wind (page 6)

  • Post

    So why are NC’s energy-based emissions falling this century? Oh, and: NC’s energy-based emissions are falling this century

    Read about this in my Spotlight report on The Market Forces Behind North Carolina’s Falling Emissions. If you’d like a hint, these charts: go a long way toward explaining this graph:…
    Jon Sanders, February 3, 2017
  • Post

    The market is solving emissions concerns. Bet you haven’t heard THAT.

    The recent Brookings report on the future of the climate has irreducible good news for environmentalists who have been concerned about emissions. Counter to the pedal drone of media reports, they are going down: Brookings is here reiterating findings by the U.S. Energy Information Administration and the National Oceanic…
    Jon Sanders, January 23, 2017
  • Post

    A side note: what wasn’t a founding purpose of the REPS mandate

    In my Carolina Journal column today I noted: … North Carolina’s [electricity] rates have been among the most competitive in the nation. That changed when the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standards law passed in 2007. The REPS mandate forced utilities to use an increasing proportion of high–…
    Jon Sanders, October 13, 2016
  • Post

    Matthew reminds us: electricity really is a basic human necessity

    The idea for my Carolina Journal column today came to me Sunday night, while I was sitting in the dark with the rest of my family reading by candlelight and hoping we would have power and water restored soon. Duke Energy’s blanket announcement that it’d be done by…
    Jon Sanders, October 13, 2016
  • Post

    Detroit News editorial: ‘Green energy’ hurts the poor

    The editorial, by Utah State professor William Shughart and researcher Michael Jensen, reiterate points made here. They argue that the politicized drive for “green energy” is drowning out the much greater problem of energy poverty. (The chart on the right comes from a recent Locker Room post about energy…
    Jon Sanders, August 16, 2016
  • 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

    Cute. But sorry, renewables, the “Gig” is up…

    A light-hearted tweet from Clean Energy NC on twitter hearkens back to Back to the Future (the scene, for those of you woefully in the dark about it): NC Solar Power Could Send Doc Back to the Future https://t.co/kGqzr2s19y #CleanEnergy #NCGA pic.twitter.com/Bl1eI2ObvR — Clean Energy in NC (@cleanenergync) June 30, 2016 Thing is, the time machine car was originally powered with a teensy pellet of plutonium. To generate an equivalent burst of energy naturally, compactly, they needed a bolt of lightning. Renewable energy!? Hello? Hello? Anybody home? Huh? Think, McFly!
    Jon Sanders, June 30, 2016