The Week That Was: 2025-06-14 (June 14, 2025)
Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org)
The Science and Environmental Policy Project
Quote of the Week: “Progress often involves the killing of an exquisite theory by an ugly fact.” — Leon Lederman, Nobel Laureate in Physics, The God Particle (1993), [H/t Richard Lindzen and William Happer]
Number of the Week: 24,742 balancing actions
THIS WEEK:
By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)
Scope: TWTW begins with a report by Richard Lindzen and William Happer on greenhouse gases. They use the scientific method to substantiate that adding more greenhouse gases will benefit Earth and not cause human harm. TWTW then repeats a 2023 report by Happer, Lindzen, and Gregory Wrightstone demonstrating that the US 5th National Climate Assessment is scientifically fatally flawed. TWTW concludes with a discussion on inertia on the power grid.
*********************
Applying the Scientific Method: Last week, TWTW focused on a paper by Richard Lindzen and William Happer emphasizing Gold Standard Science. “Scientific Knowledge Is Determined by the Scientific Method, Not by Government Opinion, Consensus, 97% of Scientists’ Opinions, Peer Review, Models that Do Not Work, or Cherry-Picked, Fabricated, Falsified or Omitted Contradictory Data.” The two authors discussed each of these subtopics.
This week, TWTW will focus on a second paper by Lindzen and Happer titled: “Physics Demonstrates that Increasing Greenhouse Gases Cannot Cause Dangerous Warming, Extreme Weather or Any Harm.” The subtitle is: “More Carbon Dioxide Will Create More Food. Driving Greenhouse Gas Emissions to Net Zero and Eliminating Fossil Fuels Will Be Disastrous for People Worldwide.”
Using the Scientific Method, the paper addresses each of these subjects emphasizing the science that is ignored by the UN IPCC and its collaborators, including the US government and its warped National Climate Assessment along with the EPA endangerment finding. Each of the subtopics is discussed with physical evidence presented. In short, the policies advocated in the name of climate crisis, global warming, or climate emergency have no basis in the scientific method and are inhumane and economically destructive.
The Lindzen and Happer paper is 45 pages long and cannot be properly summarized in TWTW with all subtopics and examples discussed. Instead, TWTW will present the Summary and Conclusions, in hopes that interested readers will review the entire paper. For too long western governments, including the US, have been in the mad pursuit of a foolish goal: stopping carbon dioxide emissions; although carbon dioxide is a gas of life. It is time that the advocates of this goal are compelled to face the consequences of what they advocate.
The summary of the Lindzen and Happer paper states [citations omitted]:
BEGIN QUOTE
- SUMMARY
At the outset it is important to understand that carbon dioxide has two relevant properties, as a creator of food and oxygen, and as a greenhouse gas (GHG).
As to food and oxygen, carbon dioxide is essential to nearly all life on earth by creating food and oxygen by photosynthesis. Further, it creates more food as its level in the atmosphere increases. For example, doubling carbon dioxide from today’s approximately 420 ppm to 840 ppm would increase the amount of food available to people worldwide by roughly 40%, and doing so would have a negligible effect on temperature.
As to carbon dioxide as a GHG, the United States and countries worldwide are vigorously pursuing rules and subsidies under the Net Zero Theory that carbon dioxide and other GHG emissions must be reduced to Net Zero and the use of fossil fuels must be eliminated by 2050 to avoid catastrophic global warming and more extreme weather. A key premise stated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the “evidence is clear that carbon dioxide (CO2) is the main driver of climate change,” where “main driver means responsible for more than 50% of the change.”
The Biden Administration adopted over 100 rules, and Congress has provided enormous subsidies promoting alternatives to fossil fuel premised on the Net Zero Theory. The EPA Endangerment Finding, for example, asserts “elevated concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may reasonably be anticipated to endanger the public health and to endanger the public welfare of current and future generations.”
On April 9, 2025, President Trump issued a “Memorandum on Directing Repeal of Unlawful Rules” and Fact Sheet stating “agencies shall immediately take steps to effectuate the repeal of any [unlawful] regulation” under Supreme Court precedents, inter alia, where “the scientific and policy premises undergirding it had been shown to be wrong,” or “where the costs imposed are not justified by the public benefits.” We understand the Supreme Court has also ruled in the leading case State Farm that an agency regulation is arbitrary, capricious, and thus invalid where, inter alia:
• “the agency has … entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem”
• “the agency has relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider.”
We are career physicists with a special expertise in radiation physics, which describes how CO2 and GHGs affect heat flow in Earth’s atmosphere. In our scientific opinion, contrary to most media reporting and many people’s understanding, the “scientific premises undergirding” the Net Zero Theory, all the Biden Net Zero Theory rules and congressional subsidies are scientifically false and “wrong,” and violate these two State Farm mandates.
First, Scientific Evidence Ignored. All the agency rules, publications, and studies we have seen supporting the Endangerment Finding and other Biden Net Zero Theory rules ignored, as if it does not exist, the robust and reliable scientific evidence that:
(a) carbon dioxide, GHGs and fossil fuels will not cause catastrophic global warming and more extreme weather, detailed in Part III.
(b) there will be disastrous consequences for the poor, people worldwide, future generations, Americans, America, and other countries if CO2, other GHGs are reduced to Net Zero and fossil fuels eliminated that will endanger public health and welfare, detailed in Part IV.
Second, Unscientific Evidence at the Foundation. Unscientific evidence is all we have seen underlying the Endangerment Finding and all the other Biden Net Zero rules, detailed in Part V.
Further, Pres. Trump’s Memorandum Fact Sheet stated that agencies “must repeal any regulation where the costs imposed are not justified by the public benefits.” This is a separate and an additional reason all the Biden Net Zero Theory rules must be repealed because they have no public benefits but impose enormous costs, detailed in Parts III-V.
Therefore, these Supreme Court decisions and the science demonstrated below support repealing all the Net Zero Theory rules as soon as possible.
Further, for the same reasons, Congress should repeal all Net Zero theory subsidies, all laws that require GHG emissions be reduced and all laws that restrict fossil fuel development and infrastructure.
Finally, Peter Drucker warned, as every Net Zero Theory rule and subsidy demonstrates, that science in government is often based on “value judgments” that are “incompatible with any criteria one could possibly call scientific.”
Therefore, we suggest the President issue an Executive Order requiring all government agencies taking action based on scientific knowledge only rely on scientific knowledge derived by the scientific method and never base their action on unscientific evidence and sources.
We also suggest the Executive Order clarify that the scientific method is, simply and profoundly, to validate theoretical predictions with observations, and further, that scientific knowledge is never determined by the opinions of government, consensus, 97% of scientists, peer review, or is based on models that do not work, or cherry-picked, fabricated, falsified or omitted contradictory data, elaborated in Part II of the paper.
In summary, the blunt scientific reality requires urgent action because we are confronted with policies that destroy western economies, impoverish the working middle class, condemn billions of the world’s poorest to continued poverty and increased starvation, leave our children despairing over the alleged absence of a future, and will enrich the enemies of the West who are enjoying the spectacle of our suicide march.
Instead, let people and the market decide, not governments.
Scientific details follow.
END QUOTE
***********
In their Conclusions the authors state [citations omitted]:
BEGIN QUOTE
As career scientists, we have demonstrated that:
- The common belief that CO2 is the main driver of climate change and the EPA Endangerment Finding assertion that “elevated concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may reasonably be anticipated” to endanger the public health and welfare are scientifically false,
- Reducing CO2 and other GHG emissions to Net Zero by 2050 and eliminating the use of fossil fuels to do so will have a trivial effect on temperature.
- Unscientific evidence is the fundamental basis of all the Net Zero Theory we have seen and the EPA Endangerment Finding
- Scientific evidence contradicting the Net Zero theory is ignored by all the agency rules, rationale for subsidies and publications we have seen supporting the Net Zero Theory and the EPA Endangerment Finding, as if it does not exist.
- There is extensive reliable scientific evidence that:
- carbon dioxide, GHGs and fossil fuels will not cause catastrophic global warming and more extreme weather.
- there will be disastrous consequences for the poor, people worldwide, future generations, Americans, America, and other countries if CO2, other GHGs and fossil fuels are reduced to Net Zero and will endanger public health and welfare.
- All the Biden Net Zero Theory rules must be repealed also because they have no public benefits but impose enormous costs on people and in dollars.
Therefore, these Supreme Court decisions and the science demonstrated above support repealing all the Net Zero Theory rules as soon as possible.
Further, for the same reasons, Congress should repeal all Net Zero theory subsidies, all laws that require GHG emissions be reduced and all laws that restrict fossil fuel development and infrastructure.
Finally, Peter Drucker warned, as every Net Zero Theory demonstrates, that science in government is often based on “value judgments” that are “incompatible with any criteria one could possibly call scientific.”
Therefore, we suggest the President issue an Executive Order requiring all government agencies taking action based on scientific knowledge only rely on scientific knowledge derived by the scientific method and never base their action on unscientific evidence and sources.
We also suggest the Executive Order clarify that the scientific method is, simply and profoundly, to validate theoretical predictions with observations, and further, that scientific knowledge is never determined by the opinions of government, consensus, 97% of scientists, peer review, or is based on models that do not work, or cherry-picked, fabricated, falsified or omitted contradictory data, elaborated in Part II of the paper.
In summary, the blunt scientific reality requires urgent action because we are confronted with policies that destroy western economies, impoverish the working middle class, condemn billions of the world’s poorest to continued poverty and increased starvation, leave our children despairing over the alleged absence of a future, and will enrich the enemies of the West who are enjoying the spectacle of our suicide march.”
Instead, let people and the market decide, not governments.
END QUOTE
The above is the most severe indictment of the non-science used by the US government, the IPCC, and its collaborators TWTW has seen, and it is based on the scientific method, not speculative models that have never been validated and cannot be validated. See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
*********************
The US National Climate Assessment: The CO2 Coalition re-posted the “Comment on the 5th National Climate Assessment 3d Order Draft” by Happer, Lindzen, and Gregory Wrightstone, of the CO2 Coalition submitted on January 27, 2023. As with the document above, it is lengthy and based on the scientific method, not speculative models. The Summary and Conclusions are given below:
BEGIN QUOTE
- SUMMARY
We (Happer and Lindzen) are career physicists who have specialized in radiation physics and dynamic heat transfer for decades. These are processes integral to atmospheric climate science.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the 5th National Climate Assessment 3rd Order Draft (NCA5) by 13 Federal agencies that comprise the U.S. Global Climate Research Program (USGCRP). Respectfully, in our scientific opinion, NCA5 is fatally flawed science for the following scientific reasons, separately and together:
- It omits data that contradicts its conclusions on extreme weather.
- It relies on models that do not work, which are never relied on in science.
- It relies on IPCC findings, which are government opinions, not science and are never relied on in science.
- It omits the extraordinary social benefits of CO2 and fossil fuels.
- It omits the disastrous consequences of reducing fossil fuels and CO2 emissions to “Net Zero.”
- There is no risk of catastrophic global warming caused by fossil fuels and CO2.
As to the disastrous consequences of eliminating fossil fuels, it “is estimated that nitrogen fertilizer [derived from fossil fuels] now supports approximately half of the global population.” As one of us (Happer) has made clear, without the “use of inorganic fertilizers” derived from fossil fuels, the world “will not achieve the food supply needed to support 8.5 to 10 billion people.”
The recent experience in Sri Lanka provides a red alert. “The world has just witnessed the collapse of the once bountiful agricultural sector of Sri Lanka as a result of government restrictions on mineral fertilizer.” The government of Sri Lanka banned the use of fossil fuel derived nitrogen fertilizers and pesticides, with disastrous consequences on food supply there. If similarly misguided decisions are made eliminating fossil fuels and thus nitrogen fertilizer, there will be a starvation crisis worldwide.
It is critical to repeat. Eliminating fossil fuel-derived nitrogen fertilizer will create a worldwide starvation crisis. And scientifically there is no risk of catastrophic global warming caused by fossil fuels and CO2. (See parts III.E&F for details).
Scientific details follow.
********
V. CONCLUSION
Thus, in our scientific opinion, the 5th National Climate Assessment 3rd Order Draft is fatally flawed science for the each of the following scientific reasons separately:
A. It omits unfavorable data that contradicts its conclusions on extreme weather.
B. It relies on models that do not work and thus would never be used in science.
C. It relies on IPCC findings, which are government opinions, not science.
D. It omits the extraordinary social benefits of CO2 and fossil fuels.
E. It omits the disastrous consequences of reducing fossil fuels and CO2 to “Net Zero.”
F. There Is No Risk of Catastrophic Global Warming Caused by Fossil Fuels and CO2
We urge USGCRP in the next draft of NCA5 to apply scientific method and
1. Include and analyze the omitted facts and analysis by Prof. Koonin and others that contradict NCA5 conclusions on extreme weather
2. Delete any reliance on and citation to IPCC government-controlled findings
3. Delete any reliance on and citation to CMIP models and any other models unless they have been proven to work
4. Delete any reliance on methods other than the scientific method, such as peer review and consensus
5. Include and analyze the enormous social benefits of CO2.
6. Include and analyze the enormous social benefits of fossil fuels.
END QUOTE
The Fifth National Climate Assessment (NCA5) was released on November 14, 2023. One of the organizations that signed off on NCA5 was the National Science Foundation. The Director of NSF has resigned. See link under Challenging the Orthodoxy.
*********************
Has Inertia, But Not Synchronized: Paul Homewood posted a video by UK energy consultant Kathryn Porter explaining inertia on the electrical grid. To summarize: the nine-minute video explained why large wind turbines are not synchronized with the grid. Despite their mass inertia, the frequent variation in wind speed does not allow them to synchronize with the grid, the power output varies too much. To compensate for this variation, the generated current is in direct current (DC), which is then converted to alternating current (AC) using inverters. The inverters do not have the heavy mass inertia of the wind turbines. The inverters are passive and only transmit power to the grid when the power matches grid requirements.
Porter states that the question is not “can you operate your grid with low inertia”, but “can you operate your grid with low inertia” when a fault occurs? Grid faults occur frequently and for a number of reasons a source becomes disconnected. Can you ride through the fault? Or will the fault cascade into other sources disconnecting?
Thanks to nuclear and hydropower providing almost all of France’s electricity, it was able to ride through the cascading faults, Iberia could not.
The video prompted a note to power engineer Jim O’Brien of the Irish Climate Science Forum (ICSF): is it correct in saying that the inertia of wind turbines cannot be made synchronous with the grid because wind power varies too much? O’Brien promptly responded [Boldface added]:
“Yes, wind turbines are necessarily asynchronous and generate at a variable AC frequency and power, depending on the wind. So clearly such energy cannot be directly fed onto the grid. To do so, it has to be electronically converted to direct current (DC) and re-converted into AC electrical power at the grid frequency (60Hz in the US, 50Hz in Europe). But in this process the rotating mass of the wind turbine, being isolated from the grid, provides no inertia for the grid.
