Warren Buffett on windmill power: “We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.”
From the Godfather of global warming alarmism and former NASA climate chief turned environmental activist, James Hansen, on ‘unreliable’ energy:
“Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.”
And like the old sailors say, “The wind is free … but everything else costs money”.
When it comes to assessing the costs, risks and benefits of environmental policy, Bjørn Lomborg is one of the very few that provide balanced, detailed analysis; properly supported by facts and evidence.
The economic choices we make – about allocating scarce resources to unlimited wants – should – as Lomborg consistently points out – be made taking into account all of the costs weighed against properly measured benefits (see our post here).
In recent times, he’s courted controversy in Australia (well, more like ‘confected outrage’) over the Coalition government’s plans to fund a research wing of an Australian University, where Lomborg and his fellow research travellers could pitch up and undertake proper (rational) investigation in how…
View original post 1,309 more words
Excerpt from JC Refections :
I’ve heard enough behind the scenes (including discussions with NOAA employees) that I am siding with Rep. Smith on this one.
The politicization of climate science has gotten extreme. I don’t know where to start in trying to ameliorate this situation, but Congressional oversight and investigation into what is going on in government labs does not seem inappropriate under these circumstances.
It’s a sad state of affairs that climate science has come to this.