The people pushing the “energy transition” in New York and elsewhere claim a foundation in science, but proceed with religious fervor.

A key element of the playbook is never to engage with people asking legitimate questions, who are generally dismissed out of hand as “deniers.”

But every so often one of the team will break the code of silence, thus giving us some insight into the thought process behind the campaign to transform our energy supply.

In New York, the most important academic guru behind the Climate Act and energy transition is a Cornell professor named Robert Howarth.

In this post last week, I took note that New York’s electric grid system operator, NYISO, has recently issued some clear, if muted, warnings of the impossibility of the energy transition mandated by the state’s 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA).

In a November 2023 Report, NYISO stated (deeply buried at page 52) that “DEFRs are needed to balance intermittent supply with demand,” and those DEFRs must be “significant in capacity.” DEFRs are the elusive and not-yet-invented “dispatchable emissions-free resources.”

At a conference the following month, NYISO’s VP for System Integration Planning, Zachary Smith, reiterated the need for these DEFRs in large amounts. Smith presented charts quantifying the capacity of DEFRs needed for New York to “balance” its prospective intermittent wind/solar supply as something in the range of 30+ GW. 30 GW is close to the peak electricity demand for the entire state, and is approximately equivalent to the existing capacity of New York’s fleet of natural gas plants, all of which are mandated to be closed by 2040.

So what is the answer to the great DEFR conundrum?

The electric utility for most of New York City is Consolidated Edison, usually shortened to Con Edison, or even Con Ed.

When I moved to New York almost 50 years ago, Con Ed was what they call “vertically integrated,” meaning that it was responsible for all aspects of the electricity system, from generation of the power, to high-voltage wholesale distribution, down to delivery to individual homes. That ended in the late 1990s. As part of the deregulation of that era, Con Ed sold off almost all of its generation facilities to independent operators who since then must bid for access to the grid. Today Con Ed is almost entirely in the distribution business, including both wholesale and retail.

Although it no longer generates the power, Con Ed does have competent grid engineers working for it, and it is in a position to have a bird’s-eye view of New York’s so-called energy transition. Clearly, they are very well informed about the looming energy disaster in this state. Also, of all the companies involved in some way in providing electricity in New York City, Con Ed is the main one that has direct contact with most of the ultimate consumers. They are like a sitting duck, waiting to take the blame when everything falls apart.

So, suppose you were Con Ed. What would be your strategy to deal with what you clearly know is an impending catastrophe?

Dr. Benny Peiser and I have now begun our 2024 GWPF U.S. speaking tour.

Yesterday we appeared for an event at the Texas Public Policy Foundation in Austin, Texas. Between in person and online, we understand that over 400 people attended the event. (I believe that video of this event will be posted at some point on the TPPF website, but I don’t find it there yet.). Tonight we will be speaking at the 3 West Club, 3 West 51st St. in New York City, at 6 PM.

As mentioned previously in my post two weeks ago announcing tonight’s event, the title is “Europe’s Net Zero rebellion, European elections, and the coming U.S. reckoning.” Benny will cover the European piece of the subject matter, while I am taking on the “coming U.S. reckoning.”

I’ll give you here a brief preview to whet your appetite.