No limits on power plant pollution. This is how best to lower energy prices❓

I don’t know what to think of climate concerns.

One scientist who reviewed all of the studies and literature, noted:

“Near the turn of the 21st century, several climate scientists believed that rising CO2 was the cause of observed warming and sought to support this by showing that excursions in the Earth temperature were small for the past 2,000 years, with a sudden increase in the 20th century at the same time period when CO2 emissions increased (a so-called “hockey stick” shape to the temperature vs. time plot). To do this, they employed a large number of proxies (such as tree rings) to estimate the Earth’s temperature over the last 2,000 years. Each proxy was compared to the measured temperature during the calibration period (the 20th century), and this relationship was used to convert up to 2,000 years of proxy measurements to estimated temperature. A sophisticated algorithm was used to process the large amount of data from multiple proxies into a yearly average temperature for up to 2,000 years.

Unfortunately, they made several mistakes in the statistical analysis, one of which produced a significant statistical error. This error, in which they standardized the data against the mean during the calibration period (rather than the entire data set) had the effect of almost ignoring most of the proxies, while heavily weighting those few with an increase in the 20th century – thus artificially producing a hockey stick form to the plot of temperature vs. time. In addition, the innate merit of many proxies is dubious. The climate scientists involved appeared to ignore valid criticisms from outside their peer group, and they continued to claim the hockey stick result. Climate scientists also vigorously opposed any suggestion that factors other than CO2 also affected the climate. Climate scientists introduced elements of political influence into scientific discourse by actions such as loading up a thin paper with a large number of authors – publishing votes of confidence rather than scientific results….”

He concluded:

“About 20-25 years ago, many climate scientists felt the need to promote the alarmist view of climate change by claiming the warming of the 20th century was anomalous compared to the previous 2,000 years, and coincident with rising CO2 concentration; therefore, CO2 was the driving force for this warmth. Groups of climate scientists, in frequent contact with one another, acted in concert, seemingly as a community, and did not respond legitimately to various criticisms of their work, and continued to use faulty procedures, promulgating unjustifiable results. We can speculate on their motives. They might have had a true idealistic desire to save the world from what they believed was an impending catastrophe due to global warming, but that does not justify their behavior.”

https://www.igminresearch.com/articles/html/igmin296

I don’t know how to predict our climate future. Since “An Inconvenient Truth”, here’s what we have been up to when it comes to power generation via coal. U.S. coal-fired power plants have declined sharply since 2005 due to cheaper natural gas and renewables, though recent political and demand pressures have slowed retirements. More than 60 percent of the U.S. coal fleet existing in 2010 has retired or scheduled retirement by 2030.

However, I do know that we can bang our head against the wall and curtail productive activity all we want, and it won’t make any difference so long as China and India continue on their current path.

China’s New Coal Power Installations Reach 18-Year High

https://www.forbes.com/sites/katharinabuchholz/2026/02/27/chinas-new-coal-power-installations-reach-18-year-high/

China’s electricity consumption, a key barometer of economic activity, went up 6.8 percent year on year in September, as the country’s economy further recovers, official data showed Wednesday. 2025 figures show installation of almost 70 gigawatts of new coal power capacity more than it took off the grid. The last time this number has been this high was in 2007. China has more projects in the pipeline. Additional data shows that China has a staggering 500 gigawatts of coal power capacity under construction, permitted, pre-permitted and announced … the country’s coal frenzy has still caused available coal power capacity to rise continuously every year. China had commissioned more coal power capacity in 2025 alone than India, the second biggest builder of new coal, had done in the past decade.

Keep in mind that India has significantly expanded its coal-fired power capacity since 2005, reaching over 205 GW by 2022 and maintaining 43 GW of coal plants under active construction to meet surging electricity demand.

The correct answer, to me, is to do that which is cost-effective and efficient with an eye on moderating pollution and greenhouse gas.

That would EXCLUDE offshore wind generated energy – a fools errand compared to many other alternatives, as the fully depreciated cost of offshore wind is double the cost of onshore wind, nuclear, solar, and combined natural gas.

Offshore wind is one of the most expensive ways to generate electricity. No one has EVER proposed to build an offshore wind project without lavish taxpayer subsidies, and the cost to everyday ratepayers is higher than most are willing to pay.

I think Trump is an idiot and an ass – he has missed so many opportunities for favorable action that would have resolved significant issues in a bipartisan manner. He learned that process from his predecessors, Bush II and Obama – neither ever cared all that much about legislation created in a bipartisan fashion.

Bottom line when it comes to climate and energy generation, while we may not have continued with the various climate accords, those would have been ineffective in addressing climate concerns given the activity underway in China, India and elsewhere.

LikeLike