Tom Steyer’s multimillion dollar renewable energy initiative goes down in flames

A renewable energy initiative was rejected by Arizona voters Tuesday, dealing a major blow to environmental activists who hoped to increase the state’s development of wind and solar resources.

Proposition 127, a renewable energy initiative in Arizona, lost handily Tuesday, according to ABC Arizona, citing The Associated Press. The proposal was widely expected to go down in flames heading into Election Day.

Despite millions of dollars in backing from liberal activist Tom Steyer, Proposition 127 lost at the ballot box on Election Day. The ballot proposal called for the state’s utility companies to acquire 50 percent of its electricity from renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, by 2030. If the proposal had been successful, it would have dramatically increased Arizona’s renewable energy mandate, which currently stands at 15 percent by 2025.

The battle over Proposition 127 pitted two main forces against each other: NextGen Climate Action and Pinnacle West. NextGen, an environmental organization funded by Steyer, dumped well over $20 million in an effort to convince Arizonans the mandate would be a good thing for the state. Pinnacle West — the parent company of Arizona Public Service, the biggest electric utility in the state — spent even more to convince voters otherwise.

Very similar to a Steyer-led effort in Nevada, backers of Prop 127 argued it would help fight climate change and work well in the very sunny state of Arizona. However, Arizonans for Affordable Electricity — the initiative’s main opposition group — argued it would drastically raise utility rates on Arizonans.

“Arizona voters have spoken loud and clear, overwhelmingly rejecting Proposition 127. Much will be written and said in the coming days about why Prop 127 was defeated, but it’s really pretty simple,” Matthew Benson, a spokesman for Arizonans for Affordable Electricity, said in Tuesday night statement. “Arizonans support clean energy, but not costly, politically driven mandates. Arizonans support solar power and renewable technology, but not at the expense of an affordable, reliable energy supply. Arizonans prefer to choose our own energy future rather than have it dictated to us by out-of-state special interests.”

More here

Advertisements

103 thoughts on “Tom Steyer’s multimillion dollar renewable energy initiative goes down in flames

    • The Democratic Party just took the US House of Representatives.
      Looks like the Socialists landed a few blows of their own.

      • A number of Republican losses in the House were the Republicans who proposed or supported carbon taxes.

        CLIMATE CAUCUS REPUBLICANS SUFFER A STRING OF ELECTION DEFEATS, INCLUDING THEIR PRO-CARBON TAX LEADER”

        “* Rep. Carlos Curbelo, a carbon tax supporter, lost to his Democratic opponent.
        * Other GOP lawmakers on the Climate Solutions Caucus were also defeated.
        * “[Y]et another sign that carbon taxes are politically toxic,” conservatives said.

        Florida Rep. Carlos Curbelo, who supports a carbon tax, was among defeated House Republicans who are part of a caucus set up to push global warming policies.”

        The claimed blue wave turned out to be barely a ripple; with many of the democrats elected winning by small margins. A terrible mid-term election for the democrats.

        Now, if democrats especially the out and out socialist democrats go for their promised retribution inquisition, they guarantee more future election disasters for democrats.

        • But we’ll still have to watch and listen to Nancy Pelosi on the news! Unless, of course, you’re quick on the remote like I am.

          • Somewhere around 66 Dems swore up and down that if elected/reelected they would not vote for Pelosi as Speaker of the House. We’ll see how that works out.

          • Agreed, JimG1!
            The “mute” buttons on my remotes lost their labeling long ago.

            My family is used to watching commercials without sound.

            One of the things about people is how a running mental commentary is used to ‘explain’ the world around them. The so called “inner voice”.

            Commercials try to insinuate their dialogues into people’s minds as a replacement mental commentary that explains a commercial from a marketing perspective.

            Most commercials are profoundly absurd when that advertisement commentary is turned off.

            Any hint of Pelosi, schiffless, waters, farrakhan, CAGW, global warming, Attenborough, geico, progressive, Nat Geo, etc, and the commercial or news segment gets immediately muted.

            I can read the entire dialogues later online, and avoid the “sound bite” propaganda used and abused by the MSM.

