July 17, 2022

When Will They Figure Out That Reducing U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Is Pointless?

July 17, 2022/ Francis Menton

The Supreme Court’s West Virginia v. EPA decision a couple of weeks ago has brought forth a big wave of hand wringing in the precincts of the left. How oh how are we now going to save the planet, if our friends at the EPA can no longer order up a nation-wide energy system transformation on their own authority?
A couple of examples of the genre come from Ron Brownstein in the Atlantic, and from Coral Davenport in the New York Times, both from Friday July 15.
The funny thing about these pieces, and many others like them, is that the authors seem to have completely lost track of, or failed to follow, what has happened and continues to happen in the arena of international energy consumption.

July 15, 2022

In The UK, Some Political Movement On The Climate Scare

July 15, 2022/ Francis Menton

It has long been my view that the whole climate scare thing will fade away and disappear once the costs and risks of the insane zero carbon agenda become clear to the voting public. As much as I’ve been deeply involved in efforts to expose the fake “science” behind the scare, the science arguments so far have had very little success in convincing anyone, particularly anyone (and this is most people) who is subject to appeals to fear.
But now, over in the UK, the costs and risks of pursuing an aggressive “climate” agenda are starting to hit home. And with the selection of a new Prime Minister now getting started, we can see the first glimmerings of political impact.
You might think that, since I am on the board of an organization that is an affiliate of a group based in the UK, I might have some special insights on where the PM race is going. In fact, what my UK contacts tell me is that the PM race is wide open, and anything could happen.
But there is one remarkable thing, which is that suddenly it is no longer disqualifying to express skepticism about green orthodoxy.

July 11, 2022

July 11, 2022/ Francis Menton

Central planning always fails, but the utopian visionaries implementing the plans cannot admit that they are at fault. A scapegoat must be found. As a leading example, when Soviet dictator Josef Stalin’s collectivization of agriculture led to mass starvation, the official blame was placed on “saboteurs” and “wreckers.”
Our current-day analog is the centrally-planned replacement of our very large, inexpensive and highly functional energy system, mostly based on fossil fuels, with the alternatives of intermittent wind and sun-based generation, as favored by incompetent government regulators who don’t understand how these things work or how much they will cost. Prices of energy to the consumer — from electricity to gasoline — are soaring; and reliability of supply is widely threatened.
All of which brings our President forth to blame the current price and supply issues in the energy markets on anything but his own administration’s intentional efforts to suppress the functional fossil fuel energy.

July 08, 2022

July 08, 2022/ Francis Menton

Last Thursday, June 30, the Supreme Court issued its decision in West Virginia v. EPA, holding that, absent a further explicit statute from the Congress, the EPA did not have the authority to orchestrate its planned fundamental restructuring of the electric power generation sector of the economy.
More generally, the Supreme Court stated that in cases involving “major questions,” including regulations that affect large portions of the economy, the government must demonstrate “clear congressional authorization” to support a sweeping effort to regulate.
Do you think that such a Supreme Court decision might cause the various regulatory bureaucracies to slow down and reconsider a little before plowing ahead with other dubious plans for fundamental economic restructurings?
That’s not how these bureaucracies work. And such is most particularly the case with regard to regulators of the energy sector, sometimes known as “climate change” arena.

July 05, 2022

July 05, 2022/ Francis Menton

Probably you think that the justices sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court must be among the most intelligent people in the country. Granted, the mainstream press spends a lot of time denigrating the intelligence of the conservative justices. But surely then, the liberal justices must be really, really smart.
Consider Justice Elena Kagan. She was the Dean of the Harvard Law School. Then she became the Solicitor General of the United States. That’s the person in charge of arguing the government’s positions in the Supreme Court. You need to be really smart to do that job.
So if you’re looking for someone who can teach you the thinking processes of the very smartest of the smart, there is no one better to look to than Elena Kagan.
With that in mind, let’s take a closer look at Justice Kagan’s dissent on behalf of the three liberal justices in the case of West Virginia v. EPA that came out just last week.

July 01, 2022

July 01, 2022/ Francis Menton

It’s been a momentous couple of weeks at the Supreme Court. As usual, they saved the big cases for the end. This year the big three were Bruen (gun rights), Dobbs (abortion rights) and West Virginia (administrative regulation of CO2).
All three cases were decided 6-3 along ideological lines.
These cases involved the most basic issues of what the Constitution is and how it is to be interpreted. On those issues there is virtually no hope of one side ever convincing anyone from the other side. There just are two fundamentally irreconcilable visions of how this should work.
The two visions can be summarized in just a few sentences each: