Virginia goes Don Quixote

State will defy Trump, double down on renewables and CO2 reductions – and hurt poor families

Guest essay by Paul Driessen

Democrat Ralph Northam had barely won the Virginia governor’s race when his party announced it would impose a price on greenhouse gases emissions, require a 3% per year reduction in GHG emissions, and develop a cap-and-trade scheme requiring polluters to buy credits for emitting carbon dioxide.

Meanwhile, liberal governors from California, Oregon and Washington showed up at the COP23 climate confab in Bonn, Germany to pledge that their states will remain obligated to the Paris climate treaty, and push ahead with even more stringent emission, electric vehicle, wind, solar and other programs.

Leaving aside the unconstitutional character of states signing onto an international agreement that has been repudiated by President Trump (and the absurdity of trying to blame every slight temperature change and extreme weather event on fossil fuels), there are major practical problems with all of this.

Attempting to abate, control or limit CO2 from electric power facilities has consequences. It means creating “carbon capture and storage” systems that don’t work, are huge energy hogs, drive up electricity prices, and leave us with the massive, unaddressed problem of where to put all the carbon dioxide – depriving crop and habitat plants of this essential miracle nutrient, and risking sudden catastrophic CO2 eruptions from whatever underground storage facilities might actually get approved.

It means forcing the premature shutdown of fully functional coal and gas-fired power plants – with no viable alternatives to replace them. Virginia has two nuclear power plants, and it is unlikely that the current or incoming Democrat governor (or any of their “progressive” supporters) would support building new nuke units, or even new pumped storage systems in the state’s mountainous areas.

The supposed wind and solar alternatives involve massive land use, environmental, ecological, economic, and human health and welfare impacts. Based on my previous rough calculations, using wind power to replace all current US electricity generation(3.5 billion megawatt-hours per year) … and charge batteries for seven windless days of backup power … would require some 14 million 1.8-MW bird-killing turbines, each one 330 to 410 feet tall, across some 210 million acres (twice the size of California). The backup power would require some 700 billion 100-kWh Tesla battery packs (also requiring vast acreage).

The raw materials required to build all these turbines, batteries and transmission lines – would be astronomical; the earth removal, mining, processing, smelting and manufacturing even more so. And this doesn’t even consider what it would take to replace today’s vehicles with electric versions, or (in a truly fantasy world) replacing the energy for foundries, refineries and factories with wind or solar power.

The USA has made virtually all of its mineralized areas off limits to exploration and mining. So this grand transition would make us 100% dependent on foreign suppliers for wind (and solar) energy.

Another net effect would be soaring electricity prices, forcing countless factories and businesses to close their doors, affecting livelihoods and living standards, especially among the poor, minority and blue-collar families that liberal politicians and activists profess to care so deeply about.

Right now, average Virginia families pay $1,500 a year for electricity. At California prices, their annual electricity bills would increase by $875; at German rates, by a whopping additional $2,900 a year!

At its current 8¢ cents per kilowatt-hour, Virginia’s Inova Fairfax Women’s and Children’s Hospital pays about $1.6 million annually for electricity. At California’s or Germany’s business rate (18¢ per kWh), the hospital would have to shell out $3.6 million for electricity. That unsustainable $2 million annual increase in the cost of keeping lights, heat, air conditioning, surgery centers and diagnostic equipment running would result in employee layoffs, reduced services, higher medical bills and declining patient care.

At 8¢ per kWh, the United States can power its homes, hospitals, businesses and industries for $280 billion annually. At German or California business and industry rates (18¢ a kWh), that electricity would cost $630 billion a year. At German family rates (35¢ a kWh), an economy-busting $1.2 trillion!

Equally important, California, Oregon and Washington are uniquely advantaged. Thanks primarily to Works Progress Administration dams, Oregon gets 43% of its electricity from hydroelectric projects; Washington gets 75% from hydro. California not only enjoys such mild climate that 40% of its homes don’t have air conditioning, and a seventh don’t have heating; it imports 25% of its electricity from other states. (And yet California’s electricity rates are the second highest in the Lower 48 States.)

Obviously, not every state can import one-fourth of its electricity from other states. As Margaret Thatcher would say, at some point you run out of other people’s energy. Not every state has or can have hydroelectric (which rabid greens also hate). Not every state has abundant sun or wind – and the best sites would likely be litigated until Hell freezes over. Few states have the topography for pumped storage.

As they demand de-carbonization (and thus de-industrialization) for the entire country, California, Oregon, Virginia, Washington and other “We Are Still In” (the Paris climate treaty) states, cities, businesses and organizations claim they now represent one-half of the US Gross Domestic Product. They also call themselves the Under2 Coalition, claiming they can prevent Earth’s post-1850, post-Little Ice Age, industrial era average temperature from rising more than 2 degrees C (1/2 degree above today’s.

However, amid all their demands and sanctimonious moral preening, these WASI members studiously neglect to mention what IPCC officials have said are the true primary goals of climate policy: replacing capitalism with a new centralized world economic order, and redistributing world wealth and resources.

They likewise ignore the real reason all those developing countries signed the Paris accords … and what all the rancor in Bonn has been about: poor nations were promised hundreds of billions of dollars in Green Climate Fund “adaptation and reparation” money from the very nations they demand must de-carbonize and de-industrialize. They want their loot right now, with no more delays or excuses.

The Paris Climate Treaty would have obligated the United States to pay over $20 billion per year initially – rising to more than $100 billion per year by 2030! So if they love Paris so much, these half-of-US-GDP WASI members should be obligated … and happy … to pay one-half of the USA’s Green Climate Fund obligations: $10 billion in 2017, rising steadily to $50 billion a year by 2030.

In reality, they won’t try, want or be able to meet any of the Paris requirements. It’s all Resistance, hype and holier-than-thou pixie dust. That’s why the WASI acronym is more accurately translated as We Are Still Ideologues – Intransigent, Irresponsible and Insane.

Their “we can opt into Paris” attitude also raises the interesting question of whether communities in those states (especially rural counties that voted for candidate Trump) can opt out of their de-carbonization, cap-and-trade, pseudo-renewable, pseudo-sustainable, unreliable wind and solar energy schemes. Especially if there was no debate and no statewide vote – on issues like those raised in this article – why should those most severely impacted by these schemes not be able to opt out of them?

Net US greenhouse gas emissions declined 11.5% from 2005 to 2015 – because the Obama EPA forced coal-fired power plants to shut down, more switched to natural gas, energy efficiencies increased, and a hyper-regulated US economy used less energy. Indeed, the USA is miles ahead of any other country in reducing its CO2 emissions since 2000. The next closest is the UK, which reduced its emissions by barely a fourth of the US amount. But WASI/Under2 demands would have horrendous adverse repercussions.

Meanwhile, developing countries built hundreds of coal-fired generating units, have 1,600 more under construction or in planning, and are driving millions of new gasoline-powered cars and trucks. They will not give up fossil fuel electricity generation and rely on wind and solar – though they will be happy to sell turbines and panels to WASI members. So all the US, EU and WASI sacrifices will achieve nothing.

WASI members are not just sanctimoniously tilting at windmills. They are demanding that others kowtow to their climate alarmism and imposing real harm on real people. America and the world must not base energy, ecological, health and welfare policies on Don Quixote fantasies.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow ( and author of books and articles on energy and environmental policy.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 18, 2017 8:09 pm

Both Australia and America seem to have an unlimited supply of Lunatics placed in government, academia and media, ready to undertake and support hopeless utopian quests for unachievable Climate goals at the expense of all the poor people in the countries. What is needed is a dose of really cold weather to sober them up.

Gary Pearse.
Reply to  ntesdorf
November 18, 2017 9:09 pm

America’s in better shape than Australia. Your political parties are indistinguishable from each other, like in the UK. No one to vote for and they jail you if you don’t cast a meaningless vote.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 1:34 am

Not strictly true. They fine us if we don’t turn up to vote. There’s no requirement to actually vote. Apart from that, I agree fully.

The worst about Oz is the utterly absurd preference votes. Nobody really understands how it all works, and often people get voted in by voters who don’t want them because of this. Our last federal election ballot paper was about 3 feet wide!

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 1:38 am

Oh yeah, and I’m paying about 28c per kwh in Queensland. 8c? That’s a fantasy here….

Luckily I don’t do a/c much even in the tropics or it’d bankrupt me 🙁

Gary Pearse.
Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 6:26 am

Jerome, in Quebec, it’s US4c/kWh for industry and the mining industry (where I get my living) is flourishing. South Australia continues on its idiotic renewables path despite big industries closing down.

You guys had a jewel of a country not long ago and it’s being destroyed by global governance ideologues. Canada is trying its best to wreck itself, but a no nonsense Conservative government held this off for a decade so the destroyers are just getting started.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 12:32 pm

There’s not enough difference between parties in America anymore I’m afraid. There are several so called Republicans in Congress that are sympathetic to climate action. Mitt Romney said that Trump should not have pulled the US out of Paris. Members of both parties are anti-Trump.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 4:33 pm

Another example (Virginia) of action on climate change at the sub-national/state level.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 6:09 pm

CA.Gov., 11-11-2017, Bonn, Germany

Re: Gov.Brown, Virginia and Under 2 Coalition.

Virginia signed onto the Under 2 Coalition.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 8:25 pm

UN Environment, Updated 26 September 2017

Under 2 MOU, Founding year 2015

Global organization.