          • Nancy is the gift that keeps on giving. I hope the Dems do giver her back the gavel, it’ll be the best thing for the Republicans.

          • My wife and I have started muting the talking heads on CNN, and we don’t read their names / affiliations. Some of the talking heads have been on so many times, we know who they are, and what they stand for. But it is amusing to just watch them, and figure out who the Progressives are just from their body language. I highly commend this, if you can force yourself to watch CNN.

          • Ms Nancy Drew Pelosi gave a news conference last night, taking her victory lap and touting how the Democrats will be “transparent” in all their coming efforts in the House of Representatives. I couldn’t stop laughing when I heard Ms “You’ll have to pass this bill to see what’s in it” Pelosi say that.

            Words are meaningless. Actions matter and can be the only metric in today’s politics.

        • Supporting a carbon tax was just a misguided attempt at political survival on Carlos Curbelo’s part. He ignorantly thought it would buy him some leaning-Democrat support to survive re-election.

          It is of course the opposite. It bought him nothing. Those voters who supported a carbon tax were never going to vote Republican anyway. And it only turned off his base supporters.

          Such ignorant political creatures as Curbelo are in need of culling at the ballot box.

        • News reports say that the Mass. incumbent AG was re-elected? Seems Mass. voters think the ExxonMobil affair is OK with them?

          Anymore information on this election result?

      • The House of Representatives has been irrelevant the past two decades outside of passing Obamacare. Their budget making mandates have transmogrified into Continuing Resolutions and their legislative efforts have been assumed by rogue judicial activists and the Regulative Branch of the Fe’ral Government.

        Basically 435 sinecures and obnoxious staff.

    • Not just defeated – it was 70% against, 30% in favour. All it takes to defeat stupidity is to have Tom Steyer invest in supporting it.

      • Were that but true in Nevada, Andy. Alas, it was to to be. We have too many Kalifornians trying to escape taxes and high prices there – only to ask that the same conditions be created here.

  1. Prop 127 is being defeated by better than a 2 to 1 margin — around 69% saying “No.”

    Also, Arizona Attorney General Brnovich won his re-election, with his opponent being financed with huge independent attack ads funded by Steyer. Steyer of course wanted another Democrat State AG to ad to his stable of Attorney General’s for Hire hit squad in true #ExxonKnew fashion. Plus Brnovich used his position as AG to ensure the wording in Prop 127 included the “without regard to cost to consumers” on the Renewable energy mandate. That drew Steyer’s major ire, for telling the truth to voters about the the Green’s solar power lies.

  2. Too bad Steyer didn’t sink even more of his $1.6B into this fallacy that is unreliable energy. He might have been driving a slightly used ’72 Ford Pinto. How many more times will be try to back this scam on public funds.

    • Steuer did also sink a lot money into a number of House races to turn the House over to Democrat control. Remember, Steyer is funding a huge “Impeach Trump” campaign.
      Those Dems who took his money will have to be his puppet mouthpiece in Congress on that Impeach issue. With any luck such Impeach Trump crazies will show the American people what the Democrats stand for (nothing), and Trump will roll to re-election victory in 2 years on the backlash from moderate voters.

      • They can’t actually impeach Trump because the Republicans still control the Senate. They can, however, be a royal pain in the posterior and bury the administration in subpoenas. That will be likely seen by the voters as politically motivated harassment. Some folks warn that it would backfire. link

        • Um no. They can impeach Trump. He just won’t be convicted in the Senate.

          Imho the worst part is we will have to deal with Nancy Lugosi as Speaker. (Shudder)

          • Even though the Democrats have nominal control of the House, it is a slim enough margin that I doubt they will be able to get enough votes to impeach the president on the kind of phony charges they have been floating around for the last 2 years.

          • I second Paul Penrose’s comment.

            Instead of winning over fifty House seats via landslides, the democrats won a very slim House of Representatives majority margin, i.e. 219 democrat seats.

            The House has 435 members.
            218 House seats are required for a majority.
            2018’s 219 democrat House seat majority is an extremely thin majority, i.e. a majority of one House seat.

            That is, if every democrat votes in lock step with the Majority Leader of the House.

