Why the Climate Alarmists Are Winning at the State Level
I recently attended a public hearing sponsored by my state government on a state “energy plan” they are preparing. Now we all know that such plans often lead to government to interfere in the choice of energy sources. I was a little surprised that 70-80 people showed up since the state had already conducted similar hearings elsewhere in the state. The Climate-Industrial Complex (CIC) had already arranged to hold a small demonstration outside prior to the hearing. The hearing was well run, and ended only a few minutes late after about 50 people used their allotted three minutes. At the end, I thought I was the only attendee who did not support the CIC party line. Most speakers said they were interested citizens, although some mentioned environmental organization affiliations or stated they were employees of the renewable energy industry. A representative of a small local electricity non-profit spoke and delivered carefully worded support for their pro-CIC position. After the end of the hearing, however, one attendee approached me and said that he supported my positions, so perhaps he did not speak. So my anti-CIC positions were supported by at most 2 of the 70-80 attendees. Trump was spoken of negatively several times, but the crowd was clearly trying to change state energy policies, not Federal policies. So why is this of any importance? Because any politician attending would might well have concluded that he/she better get onboard the CIC train soon The public comments were filled with scientific and economic misrepresentations and cliches (like constant reiteration of the word “clean” when referring to renewables), almost everything came straight out of CIC propaganda, especially the mainstream media. Renewables were always portrayed as saving money, the wave of the future, and the source of future growth, as well as being “clean.” Not a word about the many negative aspects of renewables was mentioned. Adverse outcomes in terms of higher prices and less reliability in every state and country that have tried them were never mentioned. Higher costs for much less useful output was never mentioned. The loss of birds and bats was never mentioned. The unsightly effects of wind and solar on the landscape was never discussed. The speakers fairly uniformly felt that current state Democratic Party office holders were not doing what they needed to do to promote the CIC agenda. etc. The anti-CIC folks included at most 2 out of 70-80 attendees. So the anti-CICers “lost” still another public hearing, because only one or two showed up. Without much greater grass roots support, it is all too evident what the outcome will be, unless Trump should be reelected and pursues a much more effective anti-CIC policy than he has so far. There was not sufficient time foe one speaker to rebut each of the errors made by the pro-CIC speakers. As long as the Endangerment Finding remains on the books, the CIC is likely to win at the state level in the end. Not by accident, I think, my state has recently moved towards being a blue state after long being a red state.