Webpage has information on ‘Under 2 MOU’: purpose of the organization, activities and links to more information on MOU 2.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 20, 2017 9:36 am

Yale, Sept.19, 2017

Re: Under 2 MOU Coalition and other organizations.

Has link to: Climate Opinion maps.

‘Mapping American Climate Action: Who’s Taking Charge of the Paris Agreement’

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 20, 2017 10:58 am


Cities & Subnationals: Under 2 MOU

Subnational Leadership on Climate Change

Re: Origin of Under 2 MOU

Webpage has link to Under 2 MOU organization.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 20, 2017 2:32 pm

Under 2 Coalition

North America: Click on North America for members list and more information on each member. Includes cities, states, provinces.

Webpage also has a world-wide map of the Under 2 MOU Coalition members locations.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 20, 2017 4:28 pm

New York State

‘Memorandum of Understanding Global Climate Leadership’

‘Statement of Purpose’

Signed by: Andrew Cuomo and Witnessed by Former Vice President Al Gore.

Text and signatures:

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 21, 2017 11:35 am

Earth Institute | Columbia University, Oct.9, 2015

Re: Under 2 MOU signing: Gov. Cuomo and Al Gore. Includes photos.

Fred of Greenslopes
Reply to  ntesdorf
November 18, 2017 9:39 pm

Can’t speak for America but my Australia definitely has “an unlimited supply of Lunatics in government” etc. Our current Premier has promised $151million for more Intermittent Energy in her campaigning for our State election next Saturday.

Reply to  Fred of Greenslopes
November 19, 2017 1:35 am

Yup! No sign of Peak Stupid downunder!

Reply to  Fred of Greenslopes
November 19, 2017 2:29 am

Found while trying to find out what the WASI acronym was all about — just a point of curiosity? Maybe.

WASI may refer to: Al-Wāsiʿ, one of the names of God in Islam, meaning The Omnipresent; Washi, Osmanabad, a panchayat village in Osmanabad District …

Reply to  Fred of Greenslopes
November 19, 2017 2:33 am

Does the WASI acronym translate to We Are Still Ignoramuses? If so, it fits to perfection. Even if that’s not what it translates to, it still fits.

Luc Ozade
Reply to  Fred of Greenslopes
November 19, 2017 6:55 am

@ ThomasJK

“As they demand de-carbonization (and thus de-industrialization) for the entire country, California, Oregon, Virginia, Washington and other “We Are Still In” (the Paris climate treaty) states, cities, businesses and organizations claim they now represent one-half of the US Gross Domestic Product. They also call themselves the Under2 Coalition, claiming they can prevent Earth’s post-1850, post-Little Ice Age, industrial era average temperature from rising more than 2 degrees C (1/2 degree above today’s.”

Reply to  ntesdorf
November 19, 2017 12:35 am

A cold spell would not have your desired sobering effect – in fact quite the inverse. I don’t think people quite understand just how pernicious the anti-scientific, forever unfalsifiable ‘climate change’ non-hypothesis really is.

Every possible, inconceivable or impossible weather/climate event is now covered under this lunacy. Cold periods are now explained as polar vortex instabilities – resulting from carbon dioxide warming of course. If not that then simply as yet another example of the extreme weather they all predicted would happen if we didn’t all move immediately into unheated Mongolian yurts.

Literally everything is now covered with a paper somewhere claiming whatever actually happens and relating it to carbon dioxide via. some unvalidated model. And they will state this lunacy as fact without the slightest blush. These people are properly insane ideologues and to them their invented ‘reality’ is every bit as real as your rational evidence-based world.

Reply to  cephus0
November 19, 2017 1:45 am

I agree cephus0 that the charlatan climate ‘change’ scientists will have an explanation for everything, but when the average citizen is freezing their butts off and some goofus ‘scientist’ is telling them it is all from CO2 that used to cause warming and now the planet has caught a cold, there will be a revolution. Maybe a war between state actors who continue to peddle this nonsense and won’t export coal or oil, to people in a country next door that are dying for lack of accessible energy. It is already happening, except it isn’t in the 30 year cooling phase yet. I think this CAGW meme has limits. And I wouldn’t want to be an alarmist peddling this nonsense when it does happen.

Rudi behind swamp enemy lines.
Reply to  cephus0
November 19, 2017 5:31 am

The only thing that possibly would cause them to get off their crazy train is catastrophic global cooling, consistently and over a long period of time. Anything else they’ll blame on global warming. The sad truth is they’re so greedy they’ll make anything up for some carbon credit money so that might not work.

Bradley Holdner
Reply to  ntesdorf
November 19, 2017 5:48 am

We’ve plenty of lunatics in Canada… Please don’t forget us. Search out the Province of Ontario. I’ve read it’s the most indebted jurisdiction in the western world, Libtard government has tripled the poor suckers debt to $312 Billion the utility bills they are paying is nuts, families are losing their homes and way off life, they’ve pushed wind turbines to the max, subsidized them way beyond reason, as a generalization, the choppers are financed so they aren’t done paying, before they are paid out though, they are wore out, and have swallowed piles of cash to repair, with utilization at between 12-17%, I know the people that inspect them, generally they are scrapped at around 12 years of use and financed at 14 years, simple arithmetic tells a story here. The best thing Ontario had going for them to attract business and industry, is cheap reliable and btw way clean, lots of nuclear and hydro to offset the coal and gas that were being used.

Reply to  Bradley Holdner
November 19, 2017 1:57 pm

B.C., Ontario and Quebec are about 2/3 of the economy and have large urban populations where global warming has sold well.

Quebec and B.C.along with Manitoba are well supplied with hydro-power. This made Quebec and B.C.”soft” targets to promote renewable energy as residents and businesses there are not much affected by any threat of rising electricity prices.

B.C. has mild climate/weather along its Pacific Ocean coast where most people live. California, Oregon and Washington also have mild climates/weather along their coast lines with large urban populations.

Reply to  Bradley Holdner
November 19, 2017 2:42 pm

Here’s another harsh bit of reality regarding the madness in Ontario and this comes after issues with siting turbines too close to peoples’ homes have been ignored by the government for over a decade!

Reply to  ntesdorf
November 19, 2017 10:01 am

Having our (yes, I am a Virginian) rates go up to theoretically decrease global temperature by 0.000001 C is something I really support! (/snark) Meanwhile, our local utility will finish the build-out of over 4,200 MW of new gas-fired combined cycle units in 2019, some of the most efficient units on the planet. Also in planning or under construction are an additional 4,000-5,000 MW of PV solar. Guess which source will supply the most power?

November 18, 2017 8:17 pm

Australia is already there is some states thanks to our zombie politicians. My god, these witless buffoons are going to pay for their reckless decisions!

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Craig
November 18, 2017 8:41 pm

And with the constitutional section 44 forcing MP’s (With dual or more citizenships) to resign their position (No checks and measures for MP’s? No, politicians are fully bonafide), the nation is set to be overrun with, it seems, Green MP replacements. Australia is rooted, and it’s only taken 9 years or more for our Govn’t to discover MP’s with dual citizenships populate parliament. So, it is now possible MP’s who breach S.44 of the constitution made decisions at the federal level that affect the whole nation may be invalid.

Way to go Australia! Show the world how to win a race to the bottom!

Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 18, 2017 8:53 pm

“Dig up, stupids!”

Mike Jonas
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 19, 2017 3:49 am

Australia is largely populated by people whose parents or grandparents were born overseas. It seems pretty stupid not to allow these people to be in parliament. The High Court has gone even further and has seen fit to make an absurd interpretation of the constitution which allows other countries to determine who is qualified to stand for election (either house). For example, in the recent High Court decisions, there were two almost identical cases – one with English ancestry, one with Italian. By the High Court”s covoluted and inconsistent logic, the Italian ould stay in, the other was out. The difference was a matginal (I would say irrelevant) difference between English and Italian law.

Australia’s most quintessentially Australian (and most honest) representative, Jacqui Lambie, has just been forced to resign from the Senate because of this madness. What Jacqui has lost is horrendous, but it pales into insignificance beside what Australia has lost.

If this insanity cannot be ended very soon, Australia is truly stuffed. Maybe it’s already too late?

Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 19, 2017 6:33 am

I understand why it is so important for those that live there, but in the big picture Australia is a small, economically stagnant backwater with only 4/5 of the population of Texas, or 3/5 of the population of California. I suppose the only way to gain attention is to do publicly stupid things just so people will talk about it.

Stephen Richards
Reply to  Craig
November 19, 2017 1:35 am

Sadly they won’t pay. They will disappear off the scene to collect their taxpayer’s funded enormous pension.

Reply to  Craig
November 19, 2017 1:40 am

Steady on Craig. Let’s not be insulting to zombies and witless buffoons!

Reply to  Craig
November 19, 2017 2:53 am

The only way that politicians “pay” is when they are finally voted out of office — or forced to retire — likely with a substantial publicly funded retirement income. Those who will pay most will be those who place the greatest trust in the supernatural powers of governments to do wonderfully fantastic stuff for them.

What if — the clutch of clowns that we have for governors manages to do something that causes a blackout in that strange little foreign country that’s called The District of Columbia. Very little to none of the massive amounts of electricity that are used by the various federal government facilities is actually generated in DC. Do you reckon there could be some screaming in the dark heard along the Potomac?

Reply to  ThomasJK
November 19, 2017 12:42 pm

Worst is losing their elected seat???

In the past, traitorous citizens & politicians were hung.

In America today, we give them a slap on the wrist and $300,000 in back pay…

Tom Halla
November 18, 2017 8:25 pm

I used to live in California. This sort of thing is Democratic Party policy.

