The Week That Was: 2026-04-18 (April 18, 2026)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project
Quote of the Week: “…that it is the admission of ignorance and the admission of uncertainty that there is a hope for the continuous motion of human beings in some direction that doesn’t get confined, permanently blocked, as it has so many times before in various periods in the history of man.” — Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist (1998)
Number of the Week: At or below 30%.
THIS WEEK:
By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
Scope: This TWTW begins with possible conflicts between the principal author of the “How Science Works” of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Fourth Edition and his role as an advisor to the UN IPCC as well as Pacific / Asian island nations such as the Maldives. TWTW discusses part of the impact on the media of the 16th International Conference on Climate Change” sponsored by the Heartland Institute and others and concludes with a summary of the talk by Nobel Laureate John Clauser.
*********************
Improprieties? Last week TWTW featured a disturbing letter from physicists Richard Lindzen, William Happer, and Steven Koonin to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts asserting that even with the removal of the chapter on climate change, the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Fourth Edition is an advocacy document, not a neutral description of scientific practice. The principal author Michael Weisberg has been heavily involved with the IPCC and efforts of Pacific Islanders to extract money from developed countries using the false claim that CO2 emissions are causing dangerous, unusual sea level rise that is engulfing various islands including the Maldives. His academic biography states:
“An expert on the climate needs of small island developing states, Weisberg currently serves as senior advisor to Jamaica’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations and as an advisor to the Fiji and Palau negotiating teams at COP. Weisberg was a leading voice in the development of the “mosaic of solutions” for addressing loss and damage due to the adverse impacts of climate change, which led to major breakthroughs on the topic at COP27 and COP28. This framework was developed in collaboration with the Maldivian Government and the International Peace Institute, where he is a Non-resident Senior Advisor.”
Yet, the physical evidence contradicts the claims that CO2 is causing all small developing islands to disappear. For example, Pierre Gosselin of No Tricks Zone states [Boldface added]:
“An article in the German TKP science site titled ‘Die Malediven sinken nicht’ (The Maldives are not sinking) challenges the common mythical narrative that the Maldives are destined to disappear due to rising sea levels caused by climate change.
But as we have often reported here at NoTricksZone, most islands have in fact grown in size over the recent decades.
Contrary to the ‘sinking’ narrative, the TKP article cites scientific observations (including satellite data) showing that many islands in the Maldives have actually grown in size or remained stable over recent decades rather than disappearing. This contradicts everything we’ve been told by the climate alarmists.
The TKP article explains that coral atolls are dynamic systems that can ‘grow’ with rising sea levels as coral debris and sediment accumulate on the islands, a natural process that allows them to adapt to changing water levels.
Author Thomas Oysmüller argues that the image of the sinking Maldives is frequently used by politicians and activists as a symbol of climate catastrophe to justify specific policies, despite hard empirical evidence showing the islands are more resilient than portrayed.
The article points out that the Maldivian government continues to invest heavily in permanent infrastructure, such as new airports and luxury resorts, obvious evidence that even the local authorities do not expect the islands to be uninhabitable in the near future.
The article notes that sea levels have fluctuated throughout history and that the current changes are within a range that the islands have successfully navigated in the past through natural geological processes.
In summary, the Maldives are not currently being ‘swallowed’ by the sea and that the alarmist predictions often seen in the media are not supported by the physical growth and geological behavior of the islands.”
The post by Gosselin features an image of the islands taken by the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) onboard NASA’s Terra satellite. According to the August 4, 2025, Maldives Independent “Nine years, three presidents and US$ 1 billion later: the Maldives airport saga explained” …the new airport handles 7.5 million passengers annually. https://maldivesindependent.com/explainer/nine-years-three-presidents-and-us-1-billion-later-the-maldives-airport-saga-explained-d0b3.
It is a sad moment for the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine and the Federal Judiciary Center when they chose a human-caused dangerous global warming advocate with close ties with the UN IPCC to write the chapter on “How Science Works” in the important Federal Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. In physical sciences, physical evidence trumps opinion and advocacy. The principal author of the “How Science Work” chapter appears to ignore that principle and the scientific method.
Now wonder Haper, et al. recommended the replacing the version of “How Science Works” with the “How Science Works” chapter by David Goodstein in the previous edition of the manual. See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
*********************
The Heartland Institute Conference: The videos of “The 16th International Conference on Climate Change” sponsored by the Heartland Institute and others have been posted. Several of the videos will be highlighted in TWTW this week and next week. As Jim Lakely of the Heartland Institute reports, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin gave a stirring opening keynote address:
“Speech by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, others, showed the world that climate realism on the rise.”
Lakely gleefully cites some of the headlines that appeared in the media covering the event. They include:
The New York Times:
Climate Change Denial Sees a Resurgence in Trump’s Washington
A conference near the White House drew hundreds of people who reject the scientific consensus on climate change. The mood was triumphant.
Associated Press:
Zeldin tells climate skeptics to ‘celebrate vindication’ after repeal of baseline climate rule.
Le Monde (France):
Climate change deniers have had their day: the head of the US Environmental Protection Agency tramples on science during a conference in Washington.
For the first time in the history of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, its administrator delivered a speech at a conference organized by the Heartland Institute, one of the most influential bastions of climate skepticism in the country.
POLITICO:
At climate contrarian gathering, allies urge Trump to keep Zeldin at EPA
At a Heartland Institute conference near the White House, climate contrarians celebrated the rollback of regulations under EPA chief Lee Zeldin while urging Trump not to elevate him to attorney general, fearing it would stall their agenda.
News Prima (Italy):
In the US, the head of environmental protection goes to the conference of climate deniers.
The shocking position: ‘CO₂ emissions are healthy: they could have benefits for plant growth and, in general, for society.’
The New York Times: [Again]
Climate Denial Comes to Washington
A conference of climate change deniers, a warning about the world’s largest penguin species, record low snowpack in the West, plus more climate news.”
In America Out Loud News, Tom Harris, Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition, wrote “Heartland right over the target with triumphant climate change conference” stating in part:
“In 2013, World War II Lancaster bomber pilot ‘Sandy’ Mutch (then 93 years of age) explained to me, ‘On bombing raids over Europe, we could tell we were closing in on the target when we started to get the most flak.’ That was because important German assets were often surrounded by anti-aircraft guns that filled the sky with AAA fire. And rather than being deterred by the resistance, it told Bomber Command exactly where the next wave of aircraft should concentrate their attack.