On the contrary, all conventional generators (gas, oil, coal, hydro) have rotating turbines (specifically the machine rotors), which are synchronized and locked into the grid frequency, so providing mechanically-based stability in grid frequency through varying load demand scenarios, and so can also provide carry-over inertia (for up to 10 seconds or so) to cater for any faults and allow other conventional generators to take up the system load without interruption.
This lack of inertia in wind generation is indeed the hitherto poorly-recognized Achilles Heel of renewables, so clearly illustrated in the recent Iberian blackout. The same holds for solar generation, which even more obviously provides no system inertia.
Grid stability has ultimately to be provided by conventional generation (whether directly online or in back-up to renewables), and that’s why renewables alone can never provide grid stability, and as such the ‘energy transition’ dream is ultimately doomed to failure! The Report we commissioned for Ireland expands on that theme and is also true for all grids.”
TWTW’s incorrect understanding of the inertia with the grid provided by wind turbines is hereby corrected. For the report, “Ireland’s Renewable Energy Targets for 2030 – A Reality Check”, see link under Questioning European Green.
*********************
SEPP’S APRIL FOOLS AWARD – THE JACKSON
It is time for voting on the Annual SEPP’s April Fools Award – the Jackson. The grand prize is a large lump of coal. Last year, the deserving winner of the lump of coal was the US National Science Teaching Association. In 2023, the Association banned the CO2 Coalition from its meeting which the Coalition members paid for and were approved because the CO2 Coalition exhibit pointed out that CO2 is essential for photosynthesis which is the food source of all complex life on Earth.
There are many strong candidates for this dubious honor including leaders of US scientific agencies who signed off on questionable reports on climate change. Get your votes in by June 29 with the reason why you recommend that person for the award. Send your vote to Ken@Sepp.org. If you wish, you will be anonymous. The award will be announced at the 43rd annual meeting of the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness on July 5-6. The decision of the judges is final.
*********************
Number of the Week: 24,742 balancing actions Paul Homewood reviewed part of an article by Kathryn Porter in the June 7 Sunday Times (London) “How a day of havoc unfolded on Britain’s electricity grid: Power stations were told to ramp up and ramp down, while energy was exported under the sea, amid inaccurate forecasts for wind power. The system needs renewing.”
The National Energy System Operator (NESO) is responsible for balancing the grid. Homewood writes [Boldface added]:
“As a result, NESO had to perform heroics in attempting to balance the grid. Kathryn notes:
‘The grid required 24,742 balancing actions across that day, May 29 — thousands more than usual. In essence, these actions are orders from the control room to ramp power stations up or down to keep supply and demand finely balanced.’
The cause she says was primarily high wind-power output and poor forecasting from the system operator. She writes:
‘The level of discrepancy between what was forecast and what was generated was extremely difficult for the control room to manage that day and would typically trigger substantial re-dispatching (sending new orders to power stations to change their running plans).
This re-dispatching worked both ways, up and down. For instance, we [UK] were importing from France over the IFA2 undersea cable, while exporting over its sister link, IFA1 at the same time. Similarly, some CCGTs [combined cycle gas turbines] were told to reduce power, while others in other regions were asked to ramp up output.’”
The control room of NESO must have been as stressful as an understaffed control tower of busy airport in a heavy snowstorm. See link under Energy Issues — Non-US
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
Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels
By Multiple Authors, Bezdek, Idso, Legates, and Singer eds., Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, April 2019
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
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
https://wvanwijngaarden.info.yorku.ca/files/2020/12/WThermal-Radiationf.pdf?x45936
Radiation Transport in Clouds
By W.A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, Klimarealistene, Science of Climate Change, January 2025
Challenging the Orthodoxy
Physics Demonstrates That Increasing Greenhouse Gases Cannot Cause Dangerous Warming, Extreme Weather or Any Harm
By Richard Lindzen and William Happer, CO2 Coalition, June 13, 2025
The 5th National Climate Assessment 3rd Order Draft is Fatally Flawed Science Because it Omits Contradictory Data, Relies on Models that Do Not Work and IPCC Government Opinions, Omits the Extraordinary Social Benefits of Fossil fuels and CO2, and Omits the Disastrous Consequences of Reducing Fossil Fuels and CO2 Emissions to “Net Zero.”
By William Happer, Richard Lindzen, and Gregory Wrightstone, CO2 Coalition, Jan 27, 2023
Radiation and Matter
By Kevin Kilty, WUWT, June 7, 2025
Earth’s Energy Imbalance – Part III
By Kevin Kilty, WUWT, June 8, 2025
Top Ten Reasons to Shut Down NASA’s Climate Change Shop Known as GISS
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 12, 2025
Shutting down GISS isn’t anti-science. It’s pro-accountability. Even the Inspector General’s office agrees, when they identified questionable ‘$1.63 million of GISS’ expenditures since 2012’.
[SEPP Comment: NASA-GISS has produced deceitful “cherry-picked” studies claiming CO2 is the control knob of climate.]
Distinguishing Between Correlation and Causation is Critical in Law, Science, and Medicine
By Henry Miller and Drew Kershen, ACSH, June 10, 2025
https://www.acsh.org/news/2024/08/12/distinguishing-between-correlation-and-causation-critical-law-science-and-medicine-17374
[SEPP Comment: The graph showing the correlation of autism with Organic Food Sales is striking. Many articles, such as those claimed CO2 is linked to X, are meaningless.]
Defending the Orthodoxy
‘Ticking time bomb’: Ocean acidity crosses vital threshold, study finds
By Saul Elbein, The Hill, June 9, 2025
https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/5340239-ocean-acidity-study-climate-change-carbon
Link to paper: Ocean Acidification: Another Planetary Boundary Crossed
By Helen S. Findlay, et al., Global Change Biology, June 9, 2025
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.70238
From the introduction of the paper: First proposed in 2009 (Rockström et al. 2009), the planetary boundaries assessment defines nine large scale Earth-system processes and associated boundaries that, if crossed, could generate unacceptable environmental change. These nine processes are: climate change, rate of biodiversity loss (terrestrial and marine), interference with the nitrogen and phosphorus cycles, stratospheric ozone depletion, ocean acidification, global freshwater use, change in land use, chemical pollution and atmospheric aerosol loading. [Boldface added.]
Funding: This work was supported by European Space Agency, AO/1-10757/21/I-DT. Natural Environment Research Council, NE/X006271/1. NOAA’s Global Ocean Monitoring and Observing and Ocean Acidification Programs,
[SEPP Comment: Note that those discussing the artificial boundary of ocean acidification make no mention whatsoever of the pH, the quantity that scientists use to describe whether water is basic (pH greater than 7), neutral (pH = 7) or acidic (pH less than 7). Ocean pH is over 8.0 everywhere, except in a highly isolated circumstances such as over volcanic vents.]
Questioning the Orthodoxy
The Hill Pushes Discredited Ocean Acidity Scares
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, June 10, 2025
[SEPP Comment: See links under Defending the Orthodoxy above.]
The Great Climate Science Swindle Goes On
By Chris Morrison, The Daily Sceptic, June 12, 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world – that CO2, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.