November 18, 2017 8:25 pm

The developing countries should develop coal for electricity needs.
It is the most cost efficient, low risk, low hazard of all the sources.
Buy USA.

Reply to  joelobryan
November 19, 2017 3:46 pm

Nigeria is sitting on all the coal they need and desperately want to build coal-fired electricity generating plants. The only problem is that the World Bank refuses to lend them the money unless they use it on wind and solar! I suggested that they turn to China for the help they need….


November 18, 2017 8:27 pm

When protesters protest a new oil or NG pipeline now, it is not so much about the actual route it will take, or the pipeline itself. It is now about the right to even use fossil fuels at all. Period. This assault on democracy and freedom is an act of real domestic terror and should be met head on by the Department of Homeland Security. It’s time for the USA Federal Gov’t to step up and reign in these rogue groups and anarchists including individual States that try and substitute federal policy and law with their own.

Reply to  Earthling2
November 19, 2017 2:59 am

A substantial number of the imbecilic “rogues” are embedded in the federal agencies who would have to take action if this stupidity is to be prevented from happening. I predict that when the stuff hits the rotating mechanism will be when these proposed actions, if taken, cause the lights to go out in DC. Then we got fun.

November 18, 2017 8:32 pm

“the best sites would likely be litigated until Hell freezes over”

Think Franklin Dam x 1,000,000

Reply to  Hivemind
November 18, 2017 9:03 pm

The Franklin Dam was easy to litigate the area was World Heritage listed. If they were not in that sort of area you can only oppose via Planning or EPA laws. I am sorry you can’t carry those processes on for very long they both have timeline restrictions. Even the Greens who wanted to bring things like coal mining to the High Court can’t they have no standing.

Australian law is very different to US law where they have a bill of rights. Australian law says what you can’t do, not what your rights are. So you can’t sue the Australian Government like Hansen’s granddaughter case against the US government.

Appeals under the Planning and EPA laws in most state have 6 month time expiration. That can extend out in a ping pong process of appealing but you need clear grounds. All you can do after that is appeal to the Minister, and limited appeals to courts. In most states if a project is declared critical infrastructure you can not appeal it to any court.

November 18, 2017 8:45 pm

Would be an interesting experiment to let the states set climate policy and then compete with each other in a free market setting.

Tom Halla
Reply to  chaamjamal
November 18, 2017 9:10 pm

As much purported climate policy affects interstate commerce, the states have no authority. California has a statutory exception on auto emissions.

Rhoda R
Reply to  Tom Halla
November 19, 2017 2:51 pm

Yeah, these guys are skirting Commerce Clause issues big time. I hope that Sessions wakes up long enough to do something about this.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Rhoda R
November 19, 2017 3:07 pm

Agreed, especially as the greens have made a specialty of using the courts to advance their cause. Turnabout would only be fair (and use up the green blobs funds on defense).

Gary Pearse.
November 18, 2017 8:50 pm

It will fall apart. No doubt about it. It will also put the Democrats into the penalty box for a generation. I thoujght after the worst political campaign ever waged by the most cynical dishonest, self interested campaigner ever (Dirty Dick really just told a lie about the dumbest, meaningless caper ever pulled by a politician) that the grey cardinals in the party would have had a heartfelt retrospective on how they got themselves in the place they were in.

I was sure the sign would be that Jurassic Nancy Pelorosaurus would have been replaced as Senate leader by a New young blood, but no! Like WASI Parasites they, too doubled down on a morally bankrupt elitist party, disconnected from what used to be great heir base. If someone could wake the Republicans up and get them to understand this should be a two generation term for running the country. WA, OR, CA and VA will be voting Trump next time around. What have they got to lose?

Gary Pearse.
Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 18, 2017 8:57 pm
Michael S. Kelly
Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 2:52 am

Nancy Pelosi is in the House of Representatives, not the Senate.

Gary Pearse.
Reply to  Michael S. Kelly
November 19, 2017 6:35 am

Oops, I’m not American so missing a few details.

Reply to  Gary Pearse.
November 19, 2017 6:15 am

Nancy who? Oh, you mean Nancy Lugosi.

John V. Wright
November 18, 2017 8:54 pm

WUWT is one of the few places you can read such instructive and thought-provoking articles (thank you Paul). Sadly, mainstream media rarely asks ‘difficult’ questions about energy policy. Indeed, MSM often misleads about these issues. In the UK, the BBC is the main culprit. Earlier this week it introduced an item about COP23 on its flagship radio current affairs programme ‘Today’ by saying “The United States has pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement and CO2 levels have worryingly increased”. The clear inference was that the two facts were linked. There was no reference to the reduction in CO2 levels in the US, or that China was responsible for the rise in CO2 (or that it has no significant short-term commitments under Paris). It did not even say what the size of the ‘worrying’ increase was or why we should be worried about it.

In the UK, one of the biggest carbon-related stories is the Government’s utterly daft announcement that the nation will have an all-electric car market by 2040. The UK’s peak power output is 61GW. To power an all-electric car fleet another 30GWs will be needed. We are building just one new nuclear power station. Planning for this started last century and because of planning, environmental, engineering and capital issues it has taken 20 years to get to this point. China has come in with a third of the £20 billion cost otherwise it would not have been built at all. The French will engineer it although they have not managed to get a single plant of this design working yet anywhere in the world.

Let’s assume that they solve all the technical issues and that at the end of its seven-year construction phase they have a fully-functioning power plant delivering energy to the National Grid. That will be 2025, a full 15 years before the UK has to finally get rid of petrol-engined cars and have a 100% electric car market. Good eh? Now how many of these nuclear power plants do we actually need to deliver an additional 30GW? The answer is 9.6. No journalists seem to be interested in this story and certainly none at the BBC. Why is this? Because to them this is a carbon reduction story – they see it exclusively in those terms and seem incapable of widening their journalistic enquiry to address these glaringly obvious issues.

A friend of mine, who has no interest whatsoever in CAGW issues, asked me the other day “How are they going to power all of these electric cars?”. Frankly, it’s a question that your average 12-year-old is likely to ask. But not the BBC. Go figure.

Reply to  John V. Wright
November 19, 2017 1:05 am

The BBC is purest distilled black and c0rrupted ev!l. It is sometimes showing on a goggle box at some place I happen to be and I stand in literally horrified awe at the stream of ideologically motivated twisted falsehoods spewing forth. The majority of the population watch this stuff and largely believe it. Well they have to. They are forced to pay for it or face criminal charges. Dr. Goebbels would have blushed with sincere admiration and envy.

Nigel S
Reply to  cephus0
November 19, 2017 3:13 am

Chuck out your television, you’ll feel much better for it. Plenty of recorded material on the various streaming services which do not require a licence (apart from BBC’s iPlayer of course).

Reply to  Nigel S
November 19, 2017 7:01 am

I don’t have one Nigel. Sometimes it’s on in the pub or friend’s places.

Pariah Dog
Reply to  John V. Wright
November 19, 2017 2:20 am

I could be wrong, but I thought the 2040 deadline was for new car sales. So I wouldn’t fret too much, it just means that people will keep their cars longer, and probably go for 2nd hand ICE over new electrics. After ten years or so, 2050, then maybe HMGuv will either step in to propose a ban on ICE ownership, or be pressured by the public to drop it. It’s a long way into the future though, and a lot can happen in 30 years. I would be surprised if the original proposal even makes its way through the HoC and HoL.

Reply to  Pariah Dog
November 19, 2017 2:34 am

With any sort of sanity, this ridiculous anti-CO2 farce will be over well before 2040. !

I really don’t think that people can remain that naive for that long

Nigel S
Reply to  Pariah Dog
November 19, 2017 3:29 am

Domestic heating and cooking with natural gas is suppose to be phased out from 2030 and banned by 2050 too. That should be fun. Great majority of UK homes use NG for heating and hot water using more energy than the electricity power stations produce.

According to DECC, in the cold weather of 2010, domestic gas consumption amounted to 389 TWh. In comparison, total electricity supplied to all users, not just domestic, was 339 TWh.

Reply to  Pariah Dog
November 19, 2017 4:04 am

“I really don’t think that people can remain that naive for that long”
Andy, that’s very naive of you (:-))
the sheeple have been naive for a long time why would they change now ????

Reply to  John V. Wright
November 19, 2017 3:13 am

Hey, c’mon. If college journalism majors had the aptitude to be able to actually understand science rather than just writing ‘blurbs’ using pseudo-science dogma, do you reckon they would have still been journalism majors? I know it gets to be really frustrating, but give them a break. They do the best that they are capable of doing.

Reply to  ThomasJK
November 20, 2017 3:42 am

They weren’t athletic enough to be jocks, or brainy enough to be nerds, or weird enough to be arties, or trendy enough to be groupies, so about the only place left for them was the school newspaper, where they learned to write about and take pictures of all the students who were more interesting than them. And not much else.

November 18, 2017 8:55 pm

What would it take to get all of Washington DC on 100% wind and solar, plus whatever battery pack storage solution they can implement to fill the gaps, without any lifeline connection to surrounding electrical grids?

Give them 5 years to get it all set up, then cut ’em loose and let them sink or swim.

Reply to  KTM
November 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Washington DC has a disadvantage to all 50 of the States for wind power and non-rooftop solar power, because it is a city and has no rural land. This factor is not outweighed by that city having less industry than average for US cities of its size.

Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
November 19, 2017 6:25 am

No industry? I’m sorry but DC’s graft and corruption industries are doing quite well, thank you very much. I would have added “the DNC” but I didn’t want to be redundant.

Reply to  KTM
November 19, 2017 1:11 am

I honestly don’t think they care. Just so long as they have free reign to keep on blindly gnawing and biting at the roots of civilisation they are happy enough.

Reply to  KTM
November 19, 2017 3:20 am

Could Trump make DC an example? Cut out external wires and say now you lead by example; rooftop PV and batteries? No coal, no import, just solar and wind? that’d be funny.

Reply to  Hugs
November 19, 2017 4:35 am

He’d be blamed for turning the District of Columbia into North Korea with $0.50/kWh electricity rates.

Plus… I think only Congress could force DC into such a hilarious disaster.

Reply to  KTM
November 19, 2017 4:04 pm

I doubt it is even feasible, but I would love to see them try! D.C. is only 10 miles square minus the part that Virginia stole back and nearly all of that land is covered with houses and government buildings. Rock Creek Park is largely undeveloped but is narrow and long as well as in a valley. I guess they could eradicate all the trees and replace them with wind turbines and there is lots of roof space on government buildings for PVC panels. The Mall is open except for a dozen or so National Monuments, I can see wind turbines running from the Lincoln Memorial to the Capitol. but even that might not be sufficient to replace all the power currently supplied by Maryland and Virginia.

I seem to recall a Washington Power and Light located on the eastern edge of Georgetown but that was a long time ago and I’m not sure they did much.


November 18, 2017 9:04 pm

Regarding “claiming they can prevent Earth’s post-1850, post-Little Ice Age, industrial era average temperature from rising more than 2 degrees C (1/2 degree above today’s”: 2 degrees C above the baseline around 1850 is a lot warmer than .5 degree C above today’s global temperature. That’s because global temperature increased less than 1.5 degrees C from around 1850 or the Industrial Revolution to nowadays. HadCRUT4 from 1850 to 1900 averaged about -.32 degree C below the 1961-1990 average with no warming trend according to HadCRUT4 seems to be hovering around .6 degree C above its 1961-1990 average now, possibly a little less, when excluding the effects of the recent El Nino. During The Pause which ended when the recent El Nino started warming things, HadCRUT4 was running around .5 degree C above its 1961-1990 average. This means the world warmed by .8-.9 degree C, and we have 1.1 to 1.2 degrees C more warming allowed before global temperature (smoothed by a few years) reaches 2 degrees C above pre-industrial, and that’s assuming the current version of HadCRUT4 is not overcooked.

Reply to  Donald L. Klipstein
November 19, 2017 6:45 am

Where did you get the idea that “the pause” ended? Two years of an obvious forcing doesn’t mean anything. Come back in five or ten years and maybe we will know. Maybe.

November 18, 2017 9:05 pm

My guess would be that the Governor’s personal (and professional) lifestyle would be one of the top individual contributors to CO2 in that fine state. The Governor’s office should be compelled to reduce their emissions to zero… and consequentially buy carbon credits to offset. Of course the Governor would assume the taxpayer should shell out for those credits-but methinks the Governor should pay for those credits out of the pre-established Gov’t salary.
Lawmakers should put their money where their mouth is-and stop insisting that the taxpayers carry them on their backs all the time.

November 18, 2017 9:05 pm

Much as I hate the idea, the world DESPERATELY needs to plunge into a new Mini Ice Age, just to wake everybody up to REALITY.

Jacob Frank
Reply to  AndyG55
November 18, 2017 9:19 pm

Watched a YouTube video last night explaining how climate change from CO2 is going to cause a new ice age. Slimy bastards can twist anything.

Reply to  AndyG55
November 18, 2017 9:40 pm

You are a sick man AndyG55……but so am I.
I hear your frustration brother….
When I get to build my new home, it’ll be with huge energy saving and insulation focus….even though I live in a temperate climate, for if the cooling does come to pass, how do we heat our homes if the loony buggers in power, get their way????

Reply to  D B H
November 18, 2017 11:06 pm

Somehow , this ANTI-CO2 FARCE has to be brought to a stop !!

Reply to  D B H
November 19, 2017 5:28 am

Build underground. But, of course, the PTB won’t LET you do that most places. Catch 22.

Reply to  AndyG55
November 19, 2017 12:04 am

I am thoroughly convinced an ice age, no matter how large, would disabuse alarmists of their beliefs.

Reply to  4TimesAYear
November 19, 2017 7:24 am

Maybe, though they probably would say “It’s going to warm soon” just like they do now. It works now, I can’t see that changing.

The problem with using an ice age to disabuse alarmist beliefs is the darn things just cannot be counted on to occur when you really need them!

Reply to  4TimesAYear
November 19, 2017 9:42 pm

Just have Al Goreous give CAGW presentations, starting at the North Pole and work his way back and forth among villages and cities, large and small as he heads toward the equator. Surely the ice sheets will start to form and follow him as he works his way south.

Reply to  4TimesAYear
November 20, 2017 5:00 am

November 19, 2017 at 12:04 am

I am thoroughly convinced an ice age, no matter how large, would disabuse alarmists of their beliefs.

We’d run out of rope and lamp posts way before that happens.


Reply to  AndyG55
November 19, 2017 1:26 am

Andy, it won’t wake them up. They blamed the cooling in the 70’s on human activity and they surely haven’t grown any smarter since then. If temperatures fall they will blame it on GHG’s with a simple sign change from warming to cooling or industrial particulates or aerosols or contrails or whatever.. But rest assured they will say humans did it. After all this time you surely cannot believe they will simply say ‘Oh, looks like it’s natural and we were totally delusional all along’. Ain’t hapnin. You cannot stop these suicidally insane zombies through any kind of rationality.

Tom Gelsthorpe
Reply to  cephus0
November 19, 2017 4:56 am

CAGW true believers feel that everything bad that happens is because of sin. It rains on your picnic because of sin. Ants appear at the picnic because of sin. Your dog gets ticks because of sin. Carbon sin, dust sin, electric sin, chemical sin, some kind of sin. Mother Nature is the CAGW deity, all-powerful and dangerously fragile at the same time; fickle and vindictive, too. Mess with Mother Nature, and the biosphere will be destroyed, and civilization will collapse with it — like old time fire-and-brimstone preachers who said you’d be struck down by lightning and sent directly to Hell if you harbored a naughty thought.

Stephen Richards
Reply to  AndyG55
November 19, 2017 1:40 am

As I often say. It requires only a drop in average global temperature, whatever that means, of 3°C or 3K to kick off an ice age. NASA NOAA UKMO and FRANCE METEO can easily adjust out 3K. Then it will be just called global warming colding.; SIMPLES

Reply to  AndyG55
November 19, 2017 1:44 am

I’m with you on this, Andy. I moved to the tropics because I believe the idea that a 60 odd year cycle exists. If that’s true, we will soon go back to the kind of climate that triggered tge ice age scare of the 70s, and I’ll be sitting pretty in my tropical paradise 🙂

Reply to  Jer0me
November 19, 2017 1:57 am

Newcastle NSW. If it cools a bit in winter.. so what, I can buy a thicker jacket.

If it warms a bit… more time down the beach.

Its tough… but someone has to live here. 😉

Reply to  AndyG55
November 19, 2017 4:29 am

Andy ,
There is a much simpler way of achieving the reality that you (and many of us) crave.
Embrace and promote at every opportunity electric vehicles.
To replace petrol or diesel fueled vehicles in the UK , as the UK Govt intends, will place such a demand for a cheap , reliable, greatly expanded energy grid (according to blog comments that I have seen) that it will be necessary to rely not on fickle renewables but nuclear , gas and maybe back to coal. The same is surely true of most of Europe. Whether it would be true of the US with its vast open spaces for wind and solar farms galore I do not know, but I suspect that it might .
Does it matter to you , when you are passing a speed limited truck on the motorway that the vehicle in front is electric or diesel driven . Of course not . And just think you will have all the Greens on your side, not realising that their support for you will necessarily involve them in approving fossil fuels, nuclear and hydro.
Put your energy and talents to correcting the shortcomings of electric vehicles and the most extreme consequences , politically and financially , of the alarmist cause will fade away.

Reply to  mikewaite
November 19, 2017 6:52 am

Except they don’t really want those things. They want 90% of humanity gone. For the sake of Mother Earth. And guess who the deserving 10% might be?

AGW is not Science
Reply to  mikewaite
November 20, 2017 12:35 pm

No, unfortunately it won’t. They’ll be more than happy to limit the mobility of the “masses” by having electricity so expensive that you can’t afford to drive your EV anywhere.

Mark T
November 18, 2017 10:09 pm

The whole point of these several states is to allow each to follow its own path. Let them commit suicide. I’ll gladly watch.

Reply to  Mark T
November 18, 2017 11:11 pm

Hopefully the neighboring states will make a motza, selling them coal powered electricity. 🙂

They are probably rubbing their hand with glee at the prospect 🙂

Reply to  AndyG55
November 19, 2017 11:19 am

We here in Nevada are already starting to rake it in off California. One of the reasons I moved out of Kali. Let Nevada make money off Kali’s stupidity. Best thing since only Nevada allowed casinos. Kali built Las Vegas and Reno.

November 18, 2017 10:46 pm

It should be noted that while Germany’s electricity rates might be high they are clearly not crippling the
economy. Germany has a positive balance of payments and is earning more from exports than it pays for imports. All while paying “economy busting” electicity costs and sustaining a multitude of small and medium size businesses that are the envy of the rest of Europe and most developed countries.

