Tag Archives: Green Energy

Exit Stage Right: Investors Are Bailing On Green Funds

From The Daily Caller

NICK POPE

CONTRIBUTOR

Investors are fading on green energy investment funds due to worries about the sector’s ability to grow and the possible return of former President Donald Trump to the White House, Reuters reported Wednesday, citing analysis conducted by a firm called LSEG Lipper.

Funds that invest specifically in green energy companies and products around the world saw investment outflows totaling $4.8 billion during the first quarter of 2024, the largest amount in a single quarter on record, according to Reuters. Meanwhile, the S&P Global Clean Energy Index has tanked by about 10 percentage points this year while the S&P 500 Energy Index — a fund that features many oil and gas companies — is up by more than 16% this year so far.

“This is what Consumers’ Research has been warning about from the very beginning. The idea that the rush into [Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG)] and green investing would be good for investors and shareholders was always a lie,” Will Hild, the executive director of Consumers’ Research, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Now, with higher interest rates and a completely different energy paradigm, the folly of these boondoggles is becoming apparent.” (RELATED: Citigroup Reports Huge Share Of Its Clients Are Not Ready To Reach Key Climate Targets)

Many large financial institutions in the U.S. have embraced ESG investing in recent years, characterizing it as a practice that allows for investors to profit while also helping to effectuate positive societal changes. Opponents like Hild have countered that the strategy violates the fiduciary duty that institutions have to their investors by injecting politicized considerations into financial decision-making that ought to be entirely apolitical.

Now, some of the leading asset managers in the world, such as BlackRock and State Street, are under investigation by the House Judiciary Committee for their ESG practices, while State Street and JP Morgan’s asset management arm have withdrawn from Climate Action 100+, a coalition that pushes companies to slash emissions and adopt other corporate climate policies.

Globally, some of the green funds that saw the biggest capital outflows in the first quarter of 2024 include Handelsbanken Hallbar Energi, a Swedish fund that lost $458 million of investment, and the iShares Global Clean Energy ETF, which lost $335 million, according to Reuters. Meanwhile, the Ninety One Global Environment Fund lost $226 million of investment in the first quarter.

The apparent downturn in investor confidence and interest in green energy funds appears to be happening despite the Biden administration’s push to advance its massive climate agenda and similarly costly initiatives undertaken by European states like Germany. Governments like those of the U.S. and Germany have spent vast sums of money to subsidize technologies like wind and solar power generation, but green energy has yet to displace fossil fuels as the lifeblood of the world’s developed economies.

If investor interest in green energy funds and products continues to dissipate, it is unlikely that international climate goals established or reaffirmed at 2023’s United Nations climate summit in Dubai will be met, according to Reuters.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

UK To Force “Green” Energy on North Sea Oil & Gas Platforms

From Watts Up With That?

Guest “You can’t fix stupid” by David Middleton

H/T “rhs” for this Fox News article:

UK could force oil, gas platform companies to convert rigs to green energy or face shut down: reports

North Sea Transition Authority targets 2030 deadline to design platforms for green energy solution

 By Greg Wehner Fox News

Published March 28, 2024

Oil and gas rigs in United Kingdom waters of the North Sea could be forced to convert over to green energy or low-carbon fuels, or either face closure or getting banned from opening new platforms, in an effort to reduce emissions, according to reports.

The Telegraph reported there are currently over 280 oil and gas platforms in UK waters, which produce about 3% of the total CO2 emitted by the country per year.

The same rigs, though, produce nearly half of the UK’s energy.

[…]Fox News

Why can’t the media use the words “platforms” and “rigs” correctly?

These are “rigs”:

National Offshore Industries Association

A drilling rig drills wells. It is moved onto a location to drill wells. Drilling rigs then move on to the next project. The notion of powering drilling rigs with “green energy” is exceptionally stupid. (See The Solar-Powered Oil Field… An Adjustocene Fable). Offshore drilling rigs are usually powered by diesel engines. Here’s the Transocean Deepwater Invictus for an example:

Power & Machinery

Main Power 6 x HHI HiMSEN H32/40V V-type diesel engines rated 7,000 kW,720 rpm, each driving 1 x 8,125 kVA AC generator

Emergency Power One Caterpillar 3516B V-type diesel engine rated 1,780 kW, 1,800rpm driving 1 x AC generator

Power Distribution 3 x Siemens NXPlus C Plus, 11 kV Switchboards with AKA Advanced Generator ProtectionTransocean

When oil & gas discoveries are made, production platforms are installed.

