green cronyism (page 5)

  • Post

    Federal energy subsidies and the battle between cronies

    The New York Times asks, "What would happen if the federal government ended its subsidies to companies that drill for oil and gas?" The American oil and gas industry has argued that such a move would leave the United States more dependent on foreign energy. Many environmental activists counter that ending subsidies could move the United States toward a future free of fossil fuels — helping it curtail its emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The first part of the NYT's answer is correct insofar as it would make foreign oil and gas marginally more competitive. The second part is utter fantasy and wrong in many ways. The question itself is far too narrow for a discussion of energy subsidies. It ignores the far, far greater subsidies for renewable energy, and it also ignore the massive regulatory burden placed on traditional energy sources — which are penalties or, in a different way of looking at it, negative subsidies. Further discussion and graphs follow.
    Jon Sanders, August 8, 2016
  • Post

    Even more reasons why renewable energy mandates make electricity cost much more than it should

    Here's a graph for you. Further down I'll explain what it means:
    Jon Sanders, August 4, 2016
  • Post

    A low-cost energy source that lowers rates and CO2 emissions, to boot

    That would be natural gas. Because of technological change in natural gas exploration, our rates are falling, on net (offsetting increases owing to the REPS law): Also falling: carbon dioxide emissions, as the federal Energy Information Administration has shown is mostly because of change to natural…
    Jon Sanders, May 26, 2016
  • Post

    Natural gas did most of this. Lower emissions from fracking. Or as the ‘Clean Energy C[ronies]’ call it, HYDRO-FRACKING!

    Here’s an interesting graph from the federal government’s Energy Information Administration today in a release entitled “U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in 2015 are 12% below their 2005 levels“: The EIA explains:  In 2015, U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions were 12% below the 2005 levels, mostly because of…
    Jon Sanders, May 10, 2016
  • Post

    ‘Renewables are incapable of replacing hydrocarbons at scale’

    This isn’t news to Locker Room readers (some recent examples), but I’m glad to read this in The Hill this week from Kathleen Hartnett White. Here’s a brief snippet, with the understanding that there is plenty more where this comes from: Policymakers intent on imposing a…
    Jon Sanders, March 31, 2016
  • Post

    REPS: Burning coal is bad for the environment. Burn trees instead.

    Did you know that the renewable energy portfolio standards law was not passed as a jobs program? The renewable energy lobby would like you to think that’s what it’s for. But actually, the law had four stated purposes: Diversify the resources used to reliably meet the energy needs of consumers…
    Jon Sanders, March 2, 2016
  • Post

    How lobbyists and economic impact studies trick you

    Jobs, jobs, jobs. Jobs are good, right? The economy needs jobs. Now, let’s draw your attention to jobs right here in my industry. If you just give my industry a subsidy, or a special tax break not available to anyone else, especially not my competitors, then you can create jobs…
    Jon Sanders, February 29, 2016
  • Post

    Carbon-tax zealots concede: renewable energy may never compete

    Depend upon it: news stories, industry studies, and especially lobbyists’ materials all frame the success and future importance of solar in terms of government programs. Not consumer demand and certainly not lower rates. The same can be said for the other big nondispatchable energy source, wind. — Rights & Regulation…
    Jon Sanders, February 26, 2016