Harvard [MIT] Emeritus Professor Richard Lindzen
Clean green?
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
It is not fair to judge a movement by its most unreasonable advocates… at least provided that others distance themselves from the various excesses. But if they don’t, in the face of news-like objects such as “Scientists warn California major cities could disappear by 2050”, then it is fair to say that they either lack the brains to see why it’s folly, the spines to say so, the noses to detect a foul odor coming from their own camp, or all of the above.
My Hypothesis Re-Emerges
By Willis Eschenbach, WUWT, June 13, 2025
My first post for WUWT was The Thermostat Hypothesis. A version of it was later published as a journal article named “The Thunderstorm Thermostat Hypothesis: How Clouds And Thunderstorms Control The Earth’s Temperature.”
Climate Policies to What End?
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, Jan 12, 2025
Link to: Who Is Climate Policy For? Not workers.
By Oren Cass, Commonplace, June 10, 2025
Who would have guessed it? “Tech sector emissions, energy use grow with rise of AI”
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 9, 2025
Energy & Environmental Review: June 9, 2025
By John Droz, Jr., Master Resource, June 9, 2025
Social Benefits of Carbon Dioxide
The effect of additional CO2 on the Dragon’s Blood tree of Yemen
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
From the CO2Science archive:
Problems in the Orthodoxy
India Electricity Trends
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, June 13, 2025
It looks like India’s transition to renewable energy has been put on ice for another year!
Seeking a Common Ground
Climate Adaptation vs. Mitigation Fail
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, June 12, 2025
In the post-Net Zero CO2 world (yes, here we are), the new argument is every-little-bit counts “to avoid the worst effects of climate change.” Forget precision or cost/benefit analysis; it is a qualitative ‘deep ecology’ argument.
Who Will Profit From Africa’s Trillions in Mineral Wealth?
By Duggan Flanakin, Real Clear Energy, June 10, 2025
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2025/06/10/who_will_profit_from_africas_trillions_in_mineral_wealth_1115629.html
Many African states are seeking to leverage their resources to ensure that their nations are involved not just with extraction but with processing and even manufacturing. But government planning that conflicts with corporate strategies can backfire. Grandiose job creation and industrialization “five-year plans” often do not pass the smell test for corruption.
Science, Policy, and Evidence
Policy Brief: Affordable, Reliable, and Clean
By Staff, The Heartland Institute, Accessed June 12, 2025
Models v. Observations
The Madness in its Method
By Greg Chapman, Quadrant, June 10, 2025
A recent paper, Green and Soon, has made an attempt to quantify the physical errors in climate models by benchmarking them against a naïve model. Their naïve model is purely statistical and contains no physical equations attempting to model CO2 or other factors that might affect climate. During the tuning period, it just takes the median value of the past temperatures and uses that for the forecast the following year. The difference between the naïve model and actual temperatures in the forecast period was then determined.
The errors are so great in the IPCC models, that any signal that anthropogenic warming is significantly larger than natural warming will be lost in the noise. It’s like trying to determine whether an Olympic sprinter has broken a record by relying on a sundial on a cloudy day.
Measurement Issues — Surface
Shock New Evidence Shows Unnatural 60-Second Heat Spikes Drive Many UK Met Office Temperature ‘Records’
By Chris Morrison, The Daily Sceptic, June 9, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Problems with changing instruments without ensuring they measure the same thing the same way over the same time period.]
Changing Weather
#LookItUp: Changes in unusually hot days in the U.S.
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
Link to: Climate Change Indicators: High and Low Temperatures
By Staff, EPA, Accessed June 11, 2025
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-high-and-low-temperatures
[SEPP Comment: From the website: “Nationwide, unusually hot summer days (highs) have become more common over the last few decades. The occurrence of unusually hot summer nights (lows) has increased at an even faster rate. This trend indicates less “cooling off” at night.”]
Recent Devastating Floods Failed to Convince Climate Skeptic Aussie Farmers
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, June 8, 2025
Changing Climate
Another Study Indicates China Was 7°C Warmer Than Today Throughout Much Of The Holocene
By Kenneth Richard, No Tricks Zone, June 12, 2025
Link to one paper: BrGDGT-based seasonal paleotemperature reconstruction for the last 15 000 years from a shallow lake on the eastern Tibetan Plateau
By Xiaohuan Hou, et al., Climate of the Past, Feb 24, 2024
https://cp.copernicus.org/articles/20/335/2024
Link to second paper: Holocene sea‐level changes and the influence of storms on beach ridge formation in the Lower Gulf of Thailand
By Smith Leknettip, et al., Sedimentology, April 2025
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391154596_Holocene_sea-level_changes_and_the_influence_of_storms_on_beach_ridge_formation_in_the_Lower_Gulf_of_Thailand
From the abstract of the Tibetan Plateau (TP) paper: Here, we present an ice-free-season temperature record for the past 15 kyr from a shallow, freshwater lake on the eastern TP, based on brGDGTs (branched glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraethers). This record shows that the Holocene Thermal Maximum lags the pollen-based July temperature recorded in the same sediment core. We conclude that the mismatch between the brGDGT-based and pollen-based temperatures is primarily the result of seasonal variations in solar irradiance. The overall pattern of temperature changes is supported by other summer temperature records, and the Younger Dryas cold event and the Bølling–Allerød warm period are also detected.
Changing Cryosphere – Land / Sea Ice
Ice, damned ice and statistics
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
But along the way the reporter presented a chart headlined “Arctic sea ice melting 12% per decade” and said the Arctic continent [sic] is warming 3.5 times faster than the global average, which will “push up sea levels around Britain’s coastline.” Calling the Arctic a continent when it’s an ocean is like a clock striking 13, calling into question all that has gone before and all that comes after, not least in this case because the ice is already floating so if it melts it won’t change sea levels.
The Conversation’s Greenland Glacier Retreat Hype Isn’t Supported by History or Data
By Anthony Watts, Climate Realism, June 9, 2025
We don’t need no stinkin’ Antarctic ice
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
Link to article: Antarctic Ice Growth Surprises Climate Experts
By Jeff Blaumberg, MSN.com, Accessed June 11, 2025
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/antarctic-ice-growth-surprises-climate-experts/ss-AA1G06TA
From Robson: As the piece says, in its section on “Implications for Global Sea Levels”:
“This complex balancing act makes predicting future sea-level changes more difficult. The current growth in Antarctic ice, therefore, should not be interpreted as a sign that climate risks have diminished.”
Got that? Just because the process they insist is happening went into full reverse and they don’t know why is no reason not to claim it isn’t happening. And the fact that they’re now more confused about what’s going on doesn’t mean they’re any less certain about what’s going on. Because climate.
The herd of independent minds milled about like Emperor Penguins in Antarctic midwinter, in a tight circle huddled together for mutual warmth and support.
Lowering Standards
Defund The National Academy of Sciences!
By Francis Menton, Manhattan Contrarian, June 7, 2025
https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2025-6-7-defund-the-nas
Link to article: National Academies, staggering from Trump cuts, on brink of dramatic downsizing
Plan for slashed units and mission to be presented at governor’s meeting next week
By Meredith Wadman, AAAS Science, June 2, 2025
https://www.science.org/content/article/national-academies-staggering-trump-cuts-brink-dramatic-downsizing
From AAAS article: Last Saturday, the morning after a news article announced major job losses coming at the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt wrote an apologetic memo to employees. [Boldface added]
From Menton: And here’s something else from the June 2 Science piece:
“The presidents of those three honorific societies that together with NRC comprise NASEM—McNutt, John Anderson, and Victor Dzau—each earned more than $1 million in 2023. . . . At a time when hundreds of jobs are at risk, “It is galling that the leadership of the institution makes that kind of money,” says one senior program officer with a decade of experience at the institution.”