These are “platforms”:

National Offshore Industries Association

Since production platforms are generally fixed structures (unless moved by hurricanes or subsea mudslides), they can be hooked up to the onshore power grid, however it is far more cost effective to power them with diesel and/or natural gas powered generators. The natural gas often comes from the production stream. The notion of powering production platforms with “green energy” is still fairly stupid, but actually possible.

The Green Hostage Crisis

Nearly half of the UK’s energy production comes from North Sea oil & gas platforms. Forced electrification of the platforms could result in a 3% reduction in the UK’s CO2 emissions. Holding 50% of your energy production hostage for a 3% reduction in CO2 emissions… Ron White would say:

Keeping the Lights On: UK Regulators Meet With North Sea Producers on Brownfield Electrification

The North Sea Transition Authority has previously said failure to invest in platform electrification could threaten future production rights.

February 21, 2024

By Trent Jacobs

UK regulators met recently in Aberdeen with oil and gas producers and technology suppliers to discuss strategies to enhance the electrification of the nation’s offshore platforms.

Power generation accounted for almost 80% of UK offshore oil and gas emissions in 2022—or about 2 mtpa. On the whole, the upstream industry represents a 3% share of all UK greenhouse gas emissions, according to the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA).

The authority has previously voiced concerns that the domestic industry must intensify its efforts to achieve the government’s goal of halving emissions from oil and gas production by 2030.

“Platform electrification is a key step on the road to net zero. The North Sea has long been a testbed for pioneering technologies and right now we need innovative solutions to crack the significant challenge of electrification, cut emissions, and accelerate the transition,” Bill Cattanach, the head of supply chain for NSTA, said in a statement.

[…]

Despite a consistent reduction in total emissions by the UK industry since 2020 and a nearly 50% reduction in flaring over the past 4 years, the NSTA has stressed the urgent need for action. Last year, it warned all UK North Sea operators that future production rights might be contingent on their commitment to field electrification.

[…]Journal of Petroleum Technology Part One

How does the North Sea Transition Authority envision oil field electrification?

North Sea Transition Authority

Piece of cake… On paper.

What happens when governments make economically illiterate demands?

Wood Mackenzie presented analysis at last year’s SPE Offshore Europe conference suggesting that with 80% of UK North Sea resources already extracted there is likely less than 600 million BOE remaining—leaving little to no economic case for electrification projects at many sites.

Additionally, a report from Offshore Energies UK (OEUK) predicted that up to 180 of the nearly 280 offshore platforms in the UK North Sea will cease production by the end of the decade due to natural declines. The trade group’s study further noted that 20 fields ceased production last year, while only two new fields were brought online.Journal of Petroleum Technology Part Deux

Who else thinks that the NSTA would actually prefer to see the premature abandonment of North Sea oil and gas fields, rather than the electrification thereof?

What electrification demand is next?

States are standing up to BlackRock and ESG

From CFACT

By Kathleen Marquardt

SAN FRANCISCO, CA JULY 1, 2018: BlackRock financial services logo outside of office in San Francisco

Fox News’ Thomas Catenacci’s article, “Mississippi hits BlackRock with cease and desist, threatens massive fine over ESG policies,” shows us a Secretary of State who is following the Constitution and protecting his constituents from one of the Woke and disastrous schemes – the imposition of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria in the business world.

The Corporate Finance Institute says, “By restricting access to capital (or making the terms under which it’s available less favorable), bad actors may be incentivized to improve performance across E, S, or G measures.” By the term “incentivized” they mean threatening to stop the flow of vital money important businesses may need unless they are toeing woke priorities including the Green energy line. As companies and states are learning, ESG is very hard on the bottom line. And some are not afraid to stand up against it.

Last month, 16 Republican attorneys general—Montana, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Utah—demanded answers from BlackRock on its ESG policies and participation in climate organizations. They are starting to follow through.

Like a heroic Western sheriff, Secretary of State Michael Watson stated, “Investment companies will not push their political agenda on Mississippians”. He backed that up with the announcement that he had just issued a cease-and-desist order to BlackRock, alleging the firm had committed “fraud by misleading investors through its climate policies”. Then he added this kicker, “a notice of intent to impose an administrative penalty — which could amount to a first-of-its-kind multimillion-dollar fine”—all over ESGs.

The evidence Watson gave that BlackRock is pushing ESG seems compelling. According to the article:

Watson’s order adds that BlackRock has been a signatory of Climate Action 100+ alliance, which was formed by the United Nations to combat global warming through corporate sustainability agreements. As part of its membership, the firm agreed to “support the Paris Agreement and the need for the world to transition to a lower carbon economy.”

Catenacci’s article makes these further points:

“BlackRock made untrue statements that certain of its funds do not incorporate ESG considerations,” the Mississippi order reads, “As detailed extensively in this order, BlackRock stated on multiple occasions either expressly through publications or by action that the company does in fact incorporate ESG considerations into its non-ESG funds.”

Watson said BlackRock’s alleged behavior as outlined in the order constitutes a violation of Mississippi’s general fraud statute.

He finished his remarks in the same vein, “They’ve been lying to their customers, and states like Mississippi are not going to allow this to continue. Consumers’ Research will continue to support bold actions taken by state leaders to put an end to the misuse of assets by dishonest Wall Street fat cats like Larry Fink and BlackRock.”

Those 16 states that signed on to going after BlackRock for its ESG policies have just begun the fight. The Texas Permanent School Fund just pulled $8.5 billion from BlackRock, citing its ESG. It’s heartening to see that people are waking up to the fallacies of environmental policies and even to the absurdities of radicalized climate “science”. They and many more, please!

If you want to read the full article, go to:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/mississippi-hits-blackrock-with-cease-desist-threatens-massive-fine-over-esg-policies

Biden’s Signature Climate Law Has A Major Achilles’ Heel — And Dems Are Making It Worse

From The Daily Caller

NICK POPE

CONTRIBUTOR

President Joe Biden’s landmark climate bill is being held back by a lack of comprehensive permitting reform, the absence of which enables environmentalist lawsuits that impede green energy projects subsidized by the legislation.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) contained hundreds of billions of dollars to subsidize green energy projects nationwide, but the bill did not include significant reform to the permitting process that would expedite construction timelines and insulate developments from environmental legal challenges. Unless Congressional Democrats can negotiate a permitting reform package with Republicans in an election year, these problems will continue to dog the IRA’s implementation, energy policy experts and stakeholders told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

After solar and wind developments have been built, they need to be connected to the grid via transmission lines to feed power into the grid. Permitting reform would speed up the lengthy paperwork process for that transmission, as well as provide developers an additional layer of protection against environmental lawsuits that also disrupt the construction of green energy developments (RELATED: Blue States Are Stripping Rural Counties Of Ability To Prevent Green Energy Takeover Of Their Communities)

However, that reform has not happened yet, thanks in part to Congressional Democrats’ inability to agree among themselves on what that reform should look like to counter Republican proposals, according to E&E News.

“I think that not having any transmission reform is a huge barrier to implementing the IRA,” Isaac Orr, a policy analyst for the Center for the American Experiment who specializes in energy policy, told the DCNF. “I think there was an understanding that permitting reform was necessary in order to implement a lot of the things Democrats wanted as soon as they got the IRA … It’s a physical reality that you need the transmission in order to incorporate all this new capacity on the grid.”

The lack of reform has left numerous green energy developments open to legal challenges filed by environmental groups, who often will pursue similar legal strategies adopted by opponents of fossil fuel infrastructure projects in the past.

For example, a coalition of tribes and environmental organizations are suing to block a massive $10 billion transmission project in Arizona, while different coalitions have taken to court to allege violations of environmental laws on the part of offshore wind developers building wind farms in waters off the coasts of Virginia and Massachusetts. Elsewhere in the country, conservation groups have continued the yearslong fight against Wisconsin’s Cardinal-Hickory Creek transmission line by suing the government to stop construction.

“Reforms aimed at streamlining the federal government’s permit decision-making process and discouraging frivolous litigation have the potential not only to improve regulatory efficiency but also to bring about greater certainty and predictability in the offshore wind sector,” Erik Milito, the president of the National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA) told the DCNF. “Litigation, particularly around alleged National Environmental Policy Act deficiencies, has been a significant hindrance for offshore wind projects. A robust U.S. offshore wind market relies on confidence and certainty in the permitting and regulatory process, which is essential for fostering growth and ensuring the success of these projects, much like any other major infrastructure endeavor.”

Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a leading advocate for comprehensive permitting reform, has tried to advance legislation to expedite the permitting process and minimize opportunities for litigation to gum up timelines for all kinds of energy projects.