That is why we need to carefully examine media assaults on ICCC16, to help climate realists focus our efforts to win the war for the hearts and minds of Americans.”
[Most of the bombing raids by the UK were during nighttime.] Near the end of the article Harris wrote:
“Zeldin concluded by congratulating the audience, ‘You never accepted flawed, pessimistic assumptions. You never accepted taxpayer dollars getting lit on fire. You never accepted having agency heads getting creative with the law and saying, if the law doesn’t say we can’t, then I guess we can.’
‘This morning and today, all of you gathered here in DC is a moment to celebrate. It is a day of vindication!’”
See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
*********************
What Is the Proof? At the Heartland conference the 2022 Nobel laureate in Physics John Clauser contradicted the so called “proof” that Earth is experiencing a climate crisis caused by carbon dioxide emission. Francis Menton summarized Clauser’s presentation in two essays: 1) Extreme Weather Events; and 2) Earth’s Energy Imbalance.
Key parts of Menton’s first essay include:
“Clauser titled his talk ‘Global warming, climate change, and scientific consensus have not been proven. There is no proven climate crisis.’ The talk was accompanied by a Power Point deck of some 124 slides, which were way too numerous and detailed for him to cover everything or for an audience member to take thorough notes. However, I managed to get my hands on a copy of the deck. (Clauser’s full talk is available on the Heartland website).
Today I will start with the part of Clauser’s presentation relating to the issue of what are called ‘extreme weather events’ — e.g., floods, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, and the like. For this sub-topic, Clauser began with a 2012 article from Physics Today by Jane Lubchenco and Thomas Karl, titled ‘Predicting and Managing Extreme Weather Events.’ (L&K). At the time of the article, which was during the presidency of Barack Obama, Lubchenco was the Administrator of NOAA, and Karl was Director of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center and Chair of the US Global Change Research Program. In other words, these were the people then in charge of collecting the U.S. weather data, including data on extreme weather events, on behalf of the government. As Clauser noted in his talk, if there were any people who would have access to the very best data to support a claim of increasing extreme weather, it would be these two.
The thesis of the L&K piece is that extreme weather events in the U.S. have been increasing and can be expected to increase further as the climate warms. Here’s the introductory paragraph:
Earth’s climate is warming, and destructive weather is growing more prevalent. Coping with the changes will require collaborative science, forward-thinking policy, and an informed public.
Besides making their own statement to that effect, L&K also quote multiple similar statements from the IPCC:
‘It is very likely that heat waves will increase in length, frequency, and/or intensity over most land areas. . . It is likely that the average maximum wind speed of tropical cyclones will increase throughout the coming century. . . It is likely that the frequency of heavy precipitation or the proportion of total rainfall from heavy falls will increase in the 21st century over many areas of the globe.’
So, what is the proof?
L&K present a series of charts that they assert establish the proposition that extreme weather events in the U.S. have ‘grown steadily over the past several decades.’ To measure the level of these extreme weather events within the U.S., L&K come up with something they call the ‘US Climate Extremes Index.’ They describe the Index as having been calculated based on ‘the area percentage of the country experiencing extreme monthly temperature, drought severity, soil water surplus, days with and without precipitation, land-falling hurricane activity, and one-day heavy precipitation events in any given year.’ However, beyond that description, there is nothing in the way of a technical description and backup of how the charts have been constructed quantitatively. A footnote with a link to a prior Karl article on the subject, presumably containing these details, returns a message ‘not found.’
My first comment on this ‘Climate Extremes Index’ is that it is an extremely dubious metric, obviously subject to very easy manipulation. For example, who has decided how much land area was covered by a particular ‘land-falling hurricane’? Is it just the land area where the wind speeds exceeded 75 mph, or is it the entire area over swept by the hurricane storm system over its full life span of possibly several days, mostly with far lower windspeeds? Hidden decisions like that could easily be used to manipulate an index like this to produce a desired result.
However, Clauser does not go there, and instead he just takes the values of the index as presented by L&K and asks whether they actually increased over the period covered. Here is Figure 2a from L&K, showing the values of their U.S. Climate Extremes Index over the period 1910 to 2011:
If you look at that and don’t see any particular increase, let alone some dramatic surge in recent years, you won’t be the only one.
And it gets worse. Clauser took the values of the Index shown on the bar graph and re-plotted them as dots on a scatter diagram. Then he did another plot where he reversed the order of the observations, so that the newest observations were on the left and the older on the right. In other words, the two plots are mirror images of each other. Here they are:
The years on the x-axis both indicate that they run from oldest to newest, but Clauser states that he has left it that way intentionally to challenge the observer to figure out which chart is plotted backwards. Here is Clauser’s text from his slide 9:
‘The two graphs are identical, except that one is plotted left-to-right reversed, i.e. backwards, with time increasing to the left. (If you look carefully, you will see that they are mirror images of each other.) I assert that if you can’t tell which one of these graphs is correctly plotted and which one is time-backwards, then Lubchenco and Karl’s claimed recent increase in extreme weather-event frequency is not obviously indicated by their data. One of these graphs is claimed by Lubchenko and Karl to forecast an impending climate apocalypse! Are you really confidently willing to bet trillions of dollars that you can tell which one makes that forecast?’
Clauser concluded this segment of his presentation by calling L&K’s conclusion ‘fraudulent pseudoscience.’ It is an odd sort of fraudulent pseudoscience — baldly asserting that a collection of data supports a conclusion that the data obviously do not support and expecting everyone to just nod along. It’s hard to believe that with all the data at their disposal, this is the best that L&K could come up with to prove the case of increasing extreme weather events. But that’s a lot of how ‘climate science’ works.”
So much for peer review in Physics Today and the scientific integrity of Janet Lubchenko and Thomas Karl. Key parts of Menton’s second essay include:
“The deficiencies in the GAST [Global Average Surface Temperature] data, and particularly the in-filling (fabrication) of missing data, were a main basis for the Petition for Reconsideration of the Endangerment Finding that I pursued with colleagues during the Trump 45 and Biden administrations.