I can’t think of any reason why any organization headed by Ms. McNutt should get a dime of taxpayer money. Can you?
[SEPP Comment: Marcia McNutt made her reputation by smearing major scientists who insisted on the scientific method, including Fredrick Seitz who was a distinguished president of the National Academy of Sciences for ten years. With McNutt as president, the academy has no credibility.]
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Yellow (Green) Journalism?
Politico says, ‘We’ve lost the culture war on climate’ (they mean “we lost the Science War”)
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, June 13, 2025
https://joannenova.com.au/2025/06/politico-say-weve-lost-the-culture-war-on-climate-they-mean-we-lost-the-science-war
Teach the children. The big lies of the Blob Media are what they don’t say.
When the Narrative Dies: Climate.gov and the Quiet Collapse of Climate Alarmism
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, June 11, 2025
Guardian: “Choose your news” Media is Contributing to Climate Inaction
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, June 13, 2025
Mainstream Media Ignores Development History in Nigeria to Blame Climate Change for Deadly Flooding
By Linnea Lueken, Climate Realism, June 11, 2025
The Culture War on Climate Is Over—And the Left Lost It the Day They Started Lying About Everything
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, June 12, 2025
Communicating Better to the Public – Go Personal.
Tesla vie
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
We doubt it. But only because we’re skeptical of the efficiency and focus of giant bureaucracies, especially while praising themselves. Scientific American just assumes that efforts to reduce duplication are bad. Bad in intention, bad in design, bad in execution. (Oh, and after writing the above we Googled and Wikipedia says the EPA currently has 14,592 employees. Are none of them unneeded, wrongly assigned or inept?)
Communicating Better to the Public – Use Propaganda
“Climate dread is everywhere”
By Tony Heller, His Blog, June 6, 2025
BBC Ignore Global Greening
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, June 7, 2025
Surprise, surprise!
CNN’s Climate Photo Essay Reflects Poor Policies and Poverty, Not Climate Change
By Anthony Watts, Climate Realism, June 12, 2025
Communicating Better to the Public – Protest
Empty Seats and Hurricane Histrionics
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, June 10, 2025
Irony: German Town Cancels Climate Heat & Drought Event – Due To Cool, Wet Weather!
By P Gosselin , No Tricks Zone, June 7, 2025
Expanding the Orthodoxy
Leaders warn race for minerals could turn seabed into ‘wild west’
By Nick Perry, et al., Nice, France (AFP) June 9, 2025
https://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Leaders_warn_race_for_minerals_could_turn_seabed_into_wild_west_999.html
Of particular concern is his [Trump’s] move to sidestep the International Seabed Authority (ISA) and issue permits directly to companies wanting to extract nickel and other metals from waters beyond US jurisdiction.
[SEPP Comment: According to its website: “The International Seabed Authority (ISA) is an autonomous international organization established under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the 1994 Agreement relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1994 Agreement).” The US never signed the convention due to concerns about seabed mining.] https://www.isa.org.jm/about-isa/
Questioning European Green
Ireland’s Renewable Energy Targets for 2030 – A Reality Check
By Douglas Pollock, Irish Climate Science Forum, March 2025
Germany’s Renewable Energy Overcapacity Is Pushing The Power Grid To The Limit
By Frank Bosse, Via P Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, June 10, 2025
The main thing big quantity, known as “ton ideology” in planned economies like in former East Germany. The main thing was to generate a lot of kWh, with little thought given to the sense and nonsense of it all.
Questioning Green Elsewhere
Oh where, oh where is the Energy Transition?
By David Middleton, WUWT, June 13, 2025
Net Zero Now Elephant in Corporate World
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, June 11, 2025
Link to: Corporate World Goes Quiet on Climate Pledges
By Irina Slav, Oil Price.com, June 9, 2025
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Corporate-World-Goes-Quiet-on-Climate-Pledges.html
Funding Issues
Looks like China uses a small Green “climate” donations to help create $75b in economic damage
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, June 14, 2025
https://joannenova.com.au/2025/06/looks-like-china-uses-a-small-green-climate-donations-to-help-create-75b-in-economic-damage
Link to article: China-funded group behind New York’s $75B climate law sparks national security alarms
By Willow Tohi, Newstarget, June 3, 2025
https://www.newstarget.com/2025-06-03-china-funded-group-sparks-national-security-alarms.html
Link to second article: Nonprofit Funded By Chinese Gov’t-Linked Entities Backs Blue State’s ‘Unconstitutional’ Climate Law
By Audrey Streb, Daily Caller, May 31, 2025
https://dailycaller.com/2025/05/31/chinese-govt-linked-nonprofit-backs-unconstitutional-blue-state-climate-shakedown-law
From Daily Caller article: A nonprofit organization bankrolled by numerous Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-linked entities advocated for a New York law that authorizes the state to charge energy companies billions for their roles in climate change.
The Chinese-American Planning Council (CPC) is a New York nonprofit that has received over $1.4 million in taxpayer funds since 2022, in addition to significant funding from Chinese government-linked sources in recent years, as the Daily Caller News Foundation previously reported.
[SEPP Comment: The unaudited financial statement for the CPC in the year ending June 30, 2024, shows Government Grants and Contracts of $46,814,241 of a total support of $64,947,430.]
Litigation Issues
California, coalition of states sue Trump over move to revoke EV mandate
By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, June 12, 2025
https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/5347074-california-trump-ev-mandate-newsom
[California Attorney General Rob] Bonta submitted the complaint in the Northern District of California together with his colleagues in Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
[SEPP Comment: A list of states where the state legislators are incapable of independent thinking?]
Wacky New Climate Lawsuit: Wrongful Death from Heat Wave
By Ron Clutz, His Blog, June 13, 2025
Link to: Climate Activists Sue Oil Industry for Wrongful Death
By David Zaruk, Real Clear Science, June 11, 2025
https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2025/06/11/climate_activists_sue_oil_industry_for_wrongful_death_1115736.html
The Great Climate Murder
By Kip Hansen, WUWT, June 13, 2025
See links immediately above.
EPA and other Regulators on the March
EPA Weakening Rules on Power Plant Emissions in Boost for Fossil Fuels
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, June 11, 2025
https://www.powermag.com/epa-weakening-rules-on-power-plant-emissions-in-boost-for-fossil-fuels/?utm_source=omeda&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pwrnews+eletter&oly_enc_id=7809H6412578J0B
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced sweeping changes to regulations on the release of greenhouse gases (GHG) and other pollutants from coal- and natural gas-fired power plants, revoking federal limits on emissions and weakening rules established under the Biden administration that sought to combat climate change.
[SEPP Comment: Power Mag believes CO2 is a pollutant?]
Energy Issues – Non-US
Inertia explained
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, June 13, 2025
Layman’s guide to system inertia from Kathryn Porter
Day Of Havoc For Britain’s Grid
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, June 12, 2025
Put simply, we are not only highly dependent on gas power and interconnectors to provide electricity when renewables fall short, we also need them to export surplus power and balance the grid minute to minute.