In total, there are no fewer than ten different permitting-related bills in Congress and two major regulatory initiatives underway on the federal level, but progress on streamlining the permitting process is still very sluggish, according to Utility Dive.

“All of these things, the Clean Water Act, the way the National Environmental Policy Act is now run … you can’t get anything built because of these statutes,” Mike McKenna, a Republican strategist with extensive experience in and around the energy sector, told the DCNF about Congressional gridlock on permitting reform.

“So we are about a year into you’re what I think is going to be a seven- or eight-year process, where everyone on the Left starts figuring out, ‘Oh, my goodness, these guys were right, You can’t build any of this stuff.”

Neither the White House nor the Department of Energy responded to requests for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Almost all top BP shareholders unhappy with green strategy, claims activist investor

Oil giant faces fresh pressure to halt renewables investments.

Almost all of BP’s biggest shareholders are unhappy with its shift to green energy, an activist investor has claimed, amid a growing backlash over the oil giant’s focus on net zero targets.

Giuseppe Bivona, chief executive of Bluebell Capital, which has a minority stake in BP, said he had spent the past three weeks talking to many of the company’s top 30 investors. The Telegraph has the story.

He said: “With only the exception of one shareholder, I am still to find someone who supports BP in its entirety.”

Bluebell is spearheading a brewing investor revolt after sending a 30-page letter to the FTSE 100 company in January. 

In the letter it urged BP to halt investment in renewable energy schemes, prioritise oil and gas production, and rewrite net zero targets to clarify that they will be achieved “in line with society”. 

BP has been under increasing pressure over net zero commitments that have allegedly left shareholders £40bn poorer. 

Mr Bivona said he plans to share negative feedback with BP on a no-name basis, which he said will “clearly expose them to the fact that many investors are sympathetic to what we are saying”. 

He is hopeful this will serve as a “wake-up call” for the company, with Bluebell having previously taken similar action against blue-chip giants Glencore and Danone.

The activist threat represents the first major test for Murray Auchincloss, BP’s new chief executive, who has told staff that he will stick to the green energy plans rolled out by his predecessor Bernard Looney.

Read the full story here.

Icy blast of bankruptcies loom for Swedish wind-power sector, experts warn

FURUDAL 2010-12-14Vindkraftverk p Hedboberget i Furudal i vintermiljˆ.Foto Trons / SCANPIX Kod 6995

From Brussels Signal

By Carl Deconinck

Two Swedish economists have issued a warning that the country’s wind-power industry is on the brink of a wave of bankruptcies.

Christian Sandström and Christian Steinbeck analysed wind-power companies’ annual reports in Sweden and their work revealed “significant financial problems”, they told Swedish media outlet Kvartal on February 28.

“The total loss for the years 2017–2022 amounted to 13.5 billion Swedish krona [€1.2 billion], which meant a loss margin of 39 per cent,” they said about the sector.

Such heavy losses seem to be the rule rather than the exception for wind-power companies in Sweden, according to the annual reports.

The Swedish Government has been pushing its national energy policies in a “green” direction, promoting wind power and decommissioning nuclear power plants. But the cost appears to be much more painful than previously thought, the economists stressed.

Sandström and Steinbeck have been pointing towards profitability problems in the wind sector for some time “despite suppliers benefiting from Government support through electricity certificates and being exempt from covering the entire expenses associated with grid adaptation for wind energy or the depreciation of properties near installations”.

Since the economists’ initial findings, Markbygden Ett, Sweden’s largest wind-farm installation with 179 turbines, is already facing bankruptcy, stacking up hundreds of millions of krona in debt.

The firm is not alone – many other alternative-power companies in Sweden are in trouble.

Sandström and Steinbeck pointed out that the sector as a whole has not made a profit in any year since 2017.

Company losses have ranged from 19 per cent to 90 per cent of turnover between 2017 and 2022, they said.

“The losses are simply because the industry cannot produce electricity at a cost below the market price, despite extensive subsidies,” the economists noted.

“That would put any other industry out of business, [although] the rate of investment has been very high.”

Both newer and older plants in the heavily subsidised industry shed cash, while economies of scale are also a limitation. The biggest farms make the biggest losses and only moderate-sized wind farms, with between 20 and 30 turbines, are turning any profits and those are at best described as “modest”.

Costs have failed to come down despite growing experience among those operating in the sector and the researchers did not observe any correlation between time elapsed and increased electricity production from existing turbines.