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  Germonio
November 19, 2017 12:47 am

German unions are in uproar over the layoff of 6000 workes in the Siemens energy sector:

“Die deutsche Gewerkschaft IG Metall kündigte umgehend Widerstand an. Sie wirft dem Siemens-Vorstand vor, «trotz wiederholter Appelle» nicht rechtzeitig auf die Krise in der konventionellen Kraftwerkstechnik reagiert zu haben.”

And unions have a big clout in Germany.

Reply to  Germonio
November 19, 2017 2:00 am

Anyone can earn more from exports than they do from imports – just do not consume. Exporting doesn’t make you rich – the world as a whole exports exactly the same amount as it imports. And always has done and always will. So what made us richer?

Germany is not investing enough in domestic consumption, so most people in Germany are nit getting richer. Instead it invests in exporting industries and then over-saves, driving down long-term interest rates.

Mike Jonas
Reply to  Germonio
November 19, 2017 4:10 am

Germany’s exports benefit from a currency shared with economically weak countries. If it still had its own currency I think it would find its high power costs rather damaging.

Reply to  Germonio
November 19, 2017 4:46 am

Germany massively subsidizes preferred industrial electricity consumers…
comment image

November 18, 2017 11:15 pm

Totally OT.

Next weekend, Newcastle (where I am lucky enough to live) will be hosting the V8 Supercars for two 250km street circuit races.

Petty much sold out, but I might get lucky on Sunday and find a ticket 😉

LOTS of YUMMY CO2.. mixed with rubber and fumes and smoke and …

Well.. you get the picture. 🙂

Reply to  AndyG55
November 18, 2017 11:52 pm

Just bought a Holden red line and it’s.awesome!!

Patrick MJD
Reply to  AndyG55
November 18, 2017 11:54 pm

Very highly specially made and tuned engines to run on E85. No “production” engine will run on E85 for long before, literally, burning out.

I watch it because there is not much other motorsport covered in Aus over the other dross AFL/NRL/Cricket/Tennis etc. Either way is it eco-farce. 2-3ltrs a lap? Maybe the cars should be solar powered?

Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 19, 2017 1:36 am

I’ve driven around about 60% of the track, new road surfaces and all etc

I have a feeling there could be a lot of “bruised” cars by the end of the weekend !! 🙂

But that is what its is all about.

Driver skill vs PHYSICS !!

Reply to  AndyG55
November 19, 2017 12:50 am

Hey Andy, would you still go if they were all electric????

Sorry, just HAD to ask!!!!

Reply to  D B H
November 19, 2017 1:33 am

I think I would go to sleep…

or go and watch some paint dry !!

Steve Fraser
Reply to  D B H
November 19, 2017 6:33 am

Someone will put a sleaker system in the cars to mimic the throaty roar. Different pitch for each competitive class.

Steve Fraser
Reply to  D B H
November 19, 2017 6:34 am

… speaker …

Reply to  D B H
November 19, 2017 6:53 am

You don’t just hear the rumble of those engines; You feel them through your butt and resonating in your lungs.

Reply to  D B H
November 19, 2017 7:37 am

It is way more fun watching my grandson stand behind the wheel going “Vroom! Vroom!”

Reply to  D B H
November 19, 2017 8:09 am

I’ve seen Formula 1 Electric Car races. They have two cars for each driver and swap cars in the middle of the race in order to complete the 50 minute race. When they can run a 2 hour race with one car that recharges in the same amount of time that it takes to refuel a standard ICE F1 car then they will have reached the point of creating a practical electric car.

Reply to  D B H
November 19, 2017 11:31 am

Ricdre – I’ve watched those races, too, in Long Beach, California. I love racing – cars, planes, bikes. But that race was the last electric race I will probably ever watch. Two cars per driver. That’s a hell of a refuel plan.
Maybe the idea is to buy two Teslas so you can drive from So Cal to Reno… still don’t see how that works, unless you leave one in Bishop. Yeah, that’ll work.

November 19, 2017 12:00 am

Don Quixote was actually against windmills.

The word ‘quixotic’ means: exceedingly idealistic; unrealistic and impractical. So, they are being quixotic in spite of the fact that the Don opposed windmills.

Reply to  commieBob
November 19, 2017 2:01 am

No, he thought they were giants.

Nigel S
Reply to  Phoenix44
November 19, 2017 3:38 am

Needing to be defeated by him and the trusty Rosinante.

Just then they came in sight of thirty or forty windmills that rise from that plain. And no sooner did Don Quixote see them that he said to his squire, “Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we ourselves could have wished. Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless.”

Reply to  Phoenix44
November 19, 2017 3:58 am

Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we ourselves could have wished. Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless. link

He pretty clearly thought they were evil.

The Don could not deal with modern technology. He couldn’t even perceive the windmills for what they really were.

Cervantes illustrates the depth of this transition by creating a character who stumbles into the modern world, and who seeks to impose on it the ethics of a bygone era. link

The Don is like the CAGW alarmists who demand that we restore the planet to its natural state, whatever that is. They’re much like the extremists who pine for the dark ages.

The other thing the novel highlights is the danger of spending all one’s time with one’s nose buried in books rather than getting a life and learning to deal with reality.

November 19, 2017 12:01 am

“Attempting to abate, control or limit CO2 from electric power facilities has consequences. It means creating “carbon capture and storage” systems that don’t work, are huge energy hogs, drive up electricity prices, and leave us with the massive, unaddressed problem of where to put all the carbon dioxide”

Atmospheric CO2 levels are harmless, but if they create some kind of storage facility for it, it *will* be a tragic disaster just waiting to happen – like Lake Nyos.

November 19, 2017 12:16 am

Surely there’s some mistake in this quote:

The supposed wind and solar alternatives involve massive land use, environmental, ecological, economic, and human health and welfare impacts. Based on my previous rough calculations, using wind power to replace all current US electricity generation(3.5 billion megawatt-hours per year) … and charge batteries for seven windless days of backup power … would require some 14 million 1.8-MW bird-killing turbines, each one 330 to 410 feet tall, across some 210 million acres (twice the size of California). The backup power would require some 700 billion 100-kWh Tesla battery packs (also requiring vast acreage).

3.5 billion megawatt hours per year, would equate to ~67 million megawatt hours per week.

This would require around 670 million 100-kWh battery packs. More if the wind farm outage occurred in winter because of seasonal effects, but not 1,000 times more.

There’s a lot of reasonable arguments in the article, but undermined by this mistake.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  7Kiwi
November 19, 2017 2:52 am

Yes. A lot of supporters of this tech simply can’t get their heads around how much energy is required. But then, it is the policy of “leaders” to make us live on less and less.

Henning Nielsen
November 19, 2017 12:44 am

“Their “we can opt into Paris” attitude also raises the interesting question of whether communities in those states (especially rural counties that voted for candidate Trump) can opt out of their de-carbonization”

How fun. On the federal level, US is out of Paris, then some states are in, some counties are out while some of their municipalities are in. Lots of food for lawyers.

Dave Dodd
Reply to  Henning Nielsen
November 19, 2017 1:02 am

“No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation….”

US Constitution — Article I, Section 10, Clause 1

Reply to  Dave Dodd
November 19, 2017 3:18 am

They can possibly follow the ideology of the treaty without actually entering into any agreement

Great way to bring your state to the brink of economic destruction.

Which , of course, is the AGW Agenda aim.

Too many GULLIBLE people !!

michael hart
November 19, 2017 1:33 am

“…and risking sudden catastrophic CO2 eruptions from whatever underground storage facilities might actually get approved.”

It’s amazing that many of the same people who think you can’t store relatively tiny amounts of solid, vitrified, nuclear waste safely, simultaneously think there would be no problems storing vast quantities of a pressurized gas. It shows what kind of minds you are dealing with.

Reply to  michael hart
November 19, 2017 1:49 am

And hydrogen. That wonder fuel (that actually has to be created by using some power source) is the key to the future!

All mention of the impossibility of containing it effectively, how brittle ot makes metals, and how extremely explosive it is are quietly swept under a lovely green carpet. The stupid nutters.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Jer0me
November 19, 2017 2:54 am

Plenty of hydrogen about…it’s collecting and storing it in a meaningful way is the costly bit! It’s why coal, oil and gas are so easy to handle.

Reply to  Jer0me
November 20, 2017 4:30 am

Separating hydrogen from oxygen at a net energy loss: virtuous!
Separating hydrogen from carbon at a net energy gain: dastardly!

Paying the Thermo2 tax over a dozen times to run a car on batteries: virtuous!
Paying the Thermo2 tax only a few times to run a car on hydrocarbon combustion: dastardly!

For all their claims of wanting to save the planet, the Greenies sure seem dead-set on squandering its resources, by pushing alternative energy schemes that range from the merely inefficient to the shamlessly wasteful.

Reply to  michael hart
November 19, 2017 7:20 am

Yes, and the extreme difficulty of dealing with people who have the mentality of cave men but live in the nuclear age.

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 7:42 am

Cave people. Sheesh.

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 1:51 pm

squiggy9000: Cave men. Get over it.

November 19, 2017 1:35 am

Same as water runs downhill and electrons to ground, so does industry move to were energy costs are cheaper. The energy component of each item we purchase must be in the 70-80% region and a 20% saving on that energy cost component will make an item some 15% cheaper, which will make all the difference.
Industry in Virginia may start relocating to other US states where energy is generated by cheap, clean hydrocarbons.

michael hart
November 19, 2017 1:46 am

“..why should those most severely impacted by these schemes not be able to opt out of them?”

