Based upon the evidence obtained by the Committee, the members of the climate cartel are colluding toward a common goal: the “decarbonization” of American industry
Thank you for this important reporting. The harms to Germany's economy coupled with the environmental degradation associated with their so-called decarbonization should be front and center. Putin's Russia benefited. German coal interests benefited. Here's a relevant June 13, 2024 article: https://greennuke.substack.com/p/lessons-from-germanys-wind-power The state of California is following the German playbook. Some of the coal interests that are economically benefiting are owned by Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE.) The GreenNUKE substack has been investigating BHE's conduct for some time. As a consequence, there is information consistent with BHE-led economic retaliation.
The solution for both Germany and California is to deploy nuclear power to minimize air and water pollution relative to fossil-fired dispatchable power. Modern society requires dispatchable power (under human control) instead of weather and time-of-day dependent solar and wind.) Grid-scale batteries are not cost-effective. CGNP has reached out to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee to push for rational energy policies instead of the policies backed by the German Green Party (The Heinrich Böll Foundation (hbs) receives German taxpayer funded subsidies. The hbs has offices in the West Bank of Palestine, Moscow, Russia, and Washington, DC. Many of the policies of the hbs are socialist policies. )
A note on BHE, they seem to be doing well in the Texas area too. I have heard that they have pushed for the Texas Energy Fund, whose applications stand at $38.5 million for the $5 million dollar fund. So you see where that will go. My contention and what that is worth - the State of Texas should never have become a banker, but policies drove them to no other conclusion but to fund gas peaker plants to be able to make it through the ups and downs of wind and solar and keep the lights on. Who didn't see that coming - just like ERCOT didn't see the doubling of necessary generation in the next 2 years. Really???
Politicians are good at patching the holes they create. They are not well versed in the language of energy and like all boards taking advise from experts, the road is always rosie ... we just have to get on it and get more people and more money to stay there!!!
As far as the consumer, just bend over, hand over your wallet and hold tight!
It seems lacking in factual support -- just political thrashing. What are the real environmental threats? Why have they not been addressed effectively? What are the actions all populations & governments should be taking? Does the author not know that we've known what to do for >60 years? If not, why listen to him?
It's evident that this piece is built up on earlier writing and general knowledge that the readers understand. It's not meant as explanation of theory just as baseball announcers don't explain what a ball and strike are.
What exactly "have we known" for 60+ years? I know that when I was a young boy in Maine, many sweatered sciency academics (my friend's dad was one) wandered around smoking pipes and claiming we were entering a new ice age because of pollution and *horror* nuclear power. The climate game is full of shills and men of great certitude telling us what to do. Being a little less hubristic and paternalistic would engender more useful conversation with those of differing scientific position. That would be a delightful start.
Thank you for this important reporting. The harms to Germany's economy coupled with the environmental degradation associated with their so-called decarbonization should be front and center. Putin's Russia benefited. German coal interests benefited. Here's a relevant June 13, 2024 article: https://greennuke.substack.com/p/lessons-from-germanys-wind-power The state of California is following the German playbook. Some of the coal interests that are economically benefiting are owned by Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE.) The GreenNUKE substack has been investigating BHE's conduct for some time. As a consequence, there is information consistent with BHE-led economic retaliation.
The solution for both Germany and California is to deploy nuclear power to minimize air and water pollution relative to fossil-fired dispatchable power. Modern society requires dispatchable power (under human control) instead of weather and time-of-day dependent solar and wind.) Grid-scale batteries are not cost-effective. CGNP has reached out to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee to push for rational energy policies instead of the policies backed by the German Green Party (The Heinrich Böll Foundation (hbs) receives German taxpayer funded subsidies. The hbs has offices in the West Bank of Palestine, Moscow, Russia, and Washington, DC. Many of the policies of the hbs are socialist policies. )
A note on BHE, they seem to be doing well in the Texas area too. I have heard that they have pushed for the Texas Energy Fund, whose applications stand at $38.5 million for the $5 million dollar fund. So you see where that will go. My contention and what that is worth - the State of Texas should never have become a banker, but policies drove them to no other conclusion but to fund gas peaker plants to be able to make it through the ups and downs of wind and solar and keep the lights on. Who didn't see that coming - just like ERCOT didn't see the doubling of necessary generation in the next 2 years. Really???
Politicians are good at patching the holes they create. They are not well versed in the language of energy and like all boards taking advise from experts, the road is always rosie ... we just have to get on it and get more people and more money to stay there!!!
As far as the consumer, just bend over, hand over your wallet and hold tight!
What's the purpose of this rant?
It seems lacking in factual support -- just political thrashing. What are the real environmental threats? Why have they not been addressed effectively? What are the actions all populations & governments should be taking? Does the author not know that we've known what to do for >60 years? If not, why listen to him?
Dr A. Cannara
65-400-3071
It's evident that this piece is built up on earlier writing and general knowledge that the readers understand. It's not meant as explanation of theory just as baseball announcers don't explain what a ball and strike are.
What exactly "have we known" for 60+ years? I know that when I was a young boy in Maine, many sweatered sciency academics (my friend's dad was one) wandered around smoking pipes and claiming we were entering a new ice age because of pollution and *horror* nuclear power. The climate game is full of shills and men of great certitude telling us what to do. Being a little less hubristic and paternalistic would engender more useful conversation with those of differing scientific position. That would be a delightful start.
Humility should be found in the same sentence as science.
Well said and a wonderful encapsulation of what should be stamped in all of our brains.