UK set for ‘involuntary BLACKOUTS’
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, June 11, 2025
Brilliant analysis from Clive Moffatt: Video
Market Realities Continue to Mug Faddish ‘Energy Transitions’
By Vijay Jayaraj, CO2 Coalition, June 11, 2025
Utilities, Grid Operators Grapple with Adding Renewable Energy
By Darrell Proctor, Power Mag, June 11, 2025
https://www.powermag.com/utilities-grid-operators-grapple-with-adding-renewable-energy/?utm_source=omeda&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pwrnews+eletter&oly_enc_id=7809H6412578J0B
Integrating renewable energy resources such as solar and wind into the electric power grid involves addressing challenges, starting with the intermittent nature of renewables. POWER has often highlighted the issues, noting in part a lack of physical grid capacity to accommodate supply and demand in locations with the best resources. Another issue is that as the share of renewable energy increases, the lack of real-time network management at low voltages can bring network instability, which impacts reliability. Other problems include voltage instabilities, frequency inconsistency, and harmonic distortion of the power system.
Energy Issues — US
Forget “renewable energy” — new AI data centers are building their own gas plants in Texas
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, June 7, 2025
https://joannenova.com.au/2025/06/forget-renewable-energy-new-ai-data-centers-are-building-their-own-gas-plants-in-texas
Link to article: What solar? What wind? Texas data centers build their own gas power plants
Data center operators are turning away from the grid to build their own power plants.
By Dylan Baddour and Arcelia Martin, Inside Climate News, June 5, 2025
https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/06/what-solar-what-wind-texas-data-centers-build-their-own-gas-power-plants
From article: The plant would be big enough to power a major city, with 1,200 megawatts of planned generation capacity fueled by West Texas shale gas. It will only supply the new data center, and possibly other large data centers recently proposed, down the road.
Making the Power Grid Great Again
By Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Real Clear Energy, June 12, 2025
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2025/06/12/making_the_power_grid_great_again_1116256.html
Yesterday, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the proposed repeal of the Biden-era’s Clean Power Plan 2.0, which ruled that coal-fired and many new natural gas power plants must capture and store over 90% of their carbon emissions by the 2030s—or shut down by 2040. It’s a costly mandate, resting on shaky legal and technical foundations.
The dirty secret, which Mr. Zeldin forced into the open, is that the Biden plan would not have helped the climate. The greenhouse gases emitted by the power sector do not significantly affect human health, and moving energy intensive manufacturing overseas where it is made with coal-fired power using older technology would have raised emissions, not lowered them.
We Need a Section 230 for Energy Production
By Yael Ossowski, Townhall.com. Jun 11, 2025
https://townhall.com/columnists/yael-ossowski/2025/06/11/we-need-a-section-230-for-energy-production-n2658569
The Permitting War Won’t Be Won By Judges Alone
By Juan Londono, Real Clear Energy, June 10, 2025
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2025/06/10/the_permitting_war_wont_be_won_by_judges_alone_1115616.html
Link to study: Understanding NEPA Litigation
A Systematic Review of Recent NEPA-Related Appellate Court Cases
By Nikki Chiappa, et al., Breakthrough Institute, July 11, 2024
https://thebreakthrough.org/issues/energy/understanding-nepa-litigation
From study: On average, 4.2 years elapsed between publication of an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment and conclusion of the corresponding legal challenge at the appellate level. Of these appealed cases, 84% were closed less than six years after the contested permit was published, and 39% were closed in less than three.
A Critical Alliance: How Mexico Can Strengthen the U.S. Metals Supply Chain
By Duncan Wood, Real Clear Energy, June 10, 2025
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2025/06/10/a_critical_alliance_how_mexico_can_strengthen_the_us_metals_supply_chain_1115589.html
CBRS Is Essential for the Oil and Gas Industry
By Dean Bubley, Real Clear Energy, June 11, 2025
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2025/06/11/cbrs_is_essential_for_the_oil_and_gas_industry_1115705.html
As part of the current Congressional budget reconciliation process, policymakers are hoping to raise significant revenues from spectrum auctions for mobile networks. One suggested approach is to change the current Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS) “innovation band” (between 3.55-3.7GHz) from a tiered “dynamic sharing” model to more conventional, high-power exclusive licenses.
Energy Winners Should Be Chosen By Consumers, Not Government
By Gary Abernathy, WUWT, June 12, 2025
We Need a ‘Kill Switch’ on Foreign Powers Tampering With Our Electric Grid
By Gary Abernathy, WUWT, June 10, 2025
Washington’s Control of Energy
Biden’s Bombshell Burial Ground
By Staff, Government Accountability & Oversight, June 10, 2025
Link to article: Biden’s EPA hid comments from Dept. of Energy that undermined key part of EPA power plant rule
The Clean Power Plan 2.0 was supported by a finding that carbon capture technology had been “adequately demonstrated.” The EPA sought and got comments from the DOE, which disputed that “demonstration.” Somehow those comments never made it into the administrative record.
By Kevin Killough, Just the News, June 8, 2025 [H/t Climate Depot]
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/biden-admin-epa-may-have-buried-comments-undermining-key-part-its-power
DOJ: Trump can abolish protected monuments set aside by past presidents
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, June 11, 2025
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5344219-trump-abolish-national-monuments-jdopinion
Link to legal opinion: Revocation of Prior Monument Designations
By Lanora Pettit, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, May 27, 2025
https://www.justice.gov/olc/media/1403101/dl?utm_source=Master+Press+List+2.0&utm_campaign=1f59321cdd-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2025_06_10_08_24&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-1f59321cdd-84306457
[SEPP Comment: What a president can give, can a president take away? Declarations of million-acre monuments are absurd. These are often a guise to prohibit energy development.]
Trump pulls out of Pacific Northwest salmon restoration agreement
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, June 13, 2025
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5349400-trump-reverses-biden-salmon-agreement
“The negative impacts from these reckless acts, if completed, would be devastating for the region, and there would be no viable approach to replace the low-cost, baseload energy supplied; the critical shipping channels lost; the vital water supply for local farmers reduced; or the recreational opportunities that would no longer be possible as a result of these acts,” he said in the memo.
Trump proposes axing all climate rules for power plants
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, June 11, 2025
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5344888-trump-proposes-axing-bidens-climate-rule-for-power-plants
Back to Energy Dominance? Trump BLM Reversals Signal New Era on Public Lands
By Adair Teuton, Real Clear Energy, June 11, 2025
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2025/06/11/back_to_energy_dominance_trump_blm_reversals_signal_new_era_on_public_lands_1115718.html
Return of King Coal?
Not dying: Global approvals of coal plants back up to 2015 high
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, June 12, 2025
https://joannenova.com.au/2025/06/not-dying-global-approvals-of-coal-plants-back-up-to-2015-high
[SEPP Comment: As advanced economies close them, China and India add them.]
Coal Is the New Bridge Fuel
By Bernard L. Weinstein, WUWT, June 8, 2025
Nuclear Energy and Fears
Will Small Modular Reactors Finally Get Nuclear Right?
By Doctor Y, ACSH, June 6, 202 5
https://www.acsh.org/news/2025/06/06/will-small-modular-reactors-finally-get-nuclear-right-49539
I’m an easy convert to the idea of SMRs – I spent four years living, eating, working, and sleeping less than 200 feet from an SMR; it was powering the submarine where I spent those years. Before that, I’d spent another year learning the care and feeding of a different SMR and two years teaching my sailor students to do the same.
Despite my experience in the Navy, I’ve been more or less agnostic about nuclear energy, largely because of all the factors that conspire to make each plant unique, complex, slow to license and build, and expensive.
Govt To Invest £14.2 Bn In Sizewell C
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, June 10, 2025
Kathryn Porter comments:
“It’s hard to imagine a “golden age” of nuclear power with EDF’s outdated and troubled reactor design. EDF in France is already looking to the next generation – building another of these older versions is a retrograde step. It’s also highly unlikely that Sizewell C would be built faster than Hinkley given the lengthening of supply chains.”
Rolls-Royce Get Go Ahead For SMRs
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, June 10, 2025
The tortoise has advanced a few more inches!
Talen, Amazon Launch $18B Nuclear PPA—A Grid-Connected IPP Model for the Data Center Era
By Sonal Patel, Power Mag, Jan 12, 2025
https://www.powermag.com/talen-amazon-launch-18b-nuclear-ppa-a-grid-connected-ipp-model-for-the-data-center-era/?utm_source=omeda&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pwrnews+eletter&oly_enc_id=7809H6412578J0B
Under the new arrangement, Talen will serve as AWS’s licensed retail electricity provider in Pennsylvania, enabling it to source power from the grid and contract directly with AWS. PPL Electric Utilities will deliver the power across the grid, while generation from the two-unit, 2.5-GW Susquehanna nuclear plant will be injected into PJM Interconnection
[SEPP Comment: Will the power be delivered to the grid when the grid needs it?]
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Solar and Wind
DOT asked to terminate illegal floating wind grant
By David Wojick, CFACT, June 10, 2025
https://www.cfact.org/2025/06/10/dot-asked-to-terminate-illegal-floating-wind-grant
The undersigned organizations call for the return to the U.S. Department of Transportation any unspent disbursed INFRA funds awarded to the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District in the amount of $426,719,810 on January 23, 2024, and to terminate the awarded grant as a misappropriation of federal funds.
Skipping the Rules: Offshore Wind’s Legal Issue
By Lisa Linowes, Master Resource, June 11, 2025
With offshore wind, a lethal tort issue lurks beneath the waves: Is it enough to pay off harmed ocean users after the fact, or does the law demand the government prevent harm in the first place? Under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), a clear answer is being dangerously overlooked.
Link to Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
[The Act of August 7, 1953, Chapter 345, as Amended]
[As Amended Through P.L. 116–283, Enacted January 1, 2021]
Sunnova Declares Bankruptcy
By Robert Bradley Jr., Master Resource, June 10, 2025
Yesterday, Sunnova International declared bankruptcy, or in their Enronish PR world, “Strategic Action to Facilitate Value-Maximizing Sale Process.”
The company never had a quarterly profit, existing on political fumes and gullible “green” customers.
Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles
Trump signs measure to overturn California’s EV mandate
By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, June 12, 2025
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5346277-trump-california-ev-mandate-cra
The Clean Air Act allows California to set stricter-than-federal standards for vehicular pollution, with the approval of the Environmental Protection Agency, due to its historic smog problems. In 2022, the state said it would ban new sales of gas-powered cars by 2035.
[SEPP Comment: The Clean Air Act with the California waiver was passed in 1970. Smog is created from photochemical reactions involving nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the presence of sunlight. With catalytic converters and fuel injection systems, modern gas-powered cares produce small amounts of such chemicals.]
Cargo Ship With Electric Vehicles Burning is Abandoned in Pacific Ocean
Salvage vessels are on their way.
By Leslie Eastman, Legal Insurrection, June 11, 2025
https://legalinsurrection.com/2025/06/cargo-ship-with-electric-vehicles-burning-is-abandoned-in-pacific-ocean
Chemistry does not change, no matter how much the narratives are manipulated. Lithium battery fires will remain a significant fire response challenge unless their inherent chemistry changes.
On a bad day an EV can do $100 million dollars’ worth of damage
By Jo Nova, Her Blog, June 11, 2025
https://joannenova.com.au/2025/06/one-car-battery-may-have-set-off-a-100-million-fire-another-burning-ship-adrift
A week after fire broke out on the Morning Midas, the salvage crew have finally reached the boat. The bulk car carrier was abandoned last Tuesday and has been adrift 300 miles south of Alaska. The ship only had 68 full EVs on board, with 681 hybrid cars, among a total load of 3,000 cars. But apparently that was quite enough to turn it into a 47,000 ton slow burning barbecue.
The 46,800-ton ship itself was built in 2006 and is worth about $14 million. With 3,000 new cars at $30,000 each that would be a loss of $90 million. If the ship and cargo is lost, as happened to the Felicity Ace in 2022, the total loss could be around $100 million.
The uglier side of electric vehicles: disposing of the EV batteries
By Ronald Stein, America Outloud News, June 9, 2025
https://www.americaoutloud.news/the-uglier-side-of-electric-vehicles-disposing-of-the-ev-batteries
Carbon Schemes
Carbon Capture Comes Crashing Down (Again): A Comedy in Subsidies
By Charles Rotter, WUWT, June 11, 2025
California Dreaming
Sunblock
How a big, beautiful bill crushes California.
By Doomberg, Its Blog, June 14, 2025
https://newsletter.doomberg.com/p/sunblock
To understand the scope of the issue, it is important to visualize the transformation California’s state leaders have embarked on. From 2009 to 2023, the Golden State produced 39.8 terawatt-hours (TWh) less electricity from nuclear, natural gas, and coal combined—three baseload sources that offer strong predictability to grid operators. Over the same period, this loss was barely offset by solar installations, which generated 40.5 TWh more in 2023 than in 2009. In essence, California transformed its grid into a system that is nearly impossible to manage cost-effectively, a big reason power bills are skyrocketing in the state.
The Economics of the Delta Tunnel
By Edward Ring, What’s Current, Accessed June 11, 2025
https://mailchi.mp/calpolicycenter/whats-current-issue-7860401?e=cd9fa89d1e
Health, Energy, and Climate
California scientists sound alarm on role of pesticides in raising resistance to antifungal drugs
By Sharon Udasin, The Hill, June 9, 2025
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5341036-fungicides-agriculture-risk-infections
Link to commentary: Addressing Antifungal Drug Resistance — A “One Health–One World” Challenge
By Geroge Thompson, MD, and Angel Desai, MD, The New England Journal of Medicine, June 7, 2025
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2416548
Abstract: Use of some antifungal pesticides may select for resistant fungi in the environment, which can then endanger human health. Coordinated regulatory processes in this area are important.
[SEPP Comment: How low can you go?]
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE
But if it’s cheaper…
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
Mr. Banker Person has other ideas. And he shows exceptional skill at sales jargon, including this classic gooblahoy:
“‘The problem is investors are very segmented,’ Variankaval said. ‘Different investor groups have different risk-reward preferences, and for the most part a lot of the transition theme falls in the gap between various pockets of capital,’ in what’s known as ‘the missing middle.’”
Because it comes down to this: This is a plan very likely to fail extremely expensively, and in the best-case scenario it works extremely expensively, so it’s a bargain except for not being one even if you’re absurdly optimistic.
Delusional Business Council of Australia Thinks AI can be Powered by Renewables
By Eric Worrall, WUWT, June 7, 2025
[SEPP Comment: Unreal.]
Sarah Smout’s Silly Arctic Claims
By Paul Homewood, Not a Lot of People Know That, June 8, 2025
The BBC has totally lost the plot now!
“The sound of Arctic wind howling through the strings of Sarah Smout’s carbon fiber cello on the pack ice connected to the North Pole is like nothing she has heard before.
Smout is using music, words and sound recordings to make her debut album, which will focus on climate change in the Arctic.
‘Music is a brilliant way to bring people together, speak to their hearts and minds and inspire them to make decisions themselves to bring about positive change,” said Smout.
We are witness to the climate changing all around us, but none so dramatic and fast as in the Arctic.’”
Failing which, more flavorful Brussels sprouts
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
Alarmists, being creative and independent thinkers, are now declaring CO2 aka plant food to be the latest big threat to plants. Including SciTechDaily with “Increasing Levels of CO2 Results in Less Nutritious Crops”. Or Hopkins Bloomberg Public Health, for instance:
“Less Nutritious Crops: Another Result of Rising CO2/ Rising carbon levels are eroding nutritional values of staple crops, threatening millions with hidden hunger.”
Hidden hunger? What’s that, the kind where you feel full but are secretly empty?
Well, no. Surely if they’re qualified to write on it they’ve heard of “Liebig’s Law of the Minimum” which states that what determines plant growth is not the total availability of desirable things but the scarcest resource. Which means that you could have more CO2 and less healthy, nutritious or indeed flavorful plants if there was a critical shortage of something else. For instance, water.
GROAN! [expletive deleted]
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 8, 2025
Link to paper: Storylines of Unprecedented Extremes in the Southeast United States
By Gibbon Innocent Tirivanhu Masukwedza, et al., Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Mar 11, 2025
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/106/3/BAMS-D-23-0297.1.xml
The abstract begins with: Disaster planning based on historical events is like driving forward while only looking in the rearview mirror. To expand our field of view, we use a large ensemble of weather simulations to characterize the current risk of extreme weather events in case study locations in the southeastern United States.
[SEPP Comment: Weather models are corrected constantly and cannot be relied upon for predictions beyond ten days, if that long.]
DOUBLE GROAN: Another “new normal” nonsense paper
By Anthony Watts, WUWT, June 9, 2025
Link to paper: Global Mapping of Concurrent Hazards and Impacts Associated With Climate Extremes Under Climate Change
By Gabriele Messori, et al., Earth’s Future, June 4, 2025
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025EF006325
Sex for solar? Examining patterns of public and private sector corruption within the booming California solar energy market
By Benjamin K. Sovacool, et al., Energy Strategy Reviews, May 2025 [H/t Bernie Kepshire]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211467X25000902?via%3Dihub
Tidbits
By John Robson, Climate Discussion Nexus, June 11, 2025
From the “works better if you have some first” department, Ontario liquor stores that have purged American bourbon, to punish teetotaling U.S. president Donald Trump for existing or something, do have space on their shelves for “Carbon Neutral Certified Rum” from Nicaragua. Buy it and you get 80 proof… but we suspect no other kind.
ARTICLES
1. Meet Trump’s Deregulators
Burgum, Wright and Zeldin are set on liberating Alaska and the whole economy.
By Kimberley A. Strassel, WSJ, June 5, 2025
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/meet-trumps-deregulators-energy-oil-gas-alaska-6986c82c?mod=opinion_recentauth_pos3&mod=opinion_recentauth_pos_3
TWTW Summary: After introducing Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin as the energy trio the article concludes with:
“Bill Armstrong, CEO of Armstrong Oil & Gas, laid out the cost of senseless regulation at a Dunleavy-hosted energy conference this week attended by the energy trio. He noted that the North Slope’s massive Pikka field—estimated at 3 billion barrels—was discovered in 2013. It sits next to established infrastructure and a pipeline but has yet to produce a barrel. Exxon in 2015 discovered Guyana’s Liza field—100 miles offshore, 7,000 feet deep—and is already producing 600,000 barrels a day there. That, Mr. Armstrong says, is how ‘a Third World country is kicking 100% of America’s ass.’
The Trump energy team also vowed support for a ‘twin’ liquefied natural gas pipeline, which would fuel exports to foreign allies. In Prudhoe Bay alone, workers produce more than 8 billion cubic feet of gas a day—about what Germany consumes daily—but must reinject it given lack of gas transport. The Trump team also promised to expedite energy leases, to provide roads to key sites like the Ambler mining district, to afford tribal projects more autonomy, and to expand state ‘primacy’ rights to oversee federal regulations in their area.
The trio’s laser goal is to unleash American entrepreneurialism. That message was warmly embraced by Alaskans, including the indigenous populations most harmed by federal rules. At a town hall on the North Slope, the trio received rousing applause after a resident of Kaktovik (in ANWR) thanked the Trump team for making ‘sure that our ancestral homelands weren’t going to be stolen.’
Mr. Trump deregulated in his first term, but like much in this second term, the effort this time is bolder, faster. That’s been enabled by the newly formed National Energy Dominance Council, which Messrs. Zeldin, Wright and Burgum have embraced to work as a team, turbo-charging the process.
Whereas it normally takes an agency years to repeal a few rules, the Energy Department had taken 47 deregulatory actions by mid-May, axing rules governing appliances, motors and heating and power equipment—saving consumers and business $11 billion. Mr. Zeldin by March was already re-evaluating Biden regulations on oil and gas, vehicles and power plants. Mr. Burgum is making full use of Mr. Trump’s national ‘energy emergency’ declaration to speed permits in projects across resource fields. And the team is working closely with congressional Republicans to include complementary provisions in the tax bill.
Mr. Biden is estimated to have added more than $2 trillion in regulatory burdens to the economy over his four years. While deregulation is harder for Americans to identify and appreciate than a tax cut, the Trump deregulation effort is going to be as central to any economic revival. Inside Alaska, and out.”
****************
2. How Hydrogen, the Fuel of the Future, Got Bogged Down in the Bayou
Air Products bet big on the element, but sentiment has soured, costs are snowballing and customers remain elusive
By Ed Ballard, WSJ, June 7, 2025
https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/how-hydrogen-the-fuel-of-the-future-got-bogged-down-in-the-bayou-36131eb6?mod=business_feat5_energy-oil_pos1
TWTW Summary: The article begins with:
“The chief executive of Air Products & Chemicals visited the Louisiana governor’s mansion in 2021 to unveil the industrial-gases supplier’s biggest-ever investment: a $4.5 billion facility that would make the fuel of the future by the Mississippi River.
Seifi Ghasemi’s plan was to produce hydrogen from natural gas, capture the carbon dioxide, pipe it through wildlife-rich wetland and sequester it below picturesque Lake Maurepas.
Ghasemi had a grand vision. Beyond its regular uses in oil refining and ammonia for fertilizers, hydrogen would power buses, trucks, trains, ships, planes and steel mills after the plant opened in 2026, he predicted.
Nearly five years after his visit, the project’s price tag has swelled to $8 billion, the construction timeline has slipped, and the company is still seeking customers. Ghasemi has been ousted as CEO, and his successor is reining in spending.
The idea that low-carbon hydrogen could replace oil and gas in many applications was taking off when Ghasemi visited Baton Rouge, La., as politicians and executives were vowing to slash emissions.
But sentiment has since soured. This fossil-fuel alternative remains stubbornly expensive, and governments in the U.S. and elsewhere have shied away from putting their weight behind it.”
TWTW comment: The dream of producing hydrogen by stripping carbon from methane and using the hydrogen as a fuel is impractical. Why not just burn the methane?
Related
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.