“Just as sailors on sailing ships once had to pray to higher powers for wind to get somewhere, wind farms can only wait for the right amount of wind,” they added.

On top of that, just 20 per cent of wind turbines in Sweden are Swedish owned. The rest are operated by foreign enterprises. Some 13 per cent of the reviewed turbines are Chinese.

Sandström and Steinbeck said the Chinese investors made their calculations based on “wind mapping” carried out by the Swedish Energy Agency and they have doubts about the accuracy of the data.

Also hammering profits is the fact that large parts of the Swedish wind-power industry cannot transfer or save power over-generation, meaning electricity needs to be consumed instantly or not at all – making it effectively unsustainable.

A few wind farms in the South of the country have gained financial momentum in recent years but all the others are stacking up more losses.

The academics noted that the change in the Swedish energy mix – decommissioning nuclear plants in favour of wind power – was politically driven and that no robust, financial independent industry has subsequently emerged.

A peculiar paradox also haunts the sector, the economists stressed. Low levels of wind leads to high electricity prices yet it also hinders electricity delivery.

On the flip side, when the wind is more powerful, oversupply drives down prices when there is ample electricity for sale.

“It is difficult to see a way out of this dilemma,” Sandström and Steinbeck concluded.

Green Energy Billionaire: “Farmers affected could be compensated and find other places to farm”

 Andrew “Twiggy” Forest 

From Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

A shouting match reportedly erupted after green entrepreneur Andrew “Twiggy” Forest allegedly suggested to rural MP Llew O’Brien that farmers pushed out by green energy development could find somewhere else to farm.

‘Gutless’: Nationals MP launches into expletive-filled tirade at mining magnate Andrew Forrest as pair become embroiled in fiery row over renewables

…

Andrew Clennell Political Editor
February 28, 2024 – 11:00AM

Nationals MP Llew O’Brien has become embroiled in a shouting match with mining magnate Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest in a meeting at Parliament House on Tuesday, where Mr O’Brien called Mr Forrest a “f***ing charlatan” and a “f***ing snake oil salesman” after the two got into a row over the impact of transmission lines on farms.

The argument over wind farms and transmission lines to create renewable projects descended into a stare-off between the men, according to multiple Nationals sources, including a witness to the stoush.

…

When Mr Forrest made comments about how farmers affected could be compensated and find other places to farm, Mr O’Brien blew up, according to sources.

…Read more: https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/gutless-nationals-mp-launches-into-expletivefilled-tirade-at-mining-magnate-andrew-forrest-as-pair-become-embroiled-in-fiery-row-over-renewables/news-story/7272e20e78a3af15f67a0a3124818fcc

This isn’t the first time greens have been accused of having a callous attitude to people who get in their way.

According to the BBC, in Africa disregard for the rights of people who get in the way of money making green projects has led to violence and allegations of war crimes.

I hope similar violence doesn’t occur in Australia. I am certainly not accusing Twiggy of wanting to kill anyone or commit war crimes. But seriously: What is the plan if thousands of Aussie farmers in the path of green energy transmission lines or other infrastructure projects simply refuse to move?

What would Aussie farmers do if the government responds to rural refusal to comply, with insensitivity, state backed violence, and mass expropriation? Do they think farmers would sit down and take it quietly?

I don’t know exactly what was said in that meeting. It is possible the whole situation has been wildly exaggerated, sometimes these tales grow in the telling. But you Twiggy had better issue a clarification, and fast. Because if you don’t, you might put a match to the powder keg of discontent which is building in rural Australia, over the Albanese Government’s aggressive disregard for farmers, during their rushed implementation of their poorly planned green energy policies.

Germany Likely In Recession, Central Bank Partially Blames Green Agenda

From The Daily Caller

NICK POPE

CONTRIBUTOR

Germany appears to be in a technical recession thanks in part to climate policies, according to the country’s central bank.

The German economy has struggled since 2022, flashing strong indicators that its economically-crucial manufacturing sector is hollowing out amid a prolonged energy crisis. The Bundesbank, Germany’s central bank, said Monday that while the economy’s sluggishness may meet the technical definition of a recession, the institution does not presently believe that there are credible indications that the German economy is experiencing the deep and prolonged economic decline colloquially associated with a state of recession.