            A very large number of democrat Representatives are sitting in battleground districts and they will be very sensitive about supporting false narrative topics and partisan witch hunts while ignoring the needs of America..

            N.B.
            How America is represented by democrat/Republicans.
            https://www.dropbox.com/s/3m6vun51h9ed0qm/Representatives%202018.JPG?dl=0
            Note that the alleged democrat majority is based in population dense urban/suburban areas.

            The bane of democracy has always been ‘tyranny by a majority’. A very sensitive issue already in many voters minds.

            Nor will a House of Representatives partisan witch-hunt by democrats, solely to abuse and harass Republicans, be well received by voters.

            The sheer financial cost and wasted time caused to America by baseless witch hunting will bring House democrats firmly into view during future elections; especially when the purely partisan viciousness will not be supported in the Senate.

            The House may impeach, but the Senate conducts the trial. Senate subpoenas and House democrat witch hunt testimony will be firmly imbedded in voter’s minds during the 2019 and 2020 elections.

            A bare minimum democrat majority controlling the House of Representative, that utterly fails to address America’s needs while pursuing partisan witch hunts will seriously damage perceptions for upcoming elections.

          • 219 is not the final tally, it’s the current tally of decided races. There are still about 20 races not yet decided with several of them leaning democrat. The final tally will still be less of a lead that the Republican congress had (Republicans had a 22 seats over the needed 218, Dems will likely top out at around 11 over the 218 needed)

          • “That depends on how many moderate dems with integrity are in the house.”

            Those got primaried out years ago. Example, Joe Lieberman

          • Most of the switched seats seem to be Dems replacing RINOs, which I’d consider a slight improvement in affairs. I do prefer the honest rival over the dubious ally.

          • While that can be seen as a silver lining, I’d still rather have those handful of RINOs over the Dems controlling the house.

        • Just what “high crime or misdemeanor” Trump has done never seems to be clearly stated. Personal and/or ideological dislike is no grounds to impeach. 😐

    • Always. It’s the reprobate way. Loose on a vote? Throw it back out there over and over until it passes. Eventually, voter fatigue will let it slip by.

    • “How many more times will he try to back this scam on public funds.” Simple. 1.6B/20M times, try it yourself, he can repeat it 80 times. As my Canadian friends say about Quebec separatism, it is not a referendum, it is a never-endum.

      • Sadly, it is probably an infinite number of times. For billionaires $10M is just part of interest earned on their holdings. It’s a hobby. Still it’s good to see the money go away in defeat. It’s even better than if he invested in renewable technology and watched the company go bankrupt like so many others have.

  3. He’ll keep trying (they’ll all keep trying) but they won’t win.
    Mr average gets nothing from it; yet Mr average pays for it.
    Most of us can see through Tom and Al’s scam.
    Well it’s actually them and the board of Black Rock and Goldman Sachs and the Oil giants and every liberal and socialists and opportunist on the planet these days.

    • They’ll keep trying no matter how many times they fail – all they need is to win one time, one time in which the electorate fails to due it’s due diligence in defeating the measure. Freedom requires eternal vigilance.

    • It appears that Nevada passed its renewable energy target of 50% by 2030. However, presently it has Hoover dam, some photoelectric, some wind, some geothermal (industrial scale) but still 75% or more is NG generated. They forced coal out a while back and have a few plants left but I believe they are all scheduled to close. How they plan on getting to 50% is crazy in 12 years. So….

      It is on paper, and clearly insane. So in 11 years we will be able to laugh at Nevada because of this. And then we can finally put to rest this inane concept.

      Need more Nuclear.

    • As noted elsewhere, Q-6 passed (identical to AZ’s renewable mandate) but it requires passing in two consecutive elections cycles. However, Q-3 “Energy Deregulation” failed big time, 2-1. So there’s a good chance once Nevadans take a closer look at the renewable mandate, and are exposed to two more years of WUWT education, it will fail to pass in 2020, especially since Trump will be on the ballot.

  4. Strange that there are so many initiatives for “renewable” energy and nothing for nuclear energy. I thought the problem was an immediate, critically needed, dramatic reduction in emissions. What is the supposed advantage of renewables over nuclear? That it won’t run out after 10,000 years? I thought the problem was an immediate one. Building windmills actually INCREASES emissions during this supposed “critical” period.

