Alex Epstein Profile picture
Sep 12, 2020 12 tweets 4 min read Read on X
Media coverage of the CA wildfires is designed to do 2 things: 1) Get us to ignore the fundamental role of "green" forest mismanagement in causing the out-of-control fires. 2) Get us to ignore the CA blackouts and the fundamental role of "green energy" policies in causing them.
California is experiencing blackouts because of "green" policies that reward or mandate unreliable electricity from solar and wind and punish or outlaw reliable electricity from nuclear, natural gas, coal, or hydro. We need to understand and apply this lesson this election.
Fact: electricity producers know how to produce enough reliable electricity for virtually any situation--certainly plenty for the heat wave CA has been experiencing this year. All you need to do is build enough reliable power plants: nuclear, natural gas, coal, or hydro.
CA, attempting a mini-mini-Green New Deal, decided to mandate that a lot of the electricity generated in the state had to come from unreliable, "renewable" solar and wind electricity. We shut down reliable gas and nuclear plants to hit our renewable targets.
While California was boasting about its increasing use of "unreliables"--@KamalaHarris called it a "model"--the reality was that it was becoming an electricity parasite, hugely dependent on reliable gas, nuclear, and coal plants from neighboring states such as AZ, NV, and UT.
What happens to a state trying to rely on "unreliables" when there’s a regional heat wave? The wind dies down. The sun dies down daily. This meant CA needed more electricity from the states with “reliables”--but they need more, too, so they sent CA less. Surprise...blackouts!
Everyone needs to learn from CA's blackouts--and fast. Policies mandating unreliable solar and wind electricity are making our electricity grid more unreliable every year. If we do not make reliability a priority we will become a third-world grid with frequent blackouts.
Nationally we face the prospect of frequent "green blackouts" thanks to a cocktail of 3 bad policies: 1) mandating unreliables (solar and wind), 2) prematurely shutting down ultra-reliable coal and nuclear plants while 3) stopping the construction of natural gas infrastructure.
What is @JoeBiden's answer to the CA blackouts? His "plan" would make them nationwide and frequent via 1) more mandating unreliable solar and wind, 2) more shutdowns of ultra-reliable coal and nuclear plants, and 3) more obstacles to urgently-needed natural gas infrastructure.
Blackouts aren't the only problem with green energy policies. The main problem is cost. Because wind and solar are unreliable they can’t replace our reliable power plants, only duplicate or supplement them at tremendous cost. Even when CA electricity is working it's expensive.
Every candidate who supports mandating "unreliables," let alone the Green New Deal or @JoeBiden Plan, should be reminded of the utter failure the mini-mini-GND/Biden-Plan has caused in California. I hope @realDonaldTrump raises this in the debates and uses the term "unreliables."
There is no world in which mandating "unreliables" makes sense. If you want to lower CO2 emissions, decriminalize reliable nuclear energy--something the @JoeBiden plan completely fails to do. For a real, pro-freedom, pro-nuclear energy policy go to EnergyTalkingPoints.com.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alex Epstein

Alex Epstein Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexEpstein

Jun 21
The Biden administration claims that draining the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve shows its commitment to low gas prices.

In fact, this is yet another cynical ploy to disguise that its real goal is raise gas prices.

🧵👇 Image
Biden’s claim that he released 1B barrels of gasoline to “lower prices at the pump” is his latest attempt to convince Americans he's trying to lower gasoline prices. But in fact, he’s doing his utmost to raise prices, because this is necessary for his anti-fossil-fuel goals.
From Day 1, President Biden has openly supported the destruction of the fossil fuel industry, from his 2019 campaign promise of “I guarantee you, we’re going to end fossil fuel” to his 2021 executive order declaring that America will be “net zero emissions economy-wide” by 2050. Image
Read 18 tweets
May 23
Tech giants' self-made energy crisis

For years tech giants have been helping climate catastrophists shut down reliable fossil fuel electricity, falsely claiming they can be replaced by solar/wind.

Now the grid they've helped gut can't supply their growing AI needs. 🧵👇 Image
For the last decade, tech giants such as @Apple, @Microsoft, @Meta, and @Google have, through dedicated anti-fossil-fuel propaganda and political efforts, promoted the shutdown of reliable fossil fuel power plants in favor of unreliable solar and wind. Image
Tech giants have propagandized against reliable fossil fuel power plants by falsely claiming to be "100% renewable" and implying everyone could do it. In fact, they have just paid utilities to credit them for others' solar and wind use and blame others for their coal and gas use. Image
Read 22 tweets
May 9
Despite massive subsidies and favoritism, EV sales dropped in Q1 of 2024 compared the previous quarter.

Economics be damned, EPA recently announced pollution standards that require car makers to sell >50% EVs by 2032.

My talking points on Biden's dictatorial EV mandate 🧵👇 Image
Biden's de facto mandate of >50% EVs by 2032 is a dictatorial attack on the American driver and the US grid that will

1. Force Americans to drive inferior cars.

2. Place massive new demand for reliable electricity on a grid that is declining in reliable electricity supply. Image
The EPA has finalized new pollution standards so restrictive that in order to comply, car manufacturers will have to sell 56% EVs by 2032, plus at least 13% plug-in hybrid or other partially electric cars, as well as more fuel-efficient gasoline-powered cars.
Read 28 tweets
Mar 26
How to solve America's critical minerals problem

1) liberate domestic industry to mine and process them cost-effectively
2) encourage friendly trading partners to do the same
3) stop artificially driving up demand before supply chains are ready

🧵👇 Image
America’s economy and its national security depend on the secure availability of numerous “critical minerals”—such as lithium, copper, cobalt, and various “rare earth” elements—that, due to their unique chemical properties, are essential for many of today’s leading technologies.
Take cobalt, an important ingredient in the high-tech alloys used in many batteries, jet engines, and permanent magnets. Without a secure supply of cobalt, production of significant portions of high-tech industry and high-performance military equipment are jeopardized.
Read 30 tweets
Mar 20
The “climate disclosure” fraud

Congress won't support Biden's anti-fossil-fuel agenda.

So he's circumventing the legislative process by having the SEC coerce companies into spouting anti-FF propaganda and committing to anti-FF plans in the name of “climate disclosure.”

🧵👇
The SEC's new "climate disclosure rules"—now paused by the Fifth Circuit—have been rightly criticized for forcing companies to do endless, costly paperwork, which discourages companies from going public and thus contradicts the SEC's goal of increasing opportunity for investment. Image
Sadly, most critics of the SEC's rules are missing the biggest, most dangerous problem: they're not actually “climate disclosure rules”—those already existed—they are *anti-fossil-fuel propagandizing and planning rules* that violate freedom of speech and endanger our economy.
Read 33 tweets
Mar 8
Q: What should government do to address climate change?

A: “Climate change” is the wrong target; we want to *reduce climate danger*. And the proven way to do that is: *master* climate danger by letting us use all forms of cost-effective energy, including fossil fuels.

🧵👇
Asking how government should “address climate change” assumes that us impacting climate must be a bad thing.

But it’s only bad if it endangers us by creating challenges we can’t master.

And so far, our climate mastery has far outpaced any new climate challenges.
It’s an irrefutable but little-known fact that as the world has warmed 1° C, humans have become safer than ever from climate danger. The rate of climate-related disaster deaths—from storms, floods, temperature extremes, wildfires, and drought—has fallen 98% in the last century. Image
Read 27 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(