_EP08_PREM.01_28_54_14.Still016.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/0TS_EP08_PREM.01_28_54_14.Still016.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/0TS_EP08_PREM.01_28_54_14.Still016.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":317521,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=317521","url_meta":{"origin":456573,"position":4},"title":"\u201cI Am Going To Lecture You On Climate Change:\u201d BBC Reporter Gets Schooled for Hypocrisy","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/13\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"On March 28, President Mohamed Irfaan Ali of the South American country of Guyana became an instant hero to many as he refused to take lectures on climate change from a BBC reporter during an interview.","rel":"","context":"In \"BBC\"","block_context":{"text":"BBC","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=bbc"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0I-Am-Going-To-Lecture-You-On-Climate-Change-BBC.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0I-Am-Going-To-Lecture-You-On-Climate-Change-BBC.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0I-Am-Going-To-Lecture-You-On-Climate-Change-BBC.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0I-Am-Going-To-Lecture-You-On-Climate-Change-BBC.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0I-Am-Going-To-Lecture-You-On-Climate-Change-BBC.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":390505,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=390505","url_meta":{"origin":456573,"position":5},"title":"Energy Secretary Chris Wright to IEA: Reform or the US Exits","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"07\/24\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The International Energy Agency (IEA), established in 1974 in the wake of the Arab oil embargo, was founded with a clear and vital mission: to ensure energy security for its member nations, with coordinated oil stockpiling and rigorous data and analysis to guide energy planning and investment. For decades, it\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Energy Dominance\"","block_context":{"text":"Energy Dominance","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=energy-dominance"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQOREe0R-K5X3QJLk3pNdD1mVDpVMNHlKotyjn5pBUF5DHSkMqD7MbCxGhsm3QFqbZ6yVWzaPf-5uyXfBxEwAAozF-LodreihU07Lo31TSte9R_X2m05wEz8kHeKysGpX_4TIqSAYTCRwbsLQLX5NbJHcXF5Xw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQOREe0R-K5X3QJLk3pNdD1mVDpVMNHlKotyjn5pBUF5DHSkMqD7MbCxGhsm3QFqbZ6yVWzaPf-5uyXfBxEwAAozF-LodreihU07Lo31TSte9R_X2m05wEz8kHeKysGpX_4TIqSAYTCRwbsLQLX5NbJHcXF5Xw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQOREe0R-K5X3QJLk3pNdD1mVDpVMNHlKotyjn5pBUF5DHSkMqD7MbCxGhsm3QFqbZ6yVWzaPf-5uyXfBxEwAAozF-LodreihU07Lo31TSte9R_X2m05wEz8kHeKysGpX_4TIqSAYTCRwbsLQLX5NbJHcXF5Xw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQOREe0R-K5X3QJLk3pNdD1mVDpVMNHlKotyjn5pBUF5DHSkMqD7MbCxGhsm3QFqbZ6yVWzaPf-5uyXfBxEwAAozF-LodreihU07Lo31TSte9R_X2m05wEz8kHeKysGpX_4TIqSAYTCRwbsLQLX5NbJHcXF5Xw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQOREe0R-K5X3QJLk3pNdD1mVDpVMNHlKotyjn5pBUF5DHSkMqD7MbCxGhsm3QFqbZ6yVWzaPf-5uyXfBxEwAAozF-LodreihU07Lo31TSte9R_X2m05wEz8kHeKysGpX_4TIqSAYTCRwbsLQLX5NbJHcXF5Xw.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/456573","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=456573"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/456573\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":456588,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/456573\/revisions\/456588"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/456585"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=456573"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=456573"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=456573"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}