    Yes, it’s very strange.

    If they can’t bring themselves to admit that they were wrong about nuclear power, imaging how long and what it might take for them to admit that they were wrong about CAGW. It will never happen. They’ll have to all die off.

    • Go Nuclear! Right on Steve O! What in hell is this liberal head-long rush into building bird choppers and cookers and ignoring nuclear? Three Mile Island was a big nothing and the China Syndrome was a two-bit movie. For the record, as President of a uranium exploration company I encouraged government officials to not build nuclear power reactors in earthquake-prone areas, but to especially build them where winds were strongly offshore. It does not hurt to avail yourselves of free insurance. Another example is to build a sulfuric acid contact plant on a limestone terrain, if something does go wrong no pasa nada.

      • Nathan Myhrvold, former Chief Technology Officer of Microsoft, promotes nuclear energy in Scientific American article “Why We Need Innovative Nuclear Power”
        https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-we-need-innovative-nuclear-power/

        Quotes:

        “Humanity’s appetite for fossil fuels has grown—not shrunk—despite all the new solar and wind farms and all the new LED bulbs and hybrid cars, because we just keep using more energy every year.”

        “Ironically, one of the strongest factors in reducing population growth rates is prosperity, which is highly correlated with energy use.”

        “If that fivefold increase in global energy use—or even a fraction of it—materializes, it won’t be possible to meet the demand and avoiding trashing the atmosphere without taking full advantage of nuclear energy.”

        • “Nathan Myhrvold, former Chief Technology Officer of Microsoft, promotes nuclear energy in Scientific American article “Why We Need Innovative Nuclear Power”

          I think this is developing into a trend. We are hearing more calls for nuclear power.

          Nuclear power is the only solution to the CO2 issue for the Greens. Windmills and solar are not capable of supplying humanity’s future energy needs. This is becoming more obvious with every passing day, and so the only solution for the Greens to reduce CO2 is to move to nuclear powerplants.

          Windmills and industrial solar are deadends for many reasons. The sooner everyone figures this out, the better off all of us will be.

  5. What happened in Nevada?

    I believe we need people who respect the laws of physics, not science denying dreamers like this. “Dreamers” are either delusional and have no science and reason behind their dreams, or they are fraudsters who sell corrupt dreams for their own power and control like this one. One or the other. Belief does not support successful technological societies. Reason and fact do.

    I prefer optimised science based engineering, versus subsidy harvesting machines that have no net benefit. Never good for the rest of us..

    • In Nevada, the increased renewable energy mandate passed.

      https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/07/nevada-midterms-renewable-energy/.

      “..The campaign to pass Question 6 won by a near 20-point margin, taking 59 percent of the vote to the “no” campaign’s 40 percent…”. I looks like most of the support was in the southern two-thirds of the state, including Las Vegas of course.

      However, (there is always a “however”), by state law the measure has to pass again in 2020 to become required….

      “….However, Question 6’s victory on Tuesday doesn’t mean state regulators will immediately begin enforcing stricter energy mandates. Under Nevada law, constitutional amendments require passage by voters in two consecutive elections — meaning Question 6 will need to win again in 2020 to become the law of the land….”

      So it won’t be implemented right away. It all depends on what happens with the measure in the 2020 election.

  6. “Arizonans support solar power and renewable technology, but not at the expense of an affordable, reliable energy supply.”
    Sorry but, the two are mutually exclusive. I’m surprised they don’t know that. They support “clean energy”. WTF? They need to get their story straight.

  7. Voters in Washington state also sent the overreach Party packing for the second time on carbon taxes. Let the UK, Australia, and Canada save the world from plant food.

  8. I wish they would stop calling the supporters “environmentalists”. These initiatives have nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with de-industrialization and centralization of control for every aspect of life. It is the second prong of ultimate control over the population, the first being controlling health care and the second being energy.

    Control health care and you can nanny your way into controlling what people can eat and drink and what activities they may and must participate in. The approach is “do as we say or no treatment for you!”

