According to my previous post, the situation in Ukraine should be a wake-up call for everyone to give up the illusion of wind and solar energy as soon as possible, and make sure we have energy that actually works. The wind/solar illusion, combined with an aggressive crackdown on fossil fuels and even nuclear, is essentially funding Vladimir Putin’s war through increasing oil and gas exports. and higher prices. Meanwhile, the brave Ukrainian armed forces certainly do not mind the wind; nor the Russians attacking them.
In 2021, after finally achieving energy independence under President Trump, The United States immediately renounced that as the Biden Administration introduces new rounds of fossil fuel crackdowns.
There are many people in positions of power and/or influence in and within our government who value the religious fervor of “green” energy and “real zero” emissions to the world. level that no amount of major events in the real world could penetrate their mental armor. In my February 26 post, I quote US “climate special envoy” John Kerry begging the world not to let the Russian invasion distract from the “focus” on rapidly reducing emissions. Think of all the carbon emissions from burning buildings and storage tanks! And Kerry is just the tip of the iceberg of the climate problems in and around our government that is working to accelerate as quickly as possible the dismantling of a reliable and cost-effective energy system. at our expense, even as the Ukraine war clearly demonstrated the serious need for energy security.
Last Thursday, February 24 — that would be the day Vladimir Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine — a group of Biden lieutenants held a two-hour virtual love affair they called the “Roundtable Conference.” about climate”. Have you read about it yet? In fact, the official title is “The White House Climate Science Roundtable Against ‘Procrastination’ and Communicating the Urgency of Climate Action.” The White House statement of the event can be found here, full of quotes from ignorant fools. A few examples out of many:
- Chief of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and Deputy Assistant to the President, Dr. Alondra Nelson: “This is incredibly important to us, because, as you know, the Biden-Harris Administration agenda on climate change is historic. We rejoined the Paris Agreement on Day One, and we’re back at the international negotiating table – leading the world in increasing our collective ambition, action and innovation over the next decade. We’ve also set bold goals for the US: cut US emissions in half by the end of the decade, reach 100% clean electricity by 2035, and reach net zero emissions by 2050. . . [T]his team knows better than most people: there have been decades, and still are, forces arrayed against the causes of climate action – running the gamut from self-interest and short-term thinking, to deliberate and covert disinformation campaigns like them. are invaders. ”
- White House OSTP Deputy Director for Climate and Environment Dr. Jane Lubchenco: “While there is widespread awareness of the physical science aspects of this climate crisis, attention to the social sciences has lagged behind. And at the same time, vested interests have deftly manipulated the story to block or stall action. Our world is a dual environmental and social system, which must be understood and treated as an integrated system. Today, we bring to the White House a richer, more complete integration of the physical and social sciences. . . . It’s time to understand and fight the procrastination that has cost us dearly. “
- White House Senior Adviser Neera Tanden (you will recall she did not receive confirmation from the Senate to head the OMB; so they appointed her to the position without confirmation): “It is clear that a range of special interests have been beneficial in sowing doubt about climate change and fostering denialism and procrastination. We need to confront that reality. However, despite this organized campaign, most countries want climate action because they understand the consequences of inaction. ”
- Andrea Dutton, Professor of Geosciences from the University of Wisconsin: “Sea-level rise threatens the safety and security of the United States. It’s as if we had an army circling our shores, advancing further each year than the year before, taking up more land as we go. We will not tolerate that; however, we are letting sea level rise unabated. ”
Well, Andrea, what about Russia, China, and possibly Iran and North Korea are the real threats out there? I suggest we focus on those things. Sea levels are rising at a rate of maybe 6 – 8 inches per century, as it has been in the past 10,000 years since the last ice age. Maybe we can check that again in a hundred years or so to see if it’s really a problem.
Meanwhile, back in Europe, perhaps being much closer to the advancing Russian tanks was a way to focus the mind. Germany, with “Energiewende,” has long imagined itself as the vanguard of the fossil fuel phase-out. But 12 years on from that, they have essentially no storage, batteries or otherwise, to back up wind and sun, and are therefore completely dependent on fossil fuels on windless nights and cloudy winter days. Oh, and they’ve also banned natural gas mining in their territory. So it’s Russian natural gas or nothing, like Russia’s decision to move militarily westward.
The headline of today’s Bloomberg story is “Germany can expand the use of coal to replace Russian gas.” But wait, you say – didn’t Germany just elect a new government consisting of the Social Democrats and the Greens? Surely, those people would not tolerate such a thing! Think:
Economy Secretary Robert Habeck, a former Green Party co-leader, said coal plants could last longer and even said he was not “ideologically opposed” to expanding energy use. nuclear quantity. Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Sunday announced plans to build two new liquefied natural gas terminals to expand Germany’s energy choices and reduce dependence on Russia. In an interview late Sunday on TV channel ARD, the government wanted to get to a point where it could “pick and choose the countries we want to build an energy partnership with”. “Choosing also means that, in case of doubt, you can become independent from Russian gas, coal or oil.”
Related