We all know the answer. Because they are poor, less likely to vote, and never likely to bring such matters before the courts.
The people promoting extreme cavorting-with-the-green-fairies generally don’t have to worry much about the price of Absinthe or the price of electricity.

November 19, 2017 2:04 am

Making people poorer so you can feel virtuous.

The Left has always done this but never so blatantly and in such an uncaring manner

Reply to  Phoenix44
November 19, 2017 4:46 am

It isn’t virtuosity they want. It’s power. Poor people don’t have much power. Until they get good and mad. Hmmm. Reminds me of something. King/Queen AGW demands taxation without representation. Revolution starts. Now where have I heard that before.

Reply to  Phoenix44
November 20, 2017 4:51 am

The Left only cares about the poor when it can leverage their grievances to gain or keep power. Therefore, the Left has a vested interest in keeping them aggrieved. Identity politics is but an extension of that interest. They may constantly rail against racism, real or imagined, but they keep it on life support because it’s too useful of a political tool to let die. Minority groups, wherever you may be, please open your eyes. The Left is not helping you. The Left is using you!

November 19, 2017 2:15 am

“German households pay nearly 36 U.S. cents a kilowatt-hour of electricity, versus an average of 13 cents in America.”

Perhaps if more American Voters new what they were voting for they wouldn’t?

November 19, 2017 2:56 am

If they don’t pay in to make up for what President Trump has taken out Paris is dead. As this excellent article points out, they aren’t paying in which totally misses the point of Paris in the first place.

Lars P.
November 19, 2017 3:08 am

Greenies never think it through, never balance things.
Their “we can opt into Paris” attitude also raises the interesting question of whether communities in those states (especially rural counties that voted for candidate Trump) can opt out of their de-carbonization, cap-and-trade, pseudo-renewable, pseudo-sustainable, unreliable wind and solar energy schemes.
Very true, this opens a can of worms. I want to opt out of the scheme!

The whole climate ‘science’ is made up of adjustments, not data:
The satellite altimetry was adjusted for each and every satellite. The first results in 2000 showed a 0.9 mm to zero per year, then it was adjusted in 2003 to 3 mm per year.
envisat adjusted post mortem, argo was showing ocean cooling had to be wrong, land temperature data…. all ‘adjusted’…

Y. Knott
November 19, 2017 3:08 am

Good, good – glad to hear Virginia is starting a serious effort to combat CAGW, a.k.a. LAGD*

– Democrats likely won the State in a backlash against Trump. Now that people can see first-hand what happens when you elect a Democrat Governor to “oppose Trump”, it hopefully won’t happen anywhere else. Whatever else you may say about the voting public, we’re not all stupid, all the time.

*(LAGD – Lyin’ Al Gore’s Disease)

Reply to  Y. Knott
November 19, 2017 7:48 am

The msm want you to believe it was the beginning of a democrat wave but Virginny is a blue state that shoots itself in the foot every other election.

Reply to  F. Leghorn
November 19, 2017 1:01 pm

The younger generations are already rejecting this 25 year Leftist psychosis (in US at least).

Reply to  Y. Knott
November 20, 2017 5:06 am

Pretty sure every day that Trump Derangement Syndrome persists in the media is another rock on the landslide that’s going to hit the Democrats come midterms. It will come as a surprise to noone but them.

November 19, 2017 3:11 am

According to Forbes, California electricity imports have now reached 33% of usage.

Reply to  Maxbert
November 19, 2017 7:49 am

To them that means it is clean energy.

Reply to  F. Leghorn
November 20, 2017 6:05 am

Just like SimCity. Site your nasty unscrubbed hydrocarbon-fueled power plants far away on the edge of the map and half the pollution magically disappears (and your neighbor cities will never complain about it). The rest is too far away to bother your fickle SimCitizens for SimDecades to come. And leagues of SimPowerLines will deliver 100% of the energy with no transmission loss.

…as far as urban planning is concerned, Wil Wright ruined a generation.

November 19, 2017 3:20 am

On the subject of energy – here the beeb are crowing about the biggest-in-the-world lithium battery grid farm, in California.

How big is it? Well, so big that it will supply 20,000 homes for 4 hours.

Except … that’s not very big. A drop in the ocean only in what will be needed when the progressives-green load-shedding begins fir real. In fact this statistic merely underlines the utter and woeful inadequacy of any grid battery technology to make any real difference to the fundamental inadequacy of renewable based grid ideology.

Reply to  ptolemy2
November 19, 2017 3:33 am

Likely will be the site of one really huge fire in the not too distant future. If not by accident, then probably later when it turns out to be losing vasts amounts of money making the insurance money look irresistible.

Nigel S
Reply to  alcheson
November 19, 2017 3:56 am

They could blame it on birds killed by the windmills shorting out the power lines.

Nigel S
Reply to  ptolemy2
November 19, 2017 3:48 am

120MWh for 20,000 homes for 4 hours is 1.5kW per house. That wouldn’t run many A/C units or provide hot water for showers. So the usual averaging lie.

Reply to  Nigel S
November 20, 2017 5:12 am

The Lie of Averages

Nigel S
Reply to  ptolemy2
November 19, 2017 3:54 am

Worth watching to the end when several huge diesel locos go past in the foreground pulling what look like diesel generators. Energy you can use!

Reply to  Nigel S
November 19, 2017 5:39 am

Interesting – two possible reasons for diesel generators at the same place as the battery farm:
1. Individuals with the sense to prepare for what’s coming
2. The “battery farm” will get most of it’s energy from these hidden diesel generators and chalk it up as battery power.

Nigel S
Reply to  Nigel S
November 19, 2017 7:30 am

Well one diesel road tanker contains about twice 120MWh (less allowing for IC efficiency of course). Handy things as the Spanish solar farmers found.

Reply to  ptolemy2
November 19, 2017 9:04 am

I agree. Plus, that 20,000 homes for 4 hours is in Escondido, CA; it would surely be far fewer homes just about anywhere else.

November 19, 2017 3:25 am

Good thing Trump won.. because otherwise we would have been obligated to pay every last dime requested under the Paris Accord. The TPP was actually the enforcement mechanism for the Paris Accord. Embedded in the TPP, were mechanisms to set up three member climate panels which ruled on a simple 2/3 vote with the power to assess many billions per year in fines against the US if we didn’t not strictly adhere to the EPA CPP and all International Climate accords in all 50 states. One member from the US, one member from the nation that claims we weren’t meeting ALL of our obligations, and one member appointed by the UN. In addition, this panel was given VETO power over any future changes to our EPA laws to prevent future administrations from watering down the CPP. Obama was one smart cookie… he had no need to make the Paris accord a treaty… all he needed to do was have TPP pass… and Trump was the only one who would have stopped it.

November 19, 2017 4:16 am

Y’all seem to be missing the joke here, and it’s a real knee-slapper. Whatever states can establish whatever stupid standards they like, and then trot off to foreign conferences and virtue signal. Only to find that no one cares. Because the UN isn’t interested in compliance. The only thing the UN actually wants out of us is money.

November 19, 2017 4:24 am

When were the voters in Virginia informed and was it a campaign pledge?

Coach Springer
November 19, 2017 4:24 am

Threatening accidental contraction to force intentional contraction. Contraction of activity, of economic well being, of freedom., and of life (humans, pets and agriculture – for starters). With greenies, who needs exaggerated and largely non-anthropogenic non-catastrophic global warming when you can get the real catastrophe. And they will even charge you for bringing it. A complete package.

November 19, 2017 4:27 am

The important thing the article does not mention is that the USA as a whole is doing about 5 billion tons of emissions out of a global total of 37 billion. This is around 13%. So if these guys are half that, and reduce their emissions by one half, which would be going it some, and well over Paris, then global emissions would fall by around 3%. Too small to have any effect, even if the theory is correct.

Meanwhile the rest of the world is increasing like crazy, so the result will be even less effect.

What is the point?

This is actually quite a deep question. And its not about the USA at all. The question is, what is the program? Does the program make sense?

The program these guys have is, let the rest of the world increase like crazy and we in Virginia or wherever will cut back by half. And this will….will….? Do what, exactly?

The point is, it may be insane for the world to go zero carbon, but if everyone is going to do it, is persuaded that its necessary, there is a case for going along. But there can be no rational case for doing what the rest of the world claims to be necessary when they themselves are doing the exact opposite.

That is a program which Virginia is signing up to which is irrational in its own terms. Even if you accept the CAGW thesis, this is not a rational reaction to it.

The thing the green movement needs to be forced to do is think and plan rationally, and advocate doing things only when they can be shown to achieve their supposed goals. This stuff fails the most basic rationality test.

November 19, 2017 4:32 am

Electricity is not typically generated and consumed within the same state. Therefore it is a case of interstate commerce and the states have no control over that. Legally, I can’t see how a state can impose any regulations that would directly affect another state that involves interstate commerce. And most any regulation they employ would probably do just that. There is also the issue of jurisdiction with respect to the EPA.

Nigel S
Reply to  arthur4563
November 19, 2017 4:49 am

Politicians seem to be optimists. Scotland is putting up the price of alcohol. Booze shops south of the border are stocking up. Frosty Jack’s, 2 litres of 7.5% cider will more than double in price but the good news is that Buckfast stays the same price.

Steve Fraser
Reply to  arthur4563
November 19, 2017 6:42 am

Good points.