“German economic output contracted in the final quarter of 2023, according to the February Monthly Report. Fourth-quarter real gross domestic product (GDP) fell by a seasonally adjusted 0.3% on the quarter according to the Federal Statistical Office’s flash estimate, after virtually stagnating in the first three quarters of 2023,” the Bundesbank said in a statement. “Bundesbank economists believe that uncertainty about transformation and climate policy is also likely to have weighed on economic activity.” (RELATED: German Farmers Kick Off Massive Protests Against Policy That Could Threaten Their Livelihoods)

Germany’s climate agenda has the country aiming to generate 80% of its electricity from sources like wind and solar by 2050, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

In the third quarter of 2023, the German electricity sector produced 20% less power than it did in the same period in 2022, according to the GMK Center. In terms of demand, Germany’s 2023 energy consumption checked in at about 8% lower than 2022’s levels, and approximately 25% lower than 1990 levels, according to Clean Energy Wire.

The country’s consumer price index for electricity was nearly 50% higher in December 2023 than in January 2021, according to data from Eurostat.

Germany has spent of hundreds of billions of euros to push a broad green energy transition, but the country is on track to miss its climate targets despite that spending. Officials moved to shutter the country’s remaining nuclear power plants in April 2023 amid serious concerns about the long-term energy supply.

The Bundesbank is also projecting that economic output will decline again in the first quarter of this year, according to its statement. The central bank also acknowledged that a growing share of manufacturers — 37% of all such firms as of the end of 2023 — are reporting shortfalls of orders.

The German manufacturing sector has posted either flat growth or contracted for four straight quarters, a dynamic which elevated interest rates have not helped, according to Reuters.

Numerous manufacturers and industrial companies have warned for months that the deteriorating situation in Germany may force them to shift their operations elsewhere, and some have already initiated this process, according to Bloomberg News. A collapse in German manufacturing would be devastating for the country’s economy, once widely considered the powerhouse of Europe, given that the sector has historically provided about 20% of annual GDP, according to Bloomberg News.

Germany’s economic woes appear to be shaking up the political scene, as well. The Alternative for Germany (AfD), the leading right-wing populist party, has seen its popularity more than double since the Ukraine war started and kicked the country’s energy problems into overdrive, according to polling data aggregated by Politico.

The Bundesbank did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Are ‘Green’ Agendas Carrying Governors to Political Cliffs?

From Watts Up With That?

By Gordon Tomb

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon are riding the same “green energy” horse, trotting into the sunset — or toward a political cliff.

After voicing concerns, Shapiro is pressing ahead with Pennsylvania’s proposed participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, appealing a Commonwealth Court ruling barring the governor from unilateral action. He also has proposed expanding subsidies for “alternative energy” sources.

In the Cowboy State, Gordon advocates “decarbonizing the West” with a facility that would suck carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Challenged by state legislators to debate his proposal publicly, Gordon ultimately declined.

Both governors have drawn fire from political critics, mostly Republicans, who note that their states’ economies rely heavily on fossil fuel production to generate affordable electricity and create high-paying jobs.

Do Shapiro and Gordon believe they are saving the planet? Or do they consider the environmental lobby more powerful than the voters who would foot the bill for their “green” initiatives with higher energy prices and power outages?

The political headwinds of “green” energy policies aren’t restricted to Pennsylvania and Wyoming. While these governors are sticking to their agendas, politicians worldwide face career-threatening backlashes to climate activism.

As physics teaches us, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Climate activists swung the political pendulum in one extreme direction. Now, the pendulum is heading toward its logical pivot: “Eco-friendly” governments losing to skeptical political forces.

In Germany, a constitutional court ruled that one of the “government’s main gimmicks for funding green projects” violates the law. The ruling forced the government to “level with voters about how much the net-zero energy transition will cost,” resulting in “a fiscal moment of truth that exploded into a political crisis.”

Calling climate change “a socialist lie,” self-described libertarian Javier Milei surprised some Argentinians by beating the incumbent president substantially, “fueling concerns that South America’s second-largest economy will backtrack on climate promises.” However, Argentinians’ concerns about raging inflation and economic stagnation trumped climate change.

In the Netherlands, the Party for Freedom won parliamentary elections, replacing a government that sought to kill off large segments of Dutch agriculture to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The winning party’s manifesto declares, “We have been made to fear climate change for decades. … We must stop being afraid.”

In addition to political fallout, economic troubles in green energy abound. Ford and General Motors have cut investments into poorly selling electric vehicles. Meanwhile, Siemens Energy, a wind turbine manufacturer, reports multibillion dollar losses.