    Control energy and you can control where people live and under what circumstances. You can force everyone into high-density crime-ridden cities where they can be watched and controlled. It will simply be too expensive to drive in from the suburbs or to heat and light a private home.

    Complete the troika by then removing the ability to purchase or possess a firearm for defense or resistance and the totalitarian removal of freedom will be complete.

    • More on the non-environmental aspects:

      If someone is really concerned about the environment, one would take the time to actually study the inter-relationships of the various components of an ecosystem – the ecology as a whole. In the “decarbonization” cult, the solutions are usually far worse for the ecosystem as a whole than the so-called problem of “carbon”:
      Millions of birds and bats chopped up by a predator moving at inconceivable (to the victim) speeds and irrational circular patterns. Many of these are the scavengers that clean the carcasses of the dead and open them up for other scavengers and decayers to neatly consume. Windmills have made it rare in some parts of the country to see a buzzard circling on the thermals and have greatly reduced the raptor populations in their vicinities;

      Another large number of migratory birds are lured in to their deaths by the shimmer of a false desert oasis harboring a death ray so powerful the birds burst into flames before they even realize the shimmer is not from a welcome source of water;

      Acres and acres of land are cleared and leveled to place solar panels displacing dry land tortoises and other fragile desert inhabitants that require large ranges to thrive. (this one is the least of the three examples in terms of damage, as I am sure there are many species that will adapt to and thrive in the shade provided by the panels as long as there is still sufficient food and water available otherwise.)

      The real kicker is that none of these solutions does anything to lower the production of “carbon pollution” or reliance on “carbon” fuels and in many cases actually lead to more wasted use of spinning reserves to keep the grid stable. Any reported savings in “carbon pollution” is actually due to the large scale switch from coal to gas as a result of the long-term oversupply of gas due to the advances in drilling and fracing. (and yes I am poking fun at these groups with the scare quotes around their chemical stupidity.)

    • “I wish they would stop calling the supporters “environmentalists”. These initiatives have nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with de-industrialization….”
      This is an important realization for everyone. If industrial scale wind turbines covering the planet and ruining rural communities are the agenda of ‘environmentalists’, then that term needs to discarded. It has lost its meaning.
      Industrial wind turbines have ruined the environment, especially for rural residents who are being harmed by audible noise and sub audible acoustic waves invading their bodies in their own homes.

    • Yes, but this media money is just seed money for the real income stream.

      If I can force people to buy the product at whatever price, I can then afford to actually invest in solar panels as far as the eye can see and make a healthy return on the investment.

      The fact that it is an immoral tax that only really affects the lower and middle classes by making them decide whether they can afford to heat or cool their homes versus eat and pay their health premiums never crosses their minds – there is a public trough of forced cash to plunder!

    • Um… none. Which is why Steyer is spending his $ to try to convince the public to send their $ to his company to build them. If wind and solar were such a great deal he would be spending his own money to build it. The only way it works if he can force people to buy his expensive power.

      • Actually, APS and other utilities would rather fight than be forced to retire assets prematurely. But sector leaders in utility scale solar are still driving down costs and the argument will be mute in a few more years. It’s a timing and cash flow timing issue.

        • That is incorrect, as the cost of storage is a massive overhead, currently avoided because it is provided by fossil generation for free. Adding batteries and over generating in the peak hours will roughly raise the unit cost by a factor of ten. Without that, what supplies the half of the enrgy when the lights go on? Solar Terml is great idea for hot water, though. Not that hot anything is all that necessary in Nevada.

          But hang on, how much of Nevada’s electrical energy already comes from renewable energy from the Hoover dam? No problem with that. 10% or so from Solar PV to match peak A/C time is OK, if no subsidies are involved and no storage. The Hoover Dam might also be able to help with pumped storage, but that is an unnecessary and avoidable x10 cost overhead fixing problems yu needn’t have if you can match need in real time. Electrical energy must be consumed in work as it is generated. Conversion and regeneration is a daft idea when you have a grid and controllable unsubsidised generation options. Physics 101.

        • (being a pedant, because sometimes ya just gotta) – of course you meant moot as in obsolete, or overcome by events, rather than mute i.e. silent. Though those backing these things at the moment would like to forcibly make opposition mute, so I can see why you might use that word.