Reply to  arthur4563
November 19, 2017 7:18 am

You don’t need regulations per se, just stupid people who will go along with this. The OWNER of the power plant can buy from where ever he wants and if he doesn’t want to buy from a company that doesn’t use renewables, he doesn’t have to. In states with a regulatory agency, most agencies are so stupid they believe renewables are the future and will jack rates up sky high to get the renewables online. Since power companies are all owned by democrat millionaires, there will be plenty of cooperation between states. Besides, the power company billionaires eat up the subsidies for the renewables. It’s virtually paid for by the government and the long-term contracts. What’s not to love if you’re the power company.

November 19, 2017 4:40 am

Looks like Dominion just received the political guarantee needed to reopen its North Anna unit three LOC, suspended in September. They already had obtained the combined construction and operating license on NRC’s fast track procedures, but it was suspended in September after Westinghouse’s bankruptcy.

Now it looks like they’ll have justification to start up again–it’s a GE plant design. Virginia will be firmly anchored in nuclear at least until 2060.

Too bad decisions like these can’t be made on the basis of economics.

November 19, 2017 4:41 am

I live in Oregon. Have for all my life. There is a good bet I won’t somewhere down the road.

Reply to  Pamela Gray
November 19, 2017 7:13 am

And move where? The morons in Wyoming are putting up bird choppers to please Soros and the rich in California. Killing eagles—who cares? No one in the state, save a couple of people in the legislature and a few unorganized citizens. The rest are starry-eyed teenagers drooling over “green energy” and too willfully ignorant to care what it does to the state. The idiot governor wants Wyoming to be the new Silicone Valley. I am typing this on a 1.5 MB—yes, that’s M—connection. We are a freaking joke. There’s no place left to move. Citizens have all sold out to the stupid and inept leaders and thrown in the towl. Stay where you are—by the time you leave, you’ll just be moving to a different area with the very same stupid leaders and people you left. It’s metastasized and there’s no stopping it. The stupid runs rampant.

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 7:59 am

Here in Jasper Alabama I have a 30Mb connection I pay $14.95 a month for. I could get a hundred meg connection for forty but I’m cheap.

We would welcome you here Pamela, but I warn you- no global warming at this time. It’s freaking cold today.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 8:55 am

Spelling? Silicone Valley is the San Fernando Valley (with porn production) and Silicon Valley is the Santa Clara Valley (with microchips). Sorry, old California joke.

November 19, 2017 4:41 am

I’m pretty certain that the states impising tgese green taxes are violating the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
Who has standing tobtakevthis to court?

November 19, 2017 4:47 am

In point if fact, fir the good of the nation President Trump needs to stop this centrifugal destruction if states making treaties and bkatatantly deciding to violate the laws of the land.

Reply to  hunter
November 19, 2017 7:05 am

Been visiting Alice in Wonderland again? Trump will do no such thing. The MOST important thing is the citizens of those states WILL DO NOTHING. Why should Trump do anything when the residents DO NOTHING. The country is full of children hoping Daddy Trump will bail them out of the stupidity and inaction that put them where they are. Sorry, life doesn’t work that way. Do nothing and the world runs right over you. It’s your choice to be run over and Americans CHOSE it.

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 11:50 am

Well… except they will be paying dearly for doing nothing. California is ‘doing nothing” but yet electricity prices are rapidly increasing and we already have 72c a gallon CO2 tax on gasoline.

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 1:04 pm


Good. Then they’ll learn.

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 1:53 pm

It does not appear that any learning is taking place. People fork out the money and keep electing the twits that raised the prices. If learning were happening, then our choices might change. I see no evidence of a change.

Reply to  hunter
November 20, 2017 5:36 am

Pretty sure Trump’s giving them enough rope to hang themselves. Those state governments are perilously close to being in a state (heh) of open rebellion. Arguably Trump would already be justified in sending federal troops to depose them. Washington wasted no time quelling the Whiskey Rebellion and those people were just refusing to pay a new duty on alcohol (and starting to get violent about it).

November 19, 2017 4:52 am

These people are as anti-technology as anyone around. Apparently they know from nothing about electric carsa nd smallmodular molten salt nuclear reactors, which together can accomplish way more than their expensive programs, and won’t hurt the economics of the nation. In fact, moltensalt reactors can produce power cheaper than any technology, including fossil fuels, and doesn’t require highly trained operators, or many operators at all. General Motors the other day promised sub $100 per kWhr batteries within two years (currently costing GM $150) At those prices, electric cars
are on a par with gas powered vehicles in terms of sticker price and are much cheaper to maintain and operate. And recharge speeds are fast enough these days that a 15 minute recharge can provide 240 miles of driving range. Some new higer priced electrics will have 500 miles of driving range. Almost all will exceed 300 miles in a year or so. Technology is moving towards reduced emissions – there is zero need for anyone to disrupt the current system with costly progrms that will
produce inferior carbon reduction technologies. These efforts are based almost entirely upon ignorance of future energy technologies, and superstitiuous and ignorant anti-nuclear claims.
One Union of Concerned Scientists claimed that molten salt nuclear power was a bust. Why? Because on the past some other proposed nuclear technologies were not viable. Of course, molten salt reactors have been operating many decades before the Union was even created and the only thing that prevented their commercialization was the absence of a small moderator and corrosive resistent metals. Both of those obstacles have been overcome and there is zero reason to doubt the practicality of these reactors. There are, in fact, more than a few distinctly different design
strategies and even if one or more failed for some unlikely reason, there are plenty of others that
will not possess those failed components. But none will fail – the science is simply too well known and proven over many years of experimental molten salt reactor operation. Basically ,only two components (in some designs only one) were required to make the reactors able to generate practical amounts of power. The Union of Concerned Scientists has proven itself to be woefully ignorant of new nuclear technologies.

Reply to  arthur4563
November 19, 2017 7:02 am

Electric cars are the wave of the future just like Betamax tapes were.

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 9:00 am

And HDDVD. Do you even remember those? Microsoft blew a huge fortune on that “wave”

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 1:55 pm

squiggy9000: No, I had forgotten that fiasco!

Reply to  Sheri
November 19, 2017 10:05 pm

…and don’t forget 8-track tapes!

Hocus Locus
Reply to  arthur4563
November 19, 2017 7:12 am

I like your thinking… but drop the “small”. The whole concept of “Small Modular Reactors” is a un-affordable sham, it is a clumsy (and futile) attempt by desperate people to sneak in new nuclear technologies under the radar from irrational radiation-adverse people. Which make up the large share of faux-environmentalists who are pushing natural gas without saying so, their hypocrisy kept hidden by a mutual conspiracy of silence.

The time to sprinkle a continent with small reactors was ~30 years ago. That time window is over. Money is gone. The only path to survival is >=1GWt per unit with multiple units on site, and the ONLY technology that can deliver is molten salts — Uranium burners now like ThorCon and as soon as humanly possible, Thorium/U-233 breeders as Weinberg envisioned them.

If you have plenty of free time, see my Letters and Linkfest on this most promising Energy path.

November 19, 2017 4:55 am

Anybody know how much carbon Virginia exports in the form of pellets to burn in Drax?

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  John DeFayette
November 19, 2017 6:40 am

According to GreenAccounting roolz, that would be a double red herring. First, exports don’t count. It is only what you actually burn that counts. Secondly, the wood itself is “carbon-neutral”, meaning that as long as you are replacing the trees at the same rate as you are harvesting them, it’s a wash. What they conveniently “forget” though, is all the fossil-fueled energy required to harvest, haul, process into pellets, and ship those pellets overseas. I would also question whether, in fact, those trees are being replaced at the same rate. Plus, irony of ironies, we have Greenies, who you would think would be tree-huggers, not tree-haters, chopping down trees to “save the planet”. Mind-bogglingly stupid.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 19, 2017 8:09 am

Look into the history of the species of trees that were in New England when first colonized and replaced by those needed for building sailing ships. Then do the same for the southern states. And here we are doing it again. No concern whatsoever by the Envirowhackos and their effect upon the flora/fauna of these areas. How many species of birds or mammals have disappeared?

I Came I Saw I Left
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 19, 2017 8:17 am

Virtually any land in the eastern US that is not mowed becomes forest at the same rate as ground that is planted. The only reason to plant trees is to control the species for later harvesting.

Hocus Locus
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 19, 2017 8:18 am

Plus, irony of ironies, we have Greenies, who you would think would be tree-huggers, not tree-haters, chopping down trees to “save the planet”. Mind-bogglingly stupid.

Some trees are treeier than others. Time was years ago I noted a rise in tree-huggers who were strangely silent about rainforest devastation brought on by biodiesel Palm Oil cultivation (keyword: elsewhere)… also noted a growing dislike of nuclear energy that manifested in a surge for coal… also noted that Africa was being treated as an emerging market but as a National Park infested with people, to be tossed little scraps of technology and single-dose medicines that ‘we’ would not tolerate… then finally the wind’n’solar push with vaporware storage… now propping natural gas… AND THEN…

I realized they were all the same people. What an awful crop.
It is no longer enough to raise sensible children who would reverse these trends..
They must be prepared to wage a desperate battle with ‘those people’ and their children.

Hocus Locus
November 19, 2017 5:01 am

Maryland and Virginia — two red states held hostage by populous but not electoralious Beltway and Baltimore. I used to think people matter. Now square miles matter. Once the city-states get their way the Midwest, and the rural areas surrounding these cities, will be a mechanized Medieval serfdom.

