This article originally was published at The Empowerment Alliance and is re-published here with permission.
While not everyone is on board with President Trump’s “America First” philosophy, its importance when it comes to energy is brought into sharp focus when considering where the U.S. would be if it capitulated to the whims of global organizations like the United Nations or obeyed the verdicts of world courts.
The frightening attitudes of believers in global rule were recently on display courtesy of a New York Times opinion piece headlined “Climate Science is Now the Law,” penned by three writers who are all part of something called the Center for International Environmental Law. In their article, the authors claim, “The science on climate change has long been settled. Now the law is, too.”
How did this phenomenon occur? The writers inform us that the International Court of Justice – the judicial branch of the United Nations – has ruled on a petition from “the South Pacific archipelago nation of Vanuatu and other climate-vulnerable countries, with the help of Pacific Island students” who “secured” a U.N. resolution asking the court “to clarify what existing international law requires governments to do about climate change and what legal consequences they face if their failure to uphold the law causes serious harm.”
The result? Not a surprise. The court ruled that “countries must protect citizens from the ‘urgent and existential threat’ of climate change. When a country fails to curb greenhouse gas emissions — whether by producing or consuming fossil fuels, approving new exploration to find them or subsidizing the industry — it may be held liable for ‘an internationally wrongful act,’ the court’s 15 judges said.”
The authors conclude, “This makes it much harder for any government or company to say that rules don’t apply to them or they don’t have to act. … It is a cease-and-desist notice to fossil fuel producers.” So there!
One can easily imagine the Biden administration subjugating itself to the international judiciary. Fortunately, the Trump administration – remembering that little document called the U.S. Constitution – treats rulings from international courts with the same level of respect paid to “Do Not Remove” tags on couch cushions.
At about the same time that the International Court of Overstep was issuing its decree for nations to kneel at the feet of the wind and solar gods, the Trump administration took another giant leap in its race to reverse Biden’s disastrous energy policies. On July 7, the Energy Department unveiled its “Report on Evaluating U.S. Grid Reliability and Security,” as required under President Trump’s April executive order to examine the topic.
“This methodology equips DOE and its partners with a powerful tool to identify at-risk regions and guide federal interventions to prevent power outages, accelerate data center deployment, and ensure the grid keeps pace with explosive load growth driven by artificial intelligence and reindustrialization,” the DOE reported.
Rather than follow international directives and judgments to rid itself of energy sources like natural gas, which is necessary to power technology, manufacturing and the coming AI data centers, the DOE is, fortunately, doing the exact opposite. Among the biggest DOE findings:
- If current plant retirement schedules and incremental additions remain unchanged “most regions will face unacceptable reliability risks within five years.”
- Radical change is necessary because otherwise, the magnitude of projected AI data centers and other manufacturing “cannot be met with existing approaches to load addition and grid management.
- The coal and gas plant retirements previously planned by 2030 “could lead to significant outages when weather conditions do not accommodate wind and solar generation.”
- Even with plans to replace 104 gigawatts of plant retirements with 209 gigawatts of new generation by 2030, “only 22 (gigawatts) come from firm baseload generation sources,” meaning that “the model found outage risk in several regions rises more than 30-fold.” (A gigawatt is equal to 1 billion watts.)
In other words, replacing firm baseload sources like natural gas with alternative sources like wind or solar is not an apples-for-apples proposition, since “renewables” put the grid at greater risk. Establishing arbitrary end dates for our most affordable and reliable energy sources is both illogical and reckless.
On the heels of the international court’s irresponsible and (thankfully) unenforceable decree, and the DOE’s astute recommendation to do the opposite of what the court prescribed, came a story from Reuters declaring that the Trump administration’s actions to end or curtail Biden-era subsidies and credits for “renewables” are, fortunately, having an impact.
“Singapore-based solar panel manufacturer Bila Solar is suspending plans to double capacity at its new factory in Indianapolis. Canadian rival Heliene’s plans for a solar cell facility in Minnesota are under review. Norwegian solar wafer maker NorSun is evaluating whether to move forward with a planned factory in Tulsa, Oklahoma. And two fully permitted offshore wind farms in the U.S. Northeast may never get built,” the news agency reported.
President Trump is putting America first and leading an energy renaissance that should be in full bloom on our nation’s 250th birthday on July 4, 2026. It’s difficult to imagine a greater Independence Day gift to the American people than freedom from the cold, dark landscape that would result from following the directives of global agencies and the rulings of international courts.
Gary Abernathy is a longtime newspaper editor, reporter and columnist. He was a contributing columnist for the Washington Post from 2017-2023 and a frequent guest analyst across numerous media platforms. He is a contributing columnist for The Empowerment Alliance, which advocates for realistic approaches to energy consumption and environmental conservation. Abernathy’s “TEA Takes” column will be published every Wednesday and delivered to your inbox!
This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.
The UN was one of Franklin Roosevelt’s sillier ideas.
Yeah but Harry Truman didn’t put the kybosh on it either.
Who knows, if it hadn’t become a captive of the international left, it might have actually achieved something.
But here we are . . . 🙁
But it’s a nice side income for tyrants selling their votes.
All unaccountable bureaucracies gradually veer left. They become infested with do-gooders who know best and garner the trappings of high office because they are superior and doing good work.
The US presidential system and constitution are possibly the best governing process that mankind has yet conceived. There is no equivalent in the western world where a business man and entertainer can roll in with his own carefully selected team and change course in a few months. Terms are limited to 2. So max of eight years then it gets refreshed.
UN is inhabited with failed career politicians and massive left-leaning bureaucracy. No one in that organisation should serve more than 8 years.
That’s all you need
One could be forgiven for thinking that the sole purpose of the UN now is to ensure the continuance of the UN.
Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy
The International Court predates the UN from 1945
I have an even lower opinion of Woodrow Wilson.
People, we need to adjust our thinking. The grid must be built and priced to fully and reliabily support the load at all times without any wind and solar. The only thing wind and solar contribute is fuel savings. That is all the utility should have to pay because all costs continue when wind and solar contribute except the fuel savings. The cost of accommodating the solar and wind should be paid by the W & S companies and any cost from starting and stopping the fossil systems should be deducted from the fuel savings cost. The plan to add capacity with wind and solar is wrong headed and should be abandoned. Only reliable power can add true capacity.
Any fuel saving in thermal plant is offset to some degree by the changing process conditions in fuel and firing. Industrial processes like power generation are best run at constant stable conditions. Ramping their output up and down as clouds or wind command requires operational input and adds maintenance costs.
Electricity grids have been degraded by allowing non-dispatchable generation to pollute the system. Any generator that cannot be dispatched at its rated capacity should not be connected.
Fossil fuel plants must be kept in either warm or hot standby, ready to take over in seconds, if wind or solar should fail to produce the power they promised to produce. As a result there is very, very little fuel savings to be had.
That’s what rate payers of heavily greened countries have found out – they were ripped off!
I guess the autopen ran out ink before subjuncting the US to international kangaroo courts. Watch out for ink orders from the DNC.
The court ruled that “countries must protect citizens from the ‘urgent and existential threat’ of climate change. When a country fails to curb greenhouse gas emissions — whether by producing or consuming fossil fuels, approving new exploration to find them or subsidizing the industry — it may be held liable for ‘an internationally wrongful act,’ the court’s 15 judges said.”
Look forward to the Court explaining to China that its use of coal, indeed all its emissions, must stop. India too….!
It goes to a prosecution phase 🙂
https://www.icc-cpi.int/cases
33 cases and 2 cases of crimes against humanity in it’s 23 year history
They are going to what open thousand perhaps millions of cases of crimes against humanity against people around the world and against many of those that actually fund it 🙂
You have to admire lefties thinking meaningless junk from the ICC is anything other than a press release for the day to try to stay relevant.
Mr. de Boer: I predict our lefty friends will find it too hard to go after millions, instead they will go after those who fund it, and even then be very selective about who they go after! Left-wing lawyers don’t make the mistake of pursuing lots of folks who have little money.
Oil companies would be charged with crimes against humanity if they suddenly STOPPED providing petroleum products.
“ ‘urgent and existential threat’ of climate change.”
Sounds like the world most needs saving from being buried in “climate” bovex !!
That quote is hilarious when you consider their “baseline” is during The Little Ice Age, which was a period of MISERY AND SUFFERING for humanity – as well as other life on Earth.
It is COLD that is a “threat,” not warmth.
So called “Climate Science” is not really science. According to science there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on our global climate system. The AGW hypothesis has been falsified by science. Mankind does not even know what the optimal global climate actually is let alone how to achieve it. World wide trillions of dollars have been spent fighting climate change yet no one is saying that there has been any improvement in our global climate. Spending money to fight climate change is a total waste of funds.
Might as well fight the ebb and flow of the tides.
“Spending money to fight climate change is a total waste of funds.”
Not only that, NONE of them can tell you if we’ll know we’ve “defeated” climate change. They’d likely say “Once CO2 stops rising”. But when all the same bad weather is still occurring, have they defeated CC?
IMHO, a static planet doesn’t exist. It’s always changing in some form or another.
There is no such thing as international law, or international courts. Every country, by definition, is 100% independent. Though, sometimes countries decide to force their will on other countries by various means, and sometimes team up to do this. They may just say mean things to them, impose economic sanctions, etc. and also up to waging war.
“… the International Court of Justice…”
To what extent is this organization funded by the United States of America?
Been around since 1920s
“The International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It was established in 1945 and is located in The Hague, Netherlands.”
“The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, is primarily funded through the regular budget of the United Nations. “
Maybe it takes one large sphincter muscle to spin off another smaller one?
Very nice. The US needs to let the UN/International Criminal Court know that the US law is the US Constitution. We will not yield to any other and if the UN/international Criminal Court persist in telling us what to do our money spigot to them will be shut off completely.
While I dont agree with the Court decision. The US government does incorporate international law into its legal system. The Constitution doesnt preclude this happening
Indeed many time Congress passes laws that it says operate outside US territory
Yes, our attempts at extra-territoriality so endure us to other countries.
There is not treaty I am aware of and no formal adaption of the ICC by the US.
The US adopts whatever laws, international or not, it wishes, as long as they do not violate the US Constitution. Absent Congressional legislation to adopt, any international law would not be recognized in this country. “The United States does not recognize the authority of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and has actively opposed its investigations, particularly those involving American citizens or allies. While the US has participated in other international courts and tribunals, it has a complex relationship with international law and does not generally adhere to the jurisdiction of international courts that it hasn’t specifically agreed to.”
Actually, that is not true with a strict reading of the Constitution. The laws of the United States are established by the US Congress (although subsequently “interpreted” by the Judicial branch) per Article 1, Section 1:
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.”
“Legislative powers” is defined as the authority to make, change, and repeal laws.
The U.S. Constitution with its 27 Amendments does not explicitly mention “incorporating international law” as a concept or process. Any “international” law can/could pass through Congress, at which point it then becomes US law, but in all likelihood it will not retain the same wording as in the original law.
If you think a signed treaty might be an indirect route to “incorporate an international law into US law”, keep in mind that per Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution, the power to make treaties is shared between the President and the Senate. The President has the power to negotiate and, with the “advice and consent” of the Senate, to make treaties. However, a two-thirds vote of the Senate is required for a treaty to be ratified.
“The fake science on climate change has long been settled. Now the fake law is, too.”
There, fixed.
The International Kangaroo Court makes wild-ass decisions based on wild-ass and perjured claims and research that are patently false to anyone not brainwashed.
In breaking news via The Australian today 14/8/2025-
A Chinese move to block an Australian critical minerals shipment bound for a US defence supplier has heightened the battle to shore up Western supply chains.
The shipment of 55 tonnes of antimony concentrate mined in Victoria was held up for three months at the port of Ningbo in Zhejiang Province, and only released by Chinese authorities on the condition it was returned to Australia instead of being sent on to New York-listed US Antimony Corporation.
The incident came as US Antimony, the only antimony smelter operator in North America, was looking to step up production and secure a $US240m ($367.6m) supply contract with the US Department of Defense……
US Antimony was so concerned about the shipment delay in China that it asked for help from the US State Department and the White House. ASX-listed Alkane Resources, which owns the Costerfield gold and antimony mine in Victoria, said it would never again send a shipment bound for the US via China.
That comes after Albo was sucking up to Beijing and is now busy listening to Palestinian Authority sweet talk on a two state final solution for Israelis. High time decent democracies ditched the UN gaggle of gangsters for a free trade club of our own with limited powers other than commitment to the ideals of the US Constitution. Trying to write such ideals now would inevitably be a Bill of Wrongs pushed by the usual suspects who can’t even tell the difference between a man and a woman.
Story tip:
Is Tesla Solar, the company formed by Elon Musk’s purchase of the former Solar City (deemed insolvent by its auditor Ernst & Young near the time of its acquisition), itself now going bankrupt?
One cannot find any significant news about Tesla Solar since around the end of 2019, when Walmart settled its multimillion lawsuit against Solar City/Tesla Solar on undisclosed terms. Walmart had accused Solar City of “widespread, systematic negligence” and ignoring prudent industry practices by relying on untrained and unsupervised personnel to install and maintain its panels, and prioritizing speed and profit over safety.
And there’s this from https://www.solarinsure.com/the-complete-list-of-solar-bankruptcies-and-business-closures , dated July 7, 2025:
“Major Solar Contractors That Went Out of Business in 2023, 2024 & 2025
Major Solar Bankruptcies as of June 2025 Include:
Sunnova – Multiple States
SunPower – Multiple States
Pink Energy – Multiple States
MC Solar – Modern Concepts – Florida
Harness Power – California
NM Solar Group – New Mexico
ASA – American Solar Advantage – California
Kuubix Energy – California
Erus Energy – Arizona
Infinity Energy – California
Suntuity Renewables – Per Sunova – NJ, CA , TX
ADT Solar – Multiple States
Vision Solar – Multiple States
Solcius – CA, NM, AZ, NV
Sunworks, Inc. – CA
Kayo Energy – AZ, CA, TX, FL
iSun – CT
Titan Solar Power – Multiple States
Lumio Solar – Utah
Expert Solar – Florida, Texas
Shine Solar – LA, AK”
Just wondering if Tesla Solar (which is just a part of Tesla’s energy division) will be on the 2026 list for going BK?