Clauser described a process by which the IPCC has gradually moved away from relying on GAST as its proof of global warming. The change occurred between IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (2013) and its Sixth Assessment Report (2021). From Clauser’s slides:
‘The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report AR5 (2013) reports include a graph versus time of ‘temperature anomaly’. The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report AR6 (2021) now relies on values for the Earth’s Energy Imbalance (EEI).’
Most recently, on March 23, 2026 (in case you were paying attention), UN Secretary General Antonia Guterres declared a ‘world climate emergency.’ The alleged basis for the ‘emergency’ was said to be the EEI, as presented in a Report by the World Meteorological Organization:
‘The [WMO] Report confirms that the Earth’s energy imbalance – the gap between heat absorbed and heat released – is the highest on record. In other words, our planet is trapping heat faster than it can shed it.’
Granted, the EEI metric, if it can be observed with sufficient accuracy, offers tremendous advantages over GAST as an indicator of global warming (if that is in fact occurring). It avoids the problem of averaging non-averageable data; it avoids the expense of thousands of stations (and ocean-based buoys) around the world; it avoids problems of station continuity, instrument changes, and location changes. Theoretically, it could just be measured by some satellites. And, if satellite measurements can show heat building up in the atmosphere, that can provide a basis for prediction of ongoing warming.
It seemed like such a great idea. Unfortunately, Clauser shows in great detail why the whole project has been a bust. Satellites got launched at substantial expense, originally in 1985. A second generation, known as the Terra and Aqua satellites, went up in 1999 and 2002. Unfortunately, the satellites have proven to have insufficient accuracy and gaps in their measurement abilities that make it impossible to determine if there is any ‘energy imbalance’ at all, and if so, how much.
The basic problem is that the amounts of energy coming in from the sun, and then departing back into space, are large; but the difference (if any) between the two, representing a possible build-up of energy in the atmosphere or oceans, is small. The IPCC gives a figure of the incoming radiation from the sun of 340 watts/square meter. The claimed EEI is 0.7 watts/square meter, which is only about 0.2% of the overall energy flux. This figure, appearing on Clauser’s Slide 27, is from IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report:
The numbers across the top show the incoming radiation from the sun of 340 w/sq.m. [W/m2] and outgoing of 100 w/sq.m. of short wave reflected solar radiation and 239 w/sq.m. of infrared radiation. The total of those two is 339. If you look in the lower left-hand corner, you will see a figure of 0.7 w/sq.m. as the ‘imbalance.’ That’s not exactly the difference between 340 and 339, but apparently, they think it’s OK to do some random rounding of some figures but not others.
From Clauser’s Slide 34:
[P]ower-IN and power-OUT are both huge numbers, and . . . the difference between them is minuscule – about 0.2% of power-IN. That minuscule difference is the net imbalance that is sought, both experimentally and theoretically. A second difficulty occurs when power-IN and power-OUT are both hugely varying, both in time and in space, in a seemingly random and totally irreproducible fashion. Measurement and calculation errors (including round-off errors) of any of the three large component powers readily swamp the resulting error of the very small power difference. Extreme absolute measurement accuracy is thus required.
But do the satellites actually have the ability to measure the incoming and outgoing radiation at the top of the atmosphere (TOA) with sufficient accuracy to be confident that this small 0.7 w/sq.m. difference is real? Clauser has multiple quotes from the literature admitting that the measurement accuracy is not nearly adequate. Here are two quotes from Clauser Slide 33:
Loeb et al. (2012, p.111) admit: ‘ .. A limitation of the satellite data is their inability to provide an absolute measure of the net TOA radiation imbalance to the required accuracy level. …’ Stephens et al. (2012) admit ‘… The combined uncertainty on the net TOA flux determined from CERES is ± 4 W/m2 (95% confidence) due largely to instrument calibration errors. …’
If your margin of error is +/- 4 w/sq.m. and you have measured an ‘imbalance’ of 0.7 w/sq.m., then obviously that imbalance is not significantly different from zero. Honest scientists would admit that. Unfortunately, that is not the way of climate ‘science.’
Clauser’s slides go into great detail on the nature of the problem. Apparently, the portion of the outgoing radiation that constitutes reflected solar radiation gets widely scattered and comes from many random directions; and the satellite instrumentation is not sufficient to capture all of it. From Clauser Slide 37:
The field-of-view [of the satellite instruments] is not at all panoramic. As a result, scattered and/or reflected [outgoing] energy that arrived from angular directions from above and below the narrow angular acceptance ribbon [is] missed. . .. The result was a too-low reported [figure for outgoing reflected solar energy], and a corresponding very-much too-high reported EEI value (6.5 W/m2).
So, the actual measured EEI from the satellites was 6.5 w/sq.m., but everyone recognized that that figure was impossible and would imply much more warming than observed. How to deal with the problem? Clauser quotes a 2011 paper from the famous James Hansen of NASA:
‘Because this result is implausible, instrumentation calibration factors were introduced to reduce the imbalance to the imbalance suggested by climate models, 0.85 W/m2 (Loeb et al. 2009). …’ [Underline in original]
When the data are clearly wrong, you just use your favorite model to modify the data until they fit your preferred theory. And with that I’m only up to Slide 39 of Clauser’s 124 slides.’
The story goes on and on from there. The climate ‘science’ community was not willing to admit that they had no means to measure EEI to prove a buildup of heat in the atmosphere and oceans. Hansen and others proposed using separately measured changes in Ocean Heat Content (OHC) to fill the gaps in the satellite data, and extensive efforts have been made to do that. But the OHC metrics are filled with their own measurement problems, many of them comparable to the problems of measuring average atmospheric temperature via GAST: the measurement is done by buoys in the ocean, rather than satellites at TOA; there are not nearly enough buoys; they do not measure heat at TOA, and thus are not comparable to the satellite energy flux measurements; the buoys sink down and rise back up, but their location is only known when they surface; the process of converting temperature measurements to heat content is dubious; there is no coverage at all of the polar regions; and so on and on.
Clauser goes into great detail about how some combination of badly flawed satellite data and badly flawed OHC data get reverse-engineered to back into a pre-determined figure of about 0.7 or 0.8 w/sq.m. as the EEI. He includes several accusations of scientific misconduct and uses the word ‘fraud’ liberally.