Reply to  Hocus Locus
November 19, 2017 5:32 am

Yep and to bolster the ranks of the blue DC belt in Virginia they allowed Felons the vote and imported large numbers of “immigrants”. I love all the history in the area but hate to drive it. The armpit of truck driving in the US is the I-95 corridor from Boston to Richmond.

John W. Garrett
Reply to  Hocus Locus
November 19, 2017 5:58 am

It wasn’t that long ago that Maryland and Virginia were Dixiecrat states.

Then, a horde of immigrants moved into the state in order to feed at the Government trough.

Reply to  John W. Garrett
November 19, 2017 7:00 am

The people elected allowed this and no one stopped them.

Reply to  Hocus Locus
November 19, 2017 6:59 am

States do nothing to stop this. The states want more residents and don’t care how they get them. The residents stupidly elect politicians who “promise to grow the state”. Look, we get EXACTLY what we vote for. Liars, cheats, etc. And we keep voting for them. We leave them in office. We don’t protest what they do. Townhalls are full of paid protesters for the Left. The right does nothing. Those who want things different just sigh and say it can’t be done. Americans have given up. Get used to this—it’s what America wants and actively maintains. Being steam-rollered and destroyed by the rich and evil.

Bruce Cobb
November 19, 2017 5:51 am

I’m pretty sure that WASI stands for We Are Surely Imbeciles.

November 19, 2017 5:58 am

The fossil fuels used in the wind and solar industries would provide more electricity if they were burned directly in power plants. That’s why current wind and solar power technologies can never become economical. Even if fossil fuel prices were to increase, then wind and solar power costs would also increase faster than the value of the electricity they produce. In fact, if fossil fuel prices increase by a lot, then even rich economies will find that they no longer have the energy surpluses to continue subsidizing wind and solar power, and they will be forced to shut down and abandon them. Then those monstrous wind turbine and solar farm eyesores will become ugly monuments to the foolishness of leftist government energy economics.

Reply to  MikeW
November 19, 2017 9:05 am

They already are ugly monuments

Reply to  MikeW
November 19, 2017 4:10 pm

The sooner this happens the better. Innovative recyclers need to be ready. Perhaps the propellers of wind turbines could be turned into garbage cans?

Reply to  Sommer
November 19, 2017 6:03 pm

Do you like your health being
subject to the
emissions of FFs,
esp coal?

Do you care if the
planet warms for
your ancestors or all
the others on earth?

Reply to  Sommer
November 19, 2017 6:18 pm

Fossil Fuels
are responsible
for the growth of
and the massive
benefits of
modern society.
The benefits that
you and all your
mindless, hypo-
critical socialist
bletheren take
full use of

There is no
warming effect
from CO2
in the whole of
the satellite record,
while CO2 has
been at its
purely beneficial

[Using a text screen editor? .mod]

Reply to  Sommer
November 19, 2017 6:20 pm

Yes, it would be
nice if the planet
was warmer and
more productive
of plant life for
my descendants.

Last thing I wish
for them is a
drop back into
another mini
ice age.

November 19, 2017 6:03 am

We can only hope they cannot cheat their way to control the House of delegates.

November 19, 2017 6:49 am

This will only end when the power companies have the balls to not sell to states pushing renewables. Since all power companies are run by neutured billionaires, it will not stop. Since 95% of politicians are lying, neutured creatures, it will not end. Face it, your country despises you and is out to destroy your existence.

November 19, 2017 7:58 am

Don’t know about VA, but most states allow about 5% ROI to public utilities, thus this 3% increase will be passed immediately off to the consumer. Will be fun to watch the price of Natural Gas skyrocket as VA utilities shutdown coal power plants and use NG CCTGs to make electricity. This will not only cause cause electric bills to go up as the more expensive NG cost will cause home heating bills to go up. Then, the number of low income residents seeking energy assistance will increase.

November 19, 2017 8:08 am

Surprising, how far would sophisticated Virginians go to distinguish themselves from deplorable West Virginians.

Steve Zell
Reply to  Curious George
November 20, 2017 9:39 am

West Virginia used to be a reliably blue (Democrat) state because most of the coal miners there were union members, who traditionally supported Democrats. Al Gore was the first Democrat to lose the Presidential election in West Virginia in many decades because of his global-warming scare, which led Republicans to come out in favor of coal mining, and Republicans (Bush, McCain, Romney, Trump) have won the state by increasing margins in later Presidential elections.

What many of the “sophisticated” recent immigrants to Fairfax and Arlington Counties (near DC) working for the Federal Government on the taxpayers’ dime fail to understand is that Virginia is also a coal-producing state, and closing down coal-fired power plants to try to replace them by wind farms will hurt the economy of the coal-producing areas of western Virginia (along the Appalachians) as well as make electric power much more expensive. Natural gas produces less pollution per kWh than coal, but Virginia would have to import natural gas, most likely from Pennsylvania, which produces it by fracking.

Virginia doesn’t have as much hydroelectric power as Oregon or Washington state. Anybody for damming the Shenandoah River?

November 19, 2017 8:59 am

“…if they love Paris so much, these half-of-US-GDP WASI members should be obligated … and happy … to pay one-half of the USA’s Green Climate Fund obligations: $10 billion in 2017, rising steadily to $50 billion a year by 2030.”

They should not ONLY pay that tax, because that is what it is. They should ALSO move there and leave us alone.

Tom in Florida
November 19, 2017 9:52 am

So if CO2 drifts in from bordering states what good would a carbon tax do for Virginia? Oh, you say, it is not about the environment but more about redistribution of money via government edict? That I would wholly agree with.

November 19, 2017 10:23 am

I believe that the ONLY Rational Solution to Dumbocrat sponsored State Idiocy is to set the Electric Grid to accept the Sale of Excess Electricity from such Blue States but BLOCK the Importation of Power from the so-called “Polluting States”. Once the Lights go out, there might be a Political Revolt against Progressive Idiocy!

Reply to  sz939
November 19, 2017 1:42 pm

As I am from the UK and not being a political animal myself but if the Democrats can declare ‘UDI’ from the elected government then if they get in power is it not conceivable that Republican ‘States’ can do the same and go their own way? To me it makes a complete mockery of the whole government system.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Skyman
November 19, 2017 3:33 pm

Legally, the Democratic ruled states cannot, but the Obama administration let them get away with it, and Democratic appointees in the courts also are unwilling to enforce the law.

November 19, 2017 11:43 am

Apparently, in West Virginia there has just been s deal signed with the Chinese

Some $250Billion agreement signed by Trump and the Chinese.

The first stage is reportedly scheduled to begin in the next six to eight months with the building of at least two natural gas-fired power plants likely located in Brooke and Harrison counties.

None of this will of course ever be mentioned in the MSM.

Reply to  AndyG55
November 19, 2017 12:07 pm

There is no “deal,” all there is is a non-binding MOU.

Bloomberg is very mainstream media:

“Without a contractual obligation, there’s no guarantee developments agreed to in an memorandum will get funded and built.”

Gunga Din
November 19, 2017 1:26 pm

“Virginia, there is a Santa Clause”, but his bag is empty.

Reply to  Gunga Din
November 20, 2017 5:50 am

Was going to give all you naughty boys and girls lumps of coal, but your state guvvies banned it.

November 19, 2017 2:38 pm

Perhaps, Paul.

Northam and associated goons won because the high population centers, and a couple of liberal enclaves; e.g. Albemarle where U of VA is located. voted heavily Democrat.

The majority of Virginia’s counties voted against Northam and his fools.

I suspect, any attempt to push cap & trade, anti-fossil fuel efforts through Virginia’s legislature will be rigorously opposed.

The good news is that any such efforts will really rally voters against Democrats in 2018.

It would be nice if Judicial Watch investigates Virginia’s curious heavy turnout in the cities.

November 19, 2017 3:13 pm

“…for seven windless days of backup power…”

“700 billion 100-kWh Tesla battery packs.”

United States population: 350 million

2,000 100-kWh Tesla battery packs per person.

Typical house uses 1 kilowatt per hour.

2 100-kWh Tesla battery packs per person seems more likely. But the battery packs are still expensive. Probably $10,000 each.

November 19, 2017 3:41 pm

what is the cost of not reducing
ghg emissions?

what are the health costs of
burning coal and polluting the

Reply to  crackers345
November 19, 2017 3:55 pm

1. Its costing Germany billions of dollars to NOT reduce CO2 output.

2. Coal used in a modern way is MASSIVELY more beneficial than harmful.

Remember, crackpot, coal is responsible for the rise and continuation of western civilisation.

CO2 is responsible for ALL food on Earth.

You are free to move to somewhere that is without the BENEFITS of coal fired power…

but you won’t will you.

Just sit back in your fossil fuel warmed and supplied inner city socialist left ghetto, yapping mindlessly.

Michael Jankowski
November 19, 2017 7:57 pm

Why isn’t Mosher here to discuss Don Quixote? He’s far more qualified to do that than speak on climate science.

November 20, 2017 5:28 am

Steve Fraser November 19, 2017 at 6:33 am

“Someone will put a sleaker system in the cars to mimic the throaty roar. Different pitch for each competitive class.”

Can be done already.
Makes a baby Kia sound like a VZ Monaro [famous Australian muscle car]

Dave in the UP
November 20, 2017 5:50 am

To reword the old saying: “You get what you vote for…”

November 21, 2017 4:22 pm

Sorry, the the Columbia River dams in the PNW were not built by the WPA, but by the Army Corps of Engineers.

%d bloggers like this: