NY Times Warmists Offer An Energy Wish List For Congress Or Something

I don’t want to be too dismissive towards Warmists Justin Gillis and Hal Harvey, nor laugh at their absurdity too much, as there is nothing inherently wrong with alternative energy. It’s just that they’re living in a la la land

An Energy Wish List for Congress
Here’s how lawmakers can accelerate the clean-energy economy.

Because most in the private sector do not actually care that much about unreliable, expensive alternative energy.

First, Senators Murkowski and Manchin should try to establish a firm consensus in Congress that the nation must, at minimum, double its annual spending on energy research and development. They could establish this intent in the legislation, then push as a committee for the appropriations. Business and scientific leaders, including Bill Gates, have been pleading with Congress to triple the budget for years. The sum being spent for both basic and applied research now, less than $6 billion a year in the Department of Energy budget, is paltry compared to the scope of our energy and climate problems. The United States risks falling behind China and other countries in energy technology.

Why don’t these private sector leaders, like Bill Gates, start ponying up their own money for R&D, along with development? Why is it necessary for the federal government to spend taxpayer money on what often end up as boondoggles, and often leave a destroyed, polluted area behind? But, I will say that I would rather that federal dollars go to R&D over just slapping up construction, which I’ve been noting since the time of Obama’s Stimulus.

Second, the federal tax breaks that support installation of renewable energy technologies like wind turbines and solar panels should be extended for five years. Congress should also lift caps on federal tax credits for electric cars. Under current law, these incentives will be phased out in the next few years; they should go eventually, but not until the technologies are more widespread.

Do you know who this tends to help the most? The rich people who buy more of this.

Ms. Murkowski and Mr. Manchin should specifically seek a rapid expansion of offshore wind farms. That would require tax breaks to jump-start that industry, as well as a mandate that the Trump administration accelerate offshore leasing. The technology of offshore wind production, developed largely in Europe, has improved significantly in recent years; immense turbines, planted far from shore, can each supply electricity for up to 8,000 homes. States like New York and Massachusetts are already making big plans for offshore wind, but Congress and the president could speed things up. As the market expands, costs will fall and the tax breaks can be phased out.

And you can bet that the very same Democrats supporting this will want to block the construction, as it would despoil their sea views. So will shore home owners, shore cities, and environmental groups.

Third, Congress ought to make it easier to build new high-capacity power lines across the country. This sounds rather technical, we know, but it is vital. As wind turbines and solar farms become a bigger part of the electricity mix, one of the best ways to offset their intermittent nature will be to transmit power over longer distances — if the wind is not blowing in Kansas, it may well be blowing in Oklahoma or North Dakota. But state parochialism is slowing the construction of the needed power lines.

First, environmental groups will sue over the transmission lines, as they’ve done many times. Second, they’re all but admitting that wind and solar are unreliable.

Finally, we urge Mr. Manchin and other coal-state senators to recognize that the coal industry has gone into long-term decline; coal is simply losing market share to natural gas and renewable energy. The fair thing to do is to fund a transition package for coal miners and their communities, conceptually similar to what Congress did when it passed a buyout program for tobacco farmers when a federal support policy ended.

Again, I’m no big fan of coal, but, what do your replace these jobs with? You can replace a tobacco field with, say, corn or tomatoes.

Interestingly, there is no recommendation for reliable energy, like next generation nuclear and natural gas.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

12 Responses to “NY Times Warmists Offer An Energy Wish List For Congress Or Something”

  1. Professor hale says:

    Longer transmission lines = higher line loss = lower energy efficiency. There really is an engineering “end of the earth” after which the inputs are no longer detectable.

    Longer lines only purpose are so that places like California can virtue signal about closing ALL of their energy production, while getting electricity from out of state and pretending they don’t know where it comes from.

  2. Zenobia says:

    Teach: Why don’t these private sector leaders, like Bill Gates, start ponying up their own money for R&D, along with development?

    Why don’t tRump and his supporters, like Teach, start ponying up their own money for The Wall? He needs about $6 billion for a good start. $100 from each tRump voter would do the trick. Then all he needs to do is seize a lot of land in Texas.

    Is that a good way to run the nation? If Cheney/Bush voters had paid for the Iraq invasion it would have only cost you about $20,000 each.

    If universal healthcare saves $1 trillion a year should we give it to Dem voters?… about $20,000 a year?

    • formwiz says:

      They are.

      Winifred knows as well as anyone there are several GoFundMe accounts. But, the real question is why is she against the Feds protecting us from people who go to jail in 4 times the numbers as Americans?

    • Hoss says:

      Eminent domain was created specifically for public projects (with fair compensation). But your faux indignation is noted, and ignored since it was your SCOTUS team that decided the government could seize private land so that someone who would generate more taxes with it could seize the land. So, you might want to sit that particular argument out.

      You might want to look at the congressional record on who voted for the Iraqi invasion while you’re at it. Good God, you’re awful at trying to make a point (it was really cute about socialized health care saving any money. Absolutely precious).

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Precious,

        Let tRump send the feds into south Texas to take land. We’ll see had that turns out.

        Congress gave Cheney/Bush permission to use military force, while also encouraging the administration to use diplomacy. It was Cheney/Bush who decided to invade.

        It seems as if you don’t understand the differences between socialized medicine and universal care. If you’re interested I can explain. Every advanced nation except the US has some version of universal healthcare and spend about half per person as we do. So yes, Precious, we can save $100s of billions a year AND have better healthcare, just like tRump promised.

        We’re used to Con Men being hoist with their own petard.

  3. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    The Wiz: They are.

    Great! That means the American taxpayer and Mexico are off the hook.

    You assume (which makes an ass of u in front of me) that The Wall will make a difference. Yet, even without The Wall illegal immigration is at a long-time low. Despite the Moonie Times best propaganda, the truth is that undocumented residents have a crime rate lower than citizens. The worst crime spree in recent history (the Great Recession) was caused by mostly white, male citizens. Curiously, they were not arrested.

  4. Jl says:

    So, someone who comes into your home illegally would be an “undocumented visitor”? You couldn’t come up with anything dumber if you tried..
    “Have a lower crime rate than citizens..”. Of course this is too far over the head of our resident professsor to comprehend, but the crime rate should be zero, as they shouldn’t be here to begin with.

    • david7134 says:

      The low crime factor is something the ignorant liberals always refer to, they have likely been told what to think. Fact is that illegals are far more vicious than the average American and the crime rate is higher. Add this to the fact they are here illegally and don’t assimilate and use fake document and ss numbers and this are people we don’t need.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        david7134: illegals are far more vicious than the average American

        Not according to the evidence.

        david7134: use fake documents

        Like Trump Inc supplied to their illegal workers?

Bad Behavior has blocked 6850 access attempts in the last 7 days.