But the gist is, the accuracy of the measurements is not sufficient to claim an EEI that is meaningfully different from zero. With regard to EEI, the answer to the question ‘What Is The Proof?’ is that there is no proof.”
TWTW readers will realize that the UN IPCC’s inadequacies in estimating Earth Energy Imbalance is a frequent topic. AMO physicist Howard Hayden has provided excellent descriptions including 10 essays on Basic Climate Physics and another on the UN IPCC deficiencies. Further, AMO physicists William van Wijngaarden and William Happer have provided us with a way to calculate the greenhouse effect for clear skies. Next week, TWTW will discuss other presentations as well as SEPP’s presentation of the 2025 Frederick Seitz Memorial Award to Peter Ridd.
For Menton’s essays on Clauser’s presentation see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy. For Hayden’s essays on Basic Climate Physics see https://www.sepp.org/science_papers.cfm?whichyear=2022.
*********************
SEPP’S APRIL FOOLS AWARD
THE JACKSON
SEPP is conducting its annual vote for the recipient of the coveted trophy, The Jackson, a lump of coal. Readers are asked to nominate and vote for who they think is most deserving, following these criteria:
- The nominee has advanced, or proposes to advance, significant expansion of governmental power, regulation, or control over the public or significant sections of the general economy.
- The nominee does so by declaring such measures are necessary to protect public health, welfare, or the environment.
- The nominee declares that physical science supports such measures.
- The physical science supporting the measures is flimsy at best, and possibly non-existent.
Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, was the 2025 recipient. Past recipients are not eligible. See list at https://www.sepp.org/april-fools-award.cfm
The committee that makes the selection prefers a candidate with a national or international presence. The voting will close on July 31. Please send your nomination and a brief reason why the person is qualified for the honor to Ken@SEPP.org.
*********************
Number of the Week: At or below 30%. Politicians promote wind and solar energy as low cost and affordable. Yet, as seen in locations with a high penetration of wind and solar, such as the UK, Denmark, Germany, and California, electricity rates are increasing significantly. Providing the backup needed to make wind and solar reliable and oversupply become a great burden to consumers.
Writing in Quadrant.org, Peter Smith brings up an October report by the Australian Centre for Independent Studies, “The Renewable Energy Honeymoon: starting is easy, the rest is hard.” The conclusions state in part:
“The renewables honeymoon must always come to an end. Costs will inevitably rise as wind and solar penetration increases, necessitating ever greater amounts of supporting infrastructure to move each additional unit of energy further in space and time than the last. The fundamental physical limitations of the grid and the nature of renewables make this trajectory inescapable.”
See links under Energy Issues – General.
NEWS YOU CAN USE:
Challenging the Orthodoxy — NIPCC
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science
Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2013
Summary: https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/CCR/CCR-II/Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts
Idso, Idso, Carter, and Singer, Lead Authors/Editors, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), 2014
http://climatechangereconsidered.org/climate-change-reconsidered-ii-biological-impacts/
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels
By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, April 2019
http://climatechangereconsidered.org/climate-change-reconsidered-ii-fossil-fuels/
Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming
The NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus
By Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer, Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), Nov 23, 2015
http://climatechangereconsidered.org/why-scientists-disagree-about-global-warming/
Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate
S. Fred Singer, Editor, NIPCC, 2008
http://www.sepp.org/publications/nipcc_final.pdf
Challenging the Orthodoxy – Radiation Transfer
The Role of Greenhouse Gases in Energy Transfer in the Earth’s Atmosphere
By W.A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Preprint, Mar 3, 2023
Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases
By W.A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Preprint, December 22, 2020
Net Zero Averted Temperature Increase
By Richard Lindzen, William Happer, and William A. van Wijngaarden, CO2 Coalition, June 2024
Radiation Transport in Clouds
By W.A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Klimarealistene, Science of Climate Change, January 2025
Challenging the Orthodoxy
The 16th International Conference on Climate Change
Videos, April 8 & April 9
Heartland Institute’s 2026 Climate Conference Makes Global News
By Jim Lakely, The Heartland Institute, Apr 10, 2026
At The Heartland Climate Conference: “What Is The Proof?”, Extreme Weather Events Edition
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Apr 10, 2026
At The Heartland Climate Conference: “What Is The Proof?”, Earth’s Energy Imbalance Edition
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Apr 12, 2026
Heartland right over the target with triumphant climate change conference
By Tom Harris, America Out Loud News, Apr 17, 2026
Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 17, 2026
#DoEDeepDive: Extreme Event Attribution
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
The section then provides a close look at the Pacific Northwest heat wave of June 2021. The WWA ghouls swept in rapidly afterwards and concluded it was “virtually impossible” without human-caused climate change and has become 150 times more likely due to global warming. The “red team” authors note:
“But an important counter to the first claim is that other researchers concluded from historical weather data that while a heat wave of the magnitude observed was indeed virtually impossible without anthropogenic climate change, it was also virtually impossible with climate change.”
They then quote from an assessment by the State of Oregon which pointed out that
“There is no evidence that the highly unusual combination of weather features that drove the heat dome were made more likely by climate change, and climate models do not project an increase in the frequency of high-pressure ridges over the Pacific Northwest”
The meteorology literature explained the heatwave as the result of an intense high-pressure ridge hitting at a time when soils were already dry due to a lack of precipitation. Several studies argued that greenhouse gases might have increased the maximum temperature by 1 or 2 degrees C compared to the 1800s, but the heatwave itself was just bad luck.
But that sort of conclusion doesn’t make for scary headlines, so you weren’t told, until now anyway.
Defending the Orthodoxy
Sustainability Professors: Global Warming Might Force Restriction of Agricultural Water Use
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 12, 2026
The solution to lack of water availability is to provide more water, not restrictions on farming. Israelis, Gulf State Arabs and the Chinese have all found ways to make water supply affordable. Desalination, long pipelines, whatever it takes.
US pressure puts World Bank’s climate plan at risk
Closed-door talks over the World Bank’s climate agenda have stalled, as the US pushes to scrap green targets and expand support for fossil fuels
By Matteo Civillini, Climate Home News, Apr 16, 2026
The World Bank’s work to tackle climate change is under threat as the Trump administration pushes the lender to ditch its green targets and step up support for fossil fuel infrastructure in the developing world.
Since the plan was introduced, the World Bank’s climate funding nearly doubled from $21 billion in 2021 to $39 billion in 2025.
Defending the Orthodoxy – Bandwagon Science
UK Economist Says the Quiet Part Out Loud: High Energy Prices are ‘Good for the Climate’
By Tilak Doshi, His Blog, Apr 14, 2026
Rigorous economists—those still willing to follow the data rather than the grants—continue to point out that adaptation and technological progress have always outpaced apocalyptic forecasts. The “climate emergency” that justifies Soviet-style rationing by price is, on closer inspection, a political choice, not a scientific imperative.
Questioning the Orthodoxy
Tidbits
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
Climate Home News (back in February) wrote “If anything can inspire world leaders to agree on a roadmap away from fossil fuels, it’s a trip to a vanishing Pacific island or two.” Notwithstanding the need to use fossil fuels to get there. “That’s the hope behind the plan to host three climate events in different Pacific nations in the months leading up to COP31.”
[SEPP Comment: See link immediately above.]
We’re down with that
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
There is a certain human tendency to crave certainty, and the scientific method over the last 500 years has achieved many remarkable feats based on measurement and calculation that were, indeed, very precise. But it has led to an unfortunate habit of claiming, and believing, that many things have been measured far more exactly, and carefully, than they actually were. So any effort to debate climate science rationally, assuming it is indeed the goal, requires a willingness to talk openly, and accurately, about the quality of the underlying data.
Is it hot in here?
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
The tendency to ignore the fact that this highly touted “global” warming is severely localized brings up something that’s been a sore point in the debate over global warming for more than a decade. Specifically, the people who initially said it was happening, we were causing it and disaster would surely ensue if we did not mend our ways, then redefined it as “climate change” because the globe wasn’t warming the way they predicted.
‘An Inconvenient Truth’ – 20 Years Later (In Defense of Climate Change – Episode 3)
By Bryce Nickles with Roger Pielke, Jr. Science From the Fringe, Apr 17, 2026 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Video with text
Cutting no ice
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
As we’ve said before, Roger Pielke Jr. is more interesting even when wrong than a great many people are even when right.
And if not, you need to have some better reason than not seeming uncool for maintaining that there is a human “signal” amid the natural “noise” of post-1850, or post-1900 warming, how large you think it is, and how you know.
[SEPP Comment: See link immediately above]
How to be an Alarmist
Let me count the ways
By John Ridgway, Climate Scepticism, Apr 17, 2026 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
Energy & Environmental Review: April 13, 2026
By John Droz, Jr., Master Resource, Apr 13, 2026
Problems in Orthodoxy
Renewables Are Costing Us A Fortune–Justin Rowlatt
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 16, 2026
From BBC article by Justin Rowlatt:
China still relies on coal for more than half of its energy, raising concerns that emissions linked to UK consumption may simply have shifted overseas
From Homewood: Welcome to the dark side, Justin!
Forget Climate Activism, the Guardian is Now Pushing AI Activism
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 17, 2026
But history has a hard lesson for those who ban or restrict economically important technologies.
Social Benefits of Carbon Dioxide
The effect of CO2 on Grey Mangrove
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
From the CO2Science Archive
Changing Weather
Tornado Damage and Frequency: An Update Through 2025
No upward trends in normalized tornado losses or in major tornado incidence
By Roger Pielke, Jr., His Blog, Apr 17, 2026
German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 11, 2026
Worst March Drought On Record
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Apr 17, 2026
Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Apr 15, 0226
The Origin of the Puget Sound Tornado
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 17, 2026
Around 3 PM on Wednesday, a tornado was spotted over Puget Sound. Technically, this rotating wind feature is known as a waterspout since it developed over water
Changing Climate
Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
By P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Apr 15, 2026
One prominent example of this is a study titled “Global atmospheric teleconnections during Dansgaard-Oeschger events” by a working group led by Bradley Markle from Seattle University in Washington State, published in 2017 in the journal Nature Geoscience.
Summary
Earth’s history has already experienced massive and extremely rapid climate shifts that were entirely natural in origin.
Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
By Kenneth Richard, Net Zero Watch, Apr 13, 2026
Link to paper: Unexpected Climate Revealed by a Middle Holocene Avian Assemblage from Fuerteventura (Canary Islands)
By Antonio Sánchez-Marco, et al., Quaternary, Mar 1, 2026
Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
By Tony Heller, His Blog, Apr 15, 2026
The US West is facing a serious water crisis
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
Heller then discusses the way US states compete for water supplies and have built tunnels and channels to redirect flows among regions. He warns that unless the weather changes dramatically, there will be “water wars” between states this summer.
It appears to us, not being experts in US Southwest water management, genuinely to be a looming crisis. And we appreciate that Heller’s analysis was focused on data and facts, without dragging in speculations about climate or trying to argue that the crisis would never have happened if only we had built more windmills. For those of our readers in the US Southwest, be forewarned that you may be in for a dry and difficult summer until and unless the weather changes.
Not, be it noted, until we humans change the weather.
[SEPP Comment: A video by Tony Heller posted on Feb 20.]
Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice
Greenland Ice Varies, Don’t Panic 2026 Update
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, Apr 14, 2026
New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, Apr 11, 2026
Link to latest paper: Climatological and geological drivers of glacier retreat patterns in Marian Cove, King George Island: A remote sensing study from 1956 to 2022
By Ji-Eun Park, et al., International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, February 2026
Changing Seas
AMOC To Collapse–Part 98
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 17, 2026
The perennial scare story raises its head one more!
The critical Atlantic current system appears significantly more likely to collapse than previously thought after new research found that climate models predicting the biggest slowdown are the most realistic. Scientists called the new finding “very concerning” as a collapse would have catastrophic consequences for Europe, Africa and the Americas.
From Homewood: But crooked scientists has grant money to earn and far left Guardian hacks have headlines to write. It’s a marriage made in heaven!
Lowering Standards
Can The Met Office Rainfall Claims Be Trusted?
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 17, 2026
The facts are clear.
The Met Office have only one long term meteorological site in Northern Ireland, Armagh, and there has been no upward trend in winter rainfall there since 1853. (Edenfel, by the way, which opened in 1865, only has sparse data). They have no actual data from ANY SITES, which support their “ninth wettest since 1836 claim”.
And yet, we are expected to believe what they tell us and treat it as factual truth.
When a “Drought” NOT a Drought?
By Cliff Mass, Weather Blog, Apr 11, 2026
The bottom line in all this is that there was little evidence of drought over our region based on impacts, and such impacts are required to call a situation a drought.
Some locations are fortunate to receive more precipitation than is required, and we are lucky to be in such a place.
For me, a more interesting question is why Washington State officials don’t understand this basic fact? [Boldface in original]
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Yellow (Green) Journalism?
Guardian: “The Climate Deniers are In Charge Now”
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, Apr 15, 2026
A Guardian journalist reports back from the Heartland Conference.
Breakthrough! Houston Chronicle Publishes Non-alarmist Climate Op-ed
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, Apr15, 2026
Ed. Note: Today’s post provides the background and significance of Robert Bradley’s recent op-ed in The Houston Chronicle, “World Should be Optimistic About Our Fossil Fuel Future.”
Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.
Manufactured Savings: How Ember Turns Assumptions into Energy Policy
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 11, 2026
[SEPP Comment: According to Ember’s website: “We’re a global energy think tank that accelerates the clean energy transition with data and policy.’]
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda
Continuing Slump in Global Media Climate Agitprop Bodes Ill for Future Net Zero Support
By Chris Morrison, The Daily Sceptic, Via WUWT, Apr 14, 2026 https://wattsupwiththat.com/2026/04/14/continuing-slump-in-global-media-climate-agitprop-bodes-ill-for-future-net-zero-support/
It seems the world is getting tired of clickbait, centrally determined climate claptrap that for too long has provided an unscientific base for the Net Zero fantasy. Pseudoscience gaslighting has allowed rigged computer models to predict headline-grabbing Armageddon ‘tipping points’ and contributed to the mainstream spread of unchallenged lies that extreme weather events are getting worse.
Questioning European Green
Why Britain faces the growing risk of Spanish-style blackouts
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr15, 2026
Funding Issues
Trump administration holds up NOAA grant funding
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Apr 13, 2026
The Trump administration is holding up some National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) grant funding.
A congressional joint explanatory statement accompanying the spending package passed earlier this year directs NOAA to spend about $104 million on climate laboratories and cooperative institutes, as well as $94 million on weather laboratories and cooperative institutes through its Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research.
Litigation Issues
Breaking: Major Under-the-Radar SCOTUS Decision on Climate Lawfare
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, Apr 17, 2026
Today’s decision in Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish belongs firmly in the latter category. It is not packaged as a climate case. It does not speak in the language of emissions targets or environmental urgency. Yet it strikes directly at the legal machinery that has been driving a large portion of modern climate litigation.
This does not resolve the broader debates about climate projections or policy responses. Those debates remain marked by uncertainty, particularly when it comes to long-term modeling and attribution. What this decision does is constrain the legal pathways being used to impose sweeping changes without legislative input.
Subsidies and Mandates Forever
After All These Years, Alternatives Are Finding Ways to Stand on Their Own
By Gary Abernathy, Real Clear Energy, Apr 13, 2026
With the Trump administration rolling back as many Biden-era subsidies and incentives as possible, the alternatives movement has been forced to embrace the kind of market-based structure many have argued it should have followed all along.
CfDs Continue to Pay Out Subsidies, Despite Rising Cost of Gas
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 14, 2026
The figures are now in for March, and they confirm that renewable energy covered by Contracts for Difference is still more expensive than gas power, despite the rocketing price of natural gas.
EPA and other Regulators on the March
EPA appoints industry players and academics to its Science Advisory Board
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Apr 17, 2026
Several of the board’s 37 total members come from the chemical industry, with an employee of Dow Chemical, an employee of Corteva Agriscience and two employees of Chemours among those selected. Chemours spun off from DuPont in 2015 and took on its “forever chemicals” portfolio.
Energy Issues – General
The data center energy threat is way overblown
By David Wojick, CFACT, Apr 17, 2026
[SEPP Comment: Politicians may be using data centers as an excuse for their support on wind and solar which are driving up the cost of electricity.]
Renewables’ Giffen Take
By Peter Smith, Quadrant.org, Apr 12, 2026
Link to report: The Renewable Energy Honeymoon: starting is easy, the rest is hard
By Zoe Hilton, Jae Lubberink, Michael Wu, and Aidan Morrison, The Centre for Independent Studies, Oct 2, 2025
The dire straits of Hormuz
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
Yes but their energy bills have not fluctuated because of the international market. They’ve fluctuated, mostly sharply upward, because of the deluded persistence of British governments of all partisan stripes trying to pivot to renewable power sources and having it not work. Which is why Starmer is pleading with oil companies to make oil appear from somewhere he cannot name after preventing them from making it appear from places they could, all while saying oil shmoil.
The Empire of Coal
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 12, 2026
While we are becoming ever more reliant on Chinese manufactured renewables, they are doubling down on coal.
“In March 2025, the Center for Strategic and International Studies published a landmark report revealing that the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) — a single state-owned enterprise — produced 14 million gross tonnes of vessels in 2024. That figure is more than the entire U.S. shipbuilding industry has produced in the eight decades since the end of the war, combined…”
Energy Issues – Europe
The LNG Price Premium
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr11, 2026
As I have pointed out before, gas prices are nowhere near as high as during Ukraine crisis.
But what I really wanted to draw attention to is the gap between the UK market price and global LNG prices (which given the product can be shipped anywhere in the world) is truly a global market.
At $1.35 to the pound, $19.42/MMBTU for LNG works out at £1.44/therm, which is a third higher than the UK price.
Remember that when Miliband tells you that exploiting our North Sea gas won’t save the UK money.
Net Zero Watch: Reeves is recycling a failed electricity pricing wheeze
Press Release, Net Zero Watch, Apr 17, 2026
Campaign group Net Zero Watch has dismissed Rachel Reeves’ latest promise to cut the link between gas and electricity prices in the UK, saying that it has already been examined and found wanting by NESO’s official electricity market review in May 2024.
Solar power threatens to overwhelm electricity grid
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 17, 2026
As I questioned previously, the issue of constraining surplus solar power is much more complex than the current system of paying a handful of wind farms to switch off, because solar is usually embedded and therefore invisible to NESO [National Energy System Operator] at the transmission level.
Were Shetlands Grid Upgrades Worth It?
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 17, 2026
Energy Issues – Australia
The decade Australia sleepwalked into an energy trap
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 14, 2026
Link to report: All at Sea: Fuel, War and Australia’s Achilles Heel
By Ferard Holland and Jude Blik, Page Research Centre, Mar 2, 2026
All at Sea: Fuel, War and Australia’s Achilles Heel – Page Research Centre
Opening paragraphs of report:
Australia is critically exposed to geopolitical risk due to our overwhelming dependence on imported liquid fuels.
The recent Iran war and disruption through the Strait of Hormuz have already shown how quickly overseas conflicts can translate into price spikes, physical shortages and emergency planning in Australia, even before any direct conflict emerges in our own region.
A major war in Asia could cut off far more of our supply almost overnight, and this is no longer a contingency Australia can afford to ignore. Current policy positions have failed to confront the seriousness of this exposure and have left us without a sufficient response.
Happily, Australia is blessed with energy abundance on the shores of our own continent, and this abundance can be harnessed to dramatically improve our security through domestic production of liquid fuels. The necessary steps to achieve this may have very little economic cost…
The Good Oil on Oil
By Peter Purcell, Quadrant.org, Apr 13, 2026
Our problem is simple enough: we don’t have substantial oil supplies of our own. We used to. But we used up much of what we had and the federal government virtually stopped offshore exploration for new oil deposits. They didn’t ban it, of course. They simply limited the area made available annually for exploration and then made exploration almost impossible by banning seismic reflection surveying to define new drilling locations. You could still drill, but you couldn’t do new surveys to identify where you should drill.
Australia’s ‘Renewable’ Obsession Decimates Industry
By Vijay Jayaraj, CO2 Coalition, Apr 14, 2026
The fact is no modern economy has achieved wind and solar shares of more than 40% without substantial price hikes. Yet the Australian government has a target of 82% by 2030. This is economically suicidal, a guarantee for blackouts and a death blow to what remains of manufacturing.
We’re in an oil crisis, Australia has two oil refineries, and one is on fire
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, Apr 17, 2026
Energy Issues – Elsewhere non-US
Turning Chinese
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus Apr 15, 2026
Clickbait being what it is, the article pretty quickly swallows its own premise:
“Much of the world – or at least much of Asia – seems to be responding to the energy stress caused by the Iran War by attempting to reshape itself in China’s image.”
So we went from whole world to much of Asia in one easy step. And we won’t get sidetracked by the strange enthusiasm of the Canadian government, and especially the incumbent party federally, for China which it recently dubbed a “strategic partner”. Instead, we’ll focus on an accurate statement that follows up on that business about coal. Those Asian countries:
“are now learning a harsh lesson in the dangers of foreign fossil fuel dependence. One country whose economy has been relatively resilient to the crisis, however, is China.”
Energy Issues — US
Report: New England electricity prices among the highest nationwide
By Christen Smith, Center Square, Via Climate Realism, Apr 8, 2026
Link to report: Energy Affordability 2026: A Snapshot of Electricity Prices
and Energy Policies by State
By Lora Current, et al., American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), 2026
Schadenfreude Of The Week: Majority Of New York’s Pending Wind And Solar Projects Getting Canceled
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, Apr 15, 2026
Another option for New York, and by far the best one, would be to take this opportunity to walk away from the renewable energy fantasy. In any rebidding on the onshore wind contracts, the prices are likely to be double to triple the price that could be had from a brand new natural gas plant. And the power from a natural gas plant would be dispatchable and reliable, instead of the intermittent power from wind turbines or solar panels that is never there when you really need it.
Trump admin to break ground on NYC gas pipeline that riled green activists
By Josh Christenson and Carl Campanile, New York Post, Apr 13, 2026
[SEPP Comment: Is the environment industry’s stranglehold on New York energy lessening?]
Washington’s Control of Energy
Trump schedules controversial drilling auction in Alaska wildlife refuge
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Apr 17, 2026
Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?
Tensions in the Strait of Hormuz force us to reconsider material benefits of fossil fuels
By Ronald Stein and Yoshihiro Muronaka, America Outloud News, Mar 13, 2025
Return of King Coal?
What Coal Did Today
By Frank Clemente, Fred Palmer, Real Clear Energy, Apr 15, 2026
Nuclear Energy and Fears
America’s nuclear comeback is finally here
By Jason Issac, The Hill, Via WUWT, Apr 15, 2026
EXCLUSIVE: Mike Lee Takes On ‘Valley Of Death’ Plaguing Nuclear Energy Developers
By Anthony Iafrate, The Daily Caller, Apr 14, 2026
Is America on the Verge of a Nuclear Renaissance?
By Duggan Flanakin, Real Clear Energy, Apr 14, 2026
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind
Is Plug-In Solar Worth It?
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 12, 2026
The cost of four solar panels is around £1000. However, he only saves this much because he has batteries to store excess solar power. Without these, any surplus power, particularly around the middle of the day, would have to be thrown away. Remember that many homes are unoccupied at those times, so there is very little power consumption.
In short, is it worth spending £1000 to save maybe £100, given all of the hassle involved and the fact that few people have that sort of money lying around?
[SEPP Comment: Observations from a video.]
How Do We Turn the Sun Off?
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 14, 2026
Given that Miliband also wants to triple wind power, too, we could easily have 70 GW of wind and solar chasing less than 40 GW of demand.
According to the Telegraph, we might have to pay a large power station to shut down under such circumstances. Yes, the same power stations Miliband wants to close! But the Telegraph misses the point – there will be no gas or biomass power stations contracted to supply at that time of day, because there is already too much capacity projected.
You cannot switch off something that is not switched on!
California Dreaming
Can California Thrive on Renewable Electricity?
California’s net-zero crusade is colliding with arithmetic: soaring costs, stubborn fossil-fuel dependence, and physics itself expose a 2045 target built more on aspiration than reality.
By Edward Ring, American Greatness, Apr 15, 2026
Is there any chance Californians are really going to nearly double their hydroelectric output, quintuple their nuclear energy capacity, and more than quintuple their biomass power generation? Do California’s energy planners really think the state can afford to build, deploy, and maintain more than 2,000 floating wind turbines out in the deep ocean, each of them longer than a modern supercarrier when measured from the bottom of the flotation pontoons to the tip of the rotor?
How Much CO2 Do Oil Tankers Emit En-Route to California?
By Edward Ring, California Policy Center, Accessed Apr 16, 2026
Until we don’t need it anymore, in order to improve overall air quality in California and the world, we should be producing and refining as much oil as we possibly can right here.
Other News that May Be of Interest
Rare Earth Leverage and Pressure Points on U.S. Technological Power
By Sergey E. Ivashchenko, WUWT, Apr 11, 2026
The rare‑earth‑metals crisis is not a temporary episode and cannot be reduced to a trade dispute. It marks the emergence of a resource‑driven geopolitical environment in which control over critical materials becomes a defining element of global power. Technological security is increasingly central to strategic stability, and access to rare‑earth elements is becoming a component of national economic strength. In the logic of the Yankee angle, this shift functions as a direct test of the resilience of the U.S. technological and defense system.
Senate votes to repeal Biden-era wilderness protections in Minnesota, sending bill to Trump’s desk
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Apr 16, 2026
The Senate voted 50-49 to overturn a Biden-era move to block mining in an area around Minnesota’s Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE
The climate change scientists racing to dim the sun
By Paul Homewood Not a Lot of People Know That, Apr 14, 2026
The whole idea is barmy, but more to the point, why is a penny of taxpayer money being spent on it?
The first two comments sum it up nicely:
First Comment: These people are dangerous. They should be locked up, not given grants. The arrogance of thinking we can dim the sun without it having possibly catastrophic consequences!
Wrong Again, Associated Press, Climate Change Isn’t Overrunning Evolution
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Apr 13, 2026
Bixonimania: How AI Turned a Joke Diagnosis into “Peer‑Reviewed” Medicine
Swedish researchers created a fake eye disease to see whether AI chatbots would repeat it as if it were real. The results were anything but funny.
By Leslie Eastman, Legal Insurrection, Apr 13, 2026
When a joke diagnosis morphs into “peer-reviewed” research, it is clear that the crisis in scientific credibility is no longer confined to sloppy research or corrupted journals but now extends into the algorithms that many people are now relying on for answers to serious health issues.
ARTICLES
1. New England Considers the Nuclear Option
The region’s governors acknowledge the limits of ‘renewable’ energy.
By Andrew Fowler, WSJ, Apr 9, 2026
Link to: Advancing Nuclear Energy for a 21st Century New England Electricity Grid
By the Governors of the 6 New England States, Mar 31, 2026
From Governors: These initiatives will complement our states’ other efforts to secure a safe, affordable, and reliable electricity grid for the 21st century.
TWTW Summary: The article begins with:
“A bipartisan coalition of all six New England governors has reached a conclusion that until recently would have been politically unthinkable: Renewable energy alone can’t deliver the affordable, reliable power the region needs.
In a March 31 joint statement, the governors called for a “diverse energy strategy,” identifying nuclear power as essential to meet growing demand and safeguard the region’s “collective energy future.” The shift reflects a broader trend: Energy policy is no longer only about emissions targets. It’s increasingly about cost and reliability.
Electricity prices in the region today are among the highest in the country. Natural gas last year accounted for 55% of generation in the region and nuclear for 25%. New England has invested heavily in renewable energy, particularly offshore wind and solar. Renewables last year accounted for 13% of total generation. By nature, they’re intermittent and risk prolonged blackouts.
Against this backdrop, nuclear energy is re-emerging as a practical solution. Nuclear power is consistent and is already a major source of clean energy in the U.S., preventing hundreds of millions of metric tons of emissions annually.
In New England, nuclear facilities such as Connecticut’s Millstone Power Station help maintain grid stability, powering roughly two million homes. Yet regulatory barriers have long limited the development of new nuclear capacity.
That is beginning to change. Public opinion is shifting, and policymakers increasingly recognize that meeting climate goals without reliable baseload power is unrealistic. A 2026 analysis from regional think tanks, including my own, estimates that meeting the region’s energy needs with nuclear power would cost roughly $415 billion, about half the cost of a renewable-heavy system, while reducing emissions by 92% by 2050.”
The author and the governors’ statement do not mention that since the 1990s New England has been a graveyard for nuclear power. Six plants have been shut down and only two remain operating. Vermont Yankee was shutdown in 2014 and Pilgrim Nuclear was shutdown in 2019.
The UK climate mouthpiece – the BBC
The BBC has, like the government it serves, careered from one crisis to the next, be it a complete lack of impartiality or the conduct of its “talent” etc. More often than not the BBC is the story. Not a good place to be.
But there is hope for the BBC…
………………………………………
As Guido has long predicted, the BBC’s declining audience share meant that YouTube overtook the state broadcaster as the most-watched outlet by Brits earlier this year.
Now regulators are running to catch up. Under new ‘prominence’ rules being considered by Starmer after his ill-advised reset with the EU, the BBC could be given special treatment as an organisation hand-picked by ministers. Attempts are being made to ask social media platforms to change their display algorithms to give more ‘prominence’ to this content. – In other words, some want to try to force YouTube and other video sites to give ‘prominence’ to the BBC over every other creator…
That’s ironic as the video sites themselves are massive net givers to the creative economy: YouTube alone contributed 7 billion Euros to the EU’s otherwise faltering media market in 2024. – In the UK, that platform alone has added more than £2 billion to GBP…
State regulation of poplar platforms never works. – Starmer’s internet crackdown is reaching insane new levels…
………………………………………
Guido
Yes the more that the BBC, Canada’s CBC, and Australia’s ABC are seen by the public as just the left-wing propaganda factories they are, the sooner the majorities of voters / taxpayers will be demanding that these costly sheltered workshops be shut down.
Clauser’s reversing graphs to show mirror image is simply brilliant .