Green projects are regularly falling by the wayside. Offshore wind has run into rough seas along America’s East Coast. A Danish company scrapped two New Jersey projects, and New England developers canceled three projects slated to provide power to Massachusetts and Connecticut.

Robert Bryce, author of Power Hungry: The Myths of “Green” Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future, follows the fortunes of “green” projects in the United States. His latest tally of canceled wind and solar projects is more than 600 since 2015.

“The march to ‘green’ energy, after years of uncontradicted hype, is now experiencing one reverse after another,” writes energy analyst Francis Menton.

Menton continues: “It turns out that there are limits to how much governments can achieve by trying to hide the costs of wind and solar energy through various subsidies and tax credits. At some point, after pocketing all the subsidies and credits, the developers still must deliver power to the grid at an affordable cost; and if they can’t, they will go broke.”

It is little wonder that so-called “green” technologies are having a tough go in the marketplace. A Bank of America analysis states, “Solar and wind look more expensive than almost any alternative on an unsubsidized basis. … [W]ind, biomass, and non-concentrated solar power may not be economically viable without perpetual subsidies.”

That puts taxpayers on the hook forever unless those imposing destructive policies face political consequences.

Leaders like Shapiro and Gordon might pay closer mind to certain realities, although we’ll stop short of predicting their futures. The impossibility of controlling Earth’s most complex system, the climate, may be equaled only by that of predicting the luck of a particular individual in the world’s most perplexing unnatural system: politics.

This commentary was first published at Broad + Liberty on January 3, 2024.

Gordon Tomb is a senior fellow with the Commonwealth Foundation, a Pennsylvania-based, free-market think tank, and senior advisor with the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He is primary editor of two books on climate change, including “A Very Convenient Warming: How modest warming and more CO2 are benefiting humanity.”

Biden Admin’s Latest Subsidy Proposal May Undercut Its Own Green Energy Agenda

From The Daily Caller

NICK POPE

CONTRIBUTOR

The Biden administration proposed eligibility rules for hydrogen industry subsidies Friday, but some conditions may ultimately stymie innovation and production of the technology, Bloomberg News reported.

Hydrogen is one of the key green energy technologies that the administration is counting on to replace fossil fuels on the path to reaching its goal of a fully decarbonized power sector by 2035. The proposed rules for billions of dollars of hydrogen subsidies are governed by strict environmental constraints intended to ensure that hydrogen production does not generate more emissions than it effectively cancels out, but green energy trade groups say that those conditions may actually stifle the nascent industry, according to Bloomberg.

The Biden administration and environmentalists consider hydrogen fuel to be a crucial tool to decarbonize heavy-duty transportation, as well as the production of steel and cement, according to Bloomberg. However, the hydrogen fuel production is in its infancy and has yet be proven effective and economical at scale. (RELATED: Companies Pressure Biden Admin To Allow Tax Credits For ‘Green’ Hydrogen Produced With Natural Gas)

The tax credits are meant to bridge that gap, but the proposed rules mandate that subsidy-eligible hydrogen can only be generated if new green power is being produced during the same hours, according to Bloomberg. Administration officials reportedly said that they chose to restrict the subsidies to hydrogen that is produced with green energy brought online within the last three years, on the same power grids and at the same times.

Several green energy trade associations and executives criticized the proposal. The guidelines “will fall woefully short in achieving the Administration’s decarbonization objectives” and “are counter Congress’ intent,” Andy Marsh, the CEO of Plug Power Inc., a hydrogen company, told Bloomberg.

“Unfortunately, the Administration proposal contains a fatal – but fixable – flaw that must be addressed to realize the economic, environmental, and climate benefits of commercially scaling a domestic green hydrogen industry … the rushed imposition of the most burdensome restrictions fails to acknowledge the market realities of new technology deployment,” American Clean Power Association CEO Jason Grumet said of the proposed rules. ” Specifically, imposing an hourly matching provision too early for first-wave green hydrogen projects will discourage a significant majority of clean power companies from investing in green hydrogen manufacturing and facilities.”

The green energy requirements attached to the eligibility rules could spawn a price premium of up to 150%, which would make hydrogen economically unfeasible for most potential applications, according to Bloomberg, which cited a previous analysis conducted by the American Clean Power Association.

The guidelines are still in draft form, and will now be subjected to a 60-day public comment period and potential revisions, according to Bloomberg.

The White House, the Treasury Department and the Energy Department all did not respond immediately to requests for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.