Markers On The Road To The Green Energy Wall -- Electric Trucks Edition

  • In a post in December 2021, I first asked which state or country would be the first to hit the “Renewable Energy Wall” — described as “a situation where the electricity system stops functioning, or the price goes through the roof,” or some other aspects of impossibility become so unavoidable that the zero carbon fantasy must be abandoned.

  • In subsequent posts I have explored various ways that the Wall was starting to manifest — for example, cancellation of offshore wind energy developments, and abandonment of large investments in producing so-called “green hydrogen.”

  • Although the coming of the Wall has been obvious to intelligent observers for a long time, the green energy fantasists had set their statutory and regulatory mandates sufficiently far into the future that there was no immediate reckoning.

  • But now, five and more years on, that is starting to change. The first of the impossible mandates are suddenly looming. The arrival of President Trump on the scene has also been a huge negative for the green energy crowd. But for today I’ll focus on a subject that has much more to do with reality than with any action of the President. That subject is fully electrified heavy duty trucks.

Read More

More On Counting Federal Spending As A Full-Value Addition To GDP

  • My last post on Tuesday has inspired a spirited debate in the comments about how federal spending should properly be accounted for in GDP. What is the right answer? After reading the comments, it occurs to me that there are several more points to make.

  • For those criticizing or disagreeing with my post — led by prolific commenter Richard Greene — the main theme has been that many large categories of federal spending make an obvious positive contribution to the economy. Examples given include the Defense Department, teachers/education, and national parks.

  • Surely excluding those kinds of things entirely from GDP accounting would provide at least as deceptive an indicator of the true size of the economy as including them at full cost value. And if those kinds of things, and many others, are not included at full cost value, what is the alternative? Some flat percentage discount could be applied, but there is no obvious constant level of discount that would be appropriate for all categories of spending; and reasonable people could disagree on varying levels of discount for different categories. Maybe defense should even be included at a premium!

  • My answer to this critique was at least suggested in the prior post. . . .

Read More

Is Some Honesty About To Come To Government Economic Statistics?

  • A recurring theme at this blog over the years has been the rank dishonesty of many of our government’s economic statistics.

  • Rather than being neutral indicators of the state of the country and its economy, the most important government statistics have been crafted and manipulated to maximize their usefulness to advocates for increases in the size of government and in government spending. Here is a particularly detailed post on this subject from back in December 2016.

  • The two main areas of focus here have been the statistics on GDP and on poverty. Both of those come from the Commerce Department.

  • In the case of GDP, the biggest issue is that government spending on goods and services is counted as a 100-cents-on-the-dollar addition to GDP. That means that the most wasteful spending gives an apparent but false boost to the economy; and even more importantly, that any cut to government spending, no matter how wasteful the spending may have been, gets portrayed as a hit to the economy and a harbinger of recession.

  • For today, I’ll consider the GDP statistics.

Read More

The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time -- Part XXXIII

  • The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time is the fraud by which our government alters existing U.S. and worldwide temperature data in order to enhance an apparent warming trend, and thereby support a narrative of supposedly dangerous global warming.

  • This is Part XXXIII of this series, which goes back to July 2013. A composite link to all 32 prior posts in this series can be found here.

  • As has been widely reported and discussed, the arrival of the new Trump 2.0 presidency is bringing disruption and change to many areas of a previously complacent federal bureaucracy.

  • One of the areas where disruption appears to be hitting is an agency called NOAA — the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which is a part of the Department of Commerce. NOAA is the place where the world and U.S. temperature data are collected and compiled — and altered.

  • Will the new disruption shed some light upon the systematic alterations of our temperature data?

Read More

The Process Of Rescinding The Endangerment Finding Has Begun

  • As discussed in a couple of recent posts here and here, the so-called Endangerment Finding (EF) was an EPA regulatory action early in the Obama Administration (December 2009) that now provides the foundation for all government efforts to restrict and suppress the use of hydrocarbons in our economy.

  • In one of his first day Executive Orders (“Unleashing American Energy”), President Trump directed the incoming EPA Administrator to submit, within 30 days, “recommendations to the Director of OMB on the legality and continuing applicability of the Administrator’s findings.” Lee Zeldin was then confirmed and sworn in as EPA Administrator on January 29; but the 30th day after the EO, February 19, passed without any public news about a recommendation on the EF.

  • Today there is news.

Read More

Amicus Brief Filed In Glen Oaks Village Owners v. City Of New York

Amicus Brief Filed In Glen Oaks Village Owners v. City Of New York
  • Back at the beginning of the year, I had a post titled “New York On The March To Climate Utopia.” The post took note that everything about New York State’s vision for a zero-emissions economy and for “climate leadership” was in the process of falling apart.

  • Its contracts for vast off-shore wind farms to replace fossil fuel generation had either been completely canceled (the majority) or rebid at much higher and uneconomic prices (the minority). Its two contracted facilities to produce “green” hydrogen to back up the intermittent wind and solar had run into financial difficulties and were likely to fail. Its one big contracted high-capacity transmission line to bring the imaginary upstate wind and solar electricity to downstate markets had also been canceled, without stated reason but almost certainly because of unworkable economics.

  • In the few short weeks since that post, you would think that it would be almost impossible for the situation of New York’s utopian climate plans to have gotten any worse. But in fact the situationhasgotten worse — much, much worse.

Read More