          I have seen you claim that driving down costs is going to improve this before, but cost isn’t the main (though a major) impediment to industrial solar installation, but intermittancy. Except in rare geologic formations where very tall south facing cliffs back a solar field and enough water exists to make very large reservoirs at the top and bottom so a pumped storage system can be easily created, utility level solar can never be more than 5% or so of total generation capacity. Battery technology is never going to evolve to a point where it will be commercially feasible, though many pilot projects will be attempted and many firms will go bankrupt (without large infusions of taxpayer cash) trying to prove it is so. (Though some shysters will likely find a community somewhere to fleece at a hefty profit. Shysters love themselves some virtue signalers with money.) It will always require spinning reserve of probably fossil fuel (natural gas toppers likely) to catch them when (not if) they fail to carry the load. It would be more efficient just to power the grid on a good combined cycle gas plant or a nuclear baseload plant and forget the virtue of energy poverty.

        • That is incorrect, as the cost of storage is a massive overhead, currently avoided because it is provided by fossil generation for free. Adding batteries and over generating in the peak hours will roughly raise the unit cost by a factor of ten. Without that, what supplies the 50% of the energy when the lights go on? Solar Thermal is great idea for hot water, though. Not that hot anything is all that necessary in Nevada.

          But hang on, is this like Macronman saying the French will end the use of coal when they are 80/20 nuclear and hydro? How much of Nevada’s electrical energy already comes from renewable energy from the Hoover dam? No problem with that. 10% or so from Solar PV to match peak A/C time is OK, if no subsidies are involved and no storage. The Hoover Dam might also be able to help with some cheap pumped storage, but that is an unnecessary and avoidable x10 cost overhead fixing problems you needn’t have if you can match need in real time – where is the downstream Lake Mead going to be?

          Basic problem is electrical energy must be consumed in work as it is generated, and available when needed. Conversion and regeneration is a massively daft science denying idea when you have a grid and controllable unsubsidised generation options available 24/7. Physics 101.

          • It must be the physicists looking at solutions and seeing reality busting the dream, though I see you added the hard-headed practicality of engineering to the mix. (Scientists are funny – we can suggest some of the most ridiculous things at times because we don’t have the license requirements of the engineer to stay in budget and not kill anyone. 😉

          • Paraphrased line from the Code of Hammurabi:

            If a man builds a house, and this house falls down and kills another man, the man who built the house will be put to death.

            Engineers, getting cut no slack since 4th millennium BC.

      • Anyone know exactly how Steyer capitalizes personally from all of his activism? How do we know what is in his companiy’s portfolio? I have a feeling he is in deep cahoots with Elon Musk , who need to sell batteries for backup power, similar to the SAustralia project, and probably is invested heavily in First Solar and the like , to manufacture panels and comp0anies with Windpower connections.
        He , quote, “Divested his holdings from the coal industry, through Farallon Capital, his hedge fund, where he made his billions, into the Green Energy field.”
        One of the great hypocrites..Google Farallon Capital and the coal projects and investments made in Southeast Asia.
        Some very nefarious projects and business dealings. Some say he is not totally divested, either, but operating under various other holdings.
        It has also been rumoured of a California Governatorial bid, except he holds more power in the NGO field, with Moonbeam Brown hanging on his hip, along with all the Energy gurus for the state. Where the real power is.

  9. Steyer should have hired California’s Secretary of State office to write the initiative…they rendered Prop 6 repeal of the gas tax and vehicle fee absolutely unrecognizable. It went down handily.

  10. Even in wacky Colorado, they couldn’t pass the anti-fracking law. It went down.

    So can smoke it up, But don’t kiss your sleeping wife, as you don’t have consent, close all those coal plants, but you can’t freely frack.

    Sigh…..

  11. “Affordable” isn’t “Affordable” just cause someone says so, especially when that someone is the government or some “environmental advocate”.

  12. Bumerang

    War einmal ein Bumerang;

    War ein weniges zu lang.

    Bumerang flog ein Stück,

    Aber kam nicht mehr zurück.

    Publikum — noch stundenlang —

    Wartete auf Bumerang.

     

    TO TOP
    DRUCKVERSION
    WEITEREMPFEHLEN 

    • Had a few too many Johann?

      I think that it is more accurate to say немецкий derives from the mute one (stumm)
      Which you are not! Ist is nicht? 🙂

      Perhaps OweninGA will note that this is a mute point I am making?

  13. Was heisst nje mezz.

    Das heisst

    Nicht Messen.

    Die Njemez können nicht messen was sie sagen oder tun.

    Heinrich Kleist, “der zerbrochene Krug”.

  14. I keep on having this annoying advert coming up when I scroll down on this website.

    Congratulations!Google Benutzer!

    Your IP address 88.144.238.79

    You are selected to win today’s prize: iPhone 7, £ 500 Amazon or Samsung Galaxy S7!

    Please click OK to win your prize before we give it to someone else.

  15. Tom Steyer is rich. Filthy rich. I believe he has several billion $ at his command.

    So how come he simply doesn’t use his immense wealth to build solar power stations all over the place? Why does he spend his immense fortune lobbying the government to do something he is eminently capable of doing himself? he could be handing out solar panels to the poor, re-roofing buildings on his own nickel. He could buy 10,000 people electric cars every year. That would be a rounding error on his wealth- he could do it forever just on the interest of his fortune. hell, he could invest in the Salton sea geothermal field.

    So many opportunities for a guy with immense wealth to make a difference.

    Instead he spends his money bugging us for our money. haranguing us. Bothering us. Complaining. Attacking politicians that don’t share his vision. He wastes million of $ not removing one single carbon dioxide molecule form the atmosphere.

    I just don’t get it.

    $20 million in advertising in Arizona? He could have bought 500 Teslas and given them away for free. He could have installed solar power on 1,500 homes.

    Andrew Carnegie didn’t go around, hat in hand, begging for money to build libraries. he didn’t spend his millions lobbying the government to do stuff – he just went out and did it.

    • If you went out on a date with a beautiful woman (Assuming you are a man) would you want someone else to pay for it? Hell yeah!

      I’ll have the lobster, slightly killed, flambe in garlic butter and wine. Oh, and I will have the second cheapest house white. *wink*

  16. The question is how did Tom Steyer ever make money with his cluster fuck track record
    of pouring money down the drain . Maybe someone made it for him .
    Washington State just flushed the carbon tax and the extreme green are blaming big oil .
    Sorry snowflakes just people that have a brain and bills to pay called BS on the globalist scam .

  17. The problem with save the planet con men is they have blatant conflicts of self serving interest .
    Who couldn’t make money when the tax payers are expected to get hosed and eat the risk ?
    Remember Chicago Climate Exchange ?
    The people of Washington see through the globalist con game and have bills to pay .
    Twice shot down and any politician that wants to keep flogging this scam is finished .

  18. Wonderful!!! I love it when billionaires toss away money. Too bad it wasn’t to help people with real, not imaginary future problems. What a dickhead. Let’s hope he spends many, many more millions on lost causes. Maybe it will make a dent in his treasury. NOT. It’s gonna take a lot more.

  19. From SeekingAlpha: Big Oil is celebrating big midterm wins a voters rejected measures that would have restricted drilling in Colorado and put a tax on carbon emissions in Washington. Oil companies had spent tens of millions of dollars to oppose the initiatives, with shares of Colorado producers – Noble Energy (NYSE:NBL), Anadarko Petroleum (NYSE:APC) and Devon Energy (NYSE:DVN) – under pressure since the proposal won a spot on the ballot. Colorado is the fifth-largest U.S. oil producing state.

  20. The oligarchs, owning the media, get uncritical echo chamber style coverage.
    Instead of a media that asks the basic questions, the compromised media is offering shallow reporting that merely echoes the oligarchs.
    Steyer was after saving his wind power investments, little more.

  21. My analogy of renewables is this;

    In computing, “everyone” is moving to Windows 10, O365 and mobility etc. It’s all in the “cloud” and “subscription” based licensing. Once you are “subscribed” you are “hooked” for life. It’s the heroin of IT.

    Renewables are the “heroin” of energy supply. Until it runs out!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *