Tag: green energy

Natural Gas Projects Reboot After Officials Wake Up To Stark Realities

When the government abuses its powers in pursuit of far-left political goals at the expense of commonsense policies, entire states and regions often suffer.

Such was the case in recent years when numerous projects centered on traditional energy were derailed by environmental extremists who leveraged the tools of government to erect roadblock after roadblock. Most famously, the Biden administration canceled the Keystone XL project in 2021, which was designed to carry 830,000 barrels of oil sands crude per day from Alberta to Nebraska.

Rather than play losing hands dealt from stacked decks, frustrated energy companies eventually began pulling the plug on one project after another, all to the detriment of businesses and families. Meanwhile, the government artificially propped up wind and solar projects, promoting energy sources that raided taxpayer wallets and were more expensive, less reliable and less efficient than traditional sources of energy.

Among the natural gas pipeline projects that ground to a halt were the Constitution and the Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) pipelines, both designed to transport natural gas to New York. Activists agitated against the projects, often centering their arguments on supposed clean water concerns and the alleged dangers of fracking. Even though the fracking was happening in Pennsylvania – and the projects had received approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission – New York state officials ultimately caved to the pressure from the far left and denied permits.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) was a leader among the anti-pipeline forces. In 2019, Cuomo had “signed into law the state’s goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050,” as NPR previously reported. Of the pipeline efforts, Cuomo pledged that “any way that we can challenge it, we will.”

After years of costly battles – and in the face of New York regulatory officials and politicians determined to stand in their way – company officials threw their hands in the air and gave up on the Constitution project in 2020, doing the same just a year ago in regard to the NESE pipeline.

Environmental groups were ecstatic. When the Constitution project shut down, Earthjustice staff attorney Moneen Nasmith said, “At this critical moment for our climate, we cannot afford unnecessary fossil fuel projects that will lead to more fracking and exacerbate our climate crisis.”

As evidenced by increasingly frequent blackouts and faulty grid performances, the so-called “alternatives” favored by self-labeled “environmental groups” have proven to be poor substitutes for affordable and reliable traditional energy resources. Among those resources, natural gas leads the way in both cost effectiveness and cleanliness. Natural gas has become increasingly “green” with a low carbon footprint compared to other fossil fuels.

Keep reading

Sunnova International just another EMBEZZLEMENT FRONT COMPANY as part of the Biden Regime’s FAKE GREEN movement – now BANKRUPT

Obama was the king of creating fake green companies, funding them with millions and billions of dollars, then watching them all magically go bankrupt as the money completely disappeared (went into the offshore accounts of all the executives involved). Biden was even worse, participating in these scams and schemes on a much higher financial level, running up trillions in unaccounted funds, while claiming to be supporting “climate science” and “climate change” initiatives. All big lies for embezzlement. Sunnova is just another pawn in the big “climate” game of racketeering and fraud.

  • Obama’s Green Energy Scams: The Obama administration funneled billions in taxpayer dollars into fake “green” companies like Solyndra, Abound Solar, and Fisker Automotive—only for them to collapse as executives pocketed the money. These ventures were never meant to succeed, just to launder funds to political allies.
  • Biden’s Bigger Fraud Scheme: The Biden Regime has taken green energy corruption to new heights, pushing trillions in unaccountable “climate” spending while companies like Sunnova and SunPower declare bankruptcy after executives siphon off subsidies. The entire “renewable energy” push is a front for embezzlement and control.
  • Sunnova’s Collapse Exposes the Scam: Sunnova Energy, propped up by federal loans and tax breaks, just filed for bankruptcy with up to $50 billion in liabilities—proving yet another “green” company was a taxpayer-funded Ponzi scheme. CEO John Berger and other insiders got rich while employees and customers were left holding the bag.
  • The Green Energy Grift Continues: From solar to EVs, the government’s “climate” agenda is a racket designed to bankrupt the middle class while elites profit. With more collapses coming, sites like ClimateAlarmism.news expose how these companies were never about the environment—just theft.

Keep reading

The 5 Worst Green Energy Projects Funded by Biden

Despite the Department of Government Efficiency’s failures to cut spending and the president’s support for a bill that will add $2.4 trillion to the federal deficit over the next 10 years, some wasteful government projects have been cut under the Trump administration. 

Energy Secretary Chris Wright recently canceled 24 grants approved by the Energy Department under former President Joe Biden. The action netted over $3 billion in savings. Earlier in May, Wright axed an additional $7 billion of green energy loans approved by Biden. 

Unfortunately for taxpayers, the savings that Wright has identified are only a drop in the bucket of the wasteful spending that the Biden Energy Department approved. Here are five of the most egregious examples:

1. $10 Billion for Ford’s Electric Vehicle Push and Eminent Domain Abuses 

In December 2024, the Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) closed a $9.63 billion direct loan to BlueOval SK LLC, a joint venture between Ford and South Korean conglomerate SK On. The loan was approved to fund “the construction of three manufacturing plants, to produce batteries for Ford Motor Company’s future Ford and Lincoln electric vehicles [E.V.s],” according to the award announcement. 

BlueOval has begun or completed construction for these facilities—one in western Tennessee called BlueOval City—and two in Hardin County, Kentucky, known as Kentucky 1 and 2. 

In addition to allocating millions of dollars in tax credits for the rights to house BlueOval City, the Tennessee Legislature also created the Megasite Authority of West Tennessee, reports Reason‘s Joe Lancaster. The board was granted the authority to execute contracts on behalf of development, which includes the power to seize private property through eminent domain. In most cases, the board lowballed local property owners, including Ray Jones, who was offered “a measly $8,165” for his acre of land, even though the going rate was $200,000 per acre. There is no set date for when the plant will open. 

Kentucky 1 has faced numerous occupational safety and health complaints from its workers. A review from The Courier-Journal found “dozens of workplace injuries; hospitalizations related to respiratory issues; unshakeable mold contamination; a bat-infested training facility; blocked emergency exit doors; and chemical exposure risks.” The state has opened investigations into the plant, which is scheduled to begin production later this year. Kentucky 2’s opening has been indefinitely delayed. Michael Adams, CEO of BlueOval SK, recently told WDRB, that the plant’s opening date will be a market decision, but “the market is telling us that Kentucky 2 is not ready.”

2. Facility Upgrades for ExxonMobil

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed in 2021 created a new office within the Energy Department called the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED), whose goal is to finance first-of-a-kind clean energy projects through private-public partnerships. One of the largest beneficiaries of the program has been Exxon Mobil. 

The oil major was awarded a $332 million grant from OCED to “enable the use of hydrogen in place of natural gas” at a textile and plastics facility in Baytown, Texas. At the time of the announcement, the Biden administration said the project would prevent 2.7 million metric tons of carbon emissions per year. While an interesting technology, the project did not need taxpayer support. In the same year that Exxon received this disbursement (2024), the company reported annual earnings of $33.7 billion. The project’s funding was canceled on May 30 by Wright. 

3. Reducing the Carbon Footprint of Ketchup 

No industry was spared from corporate welfare under the Biden administration, including condiments. In October 2024, Kraft Heinz was awarded a grant of up to $170.9 million from OCED. The award was intended to fund energy efficiency upgrades, the installation of heat pumps and electric boilers, and renewable energy technologies at 10 of the company’s facilities. 

The grant was also rescinded on May 30. Kraft Heinz says it will continue to invest in upgrading 30 of its manufacturing facilities and will invest $3 billion over the next five years “to modernize” its domestic supply chain infrastructure.

Keep reading

Wind and solar can never be a meaningful power source, and they are more expensive

The subsidised wind and solar chickens are coming home to roost: power prices are rocketing out of control in any jurisdiction attempting to run on sunshine and breezes. Adding mega-batteries only makes matters worse. With the ever-present threat of total blackouts, rent-seekers and their propaganda machines are still attempting to deflect and bury what occurred in Spain and Portugal last month, but the mob always works you out.

Which brings us to this week’s roundup.

First up, Guy Mitchell taps into the laws of physics – the very same immutable laws that mean dilute, diffuse weather and sunshine-dependent wind and solar can never amount to meaningful power generation sources. Ever.

Read: The Achilles Heel of Wind and Solar, American Thinker, Guy Mitchell, 15 May 2025

Meanwhile Down Under, hard-pressed households and embattled businesses are being lined up for another 10% hike on what are already the world’s highest power prices and, as the team from Jo Nova explains, the worst is yet to come.

Read: Bang! Price bomb sinks Transmission lines: Plan B says let’s pretend cars, home solar and batteries will save “Transition”, Jo Nova Blog, Jo Nova, 27 May 2025

In this two-part essay, Russ Schussler places focus on how subsidised and intermittent wind and solar have totally wrecked once orderly power markets and why you pay the ever-increasing and exorbitant price for that entirely deliberate destruction.

Read: Why “cheaper” wind and solar raise costs. Part I: The fat tail problem, Climate Etc, Russ Schussler, 13 May 2025

Read: Why “cheaper” solar raises costs. Part II: The hidden costs of residential solar, Climate Etc, Russ Schussler, 22 May 2025

In this video, David Turver takes a look at the same phenomenon in the UK – where colossal subsidies to wind and solar are driving out cheap and reliable gas-fired power and, you guessed it, consumers are paying the price.

Keep reading

Energy group says Biden had no knowledge of climate change EOs, doubt validity of autopen use

Apro-energy group scrutinized eight of former President Joe Biden’s executive orders which pertained to climate and energy issues, but their research found no evidence that Biden ever spoke publicly about the contents of the climate change-oriented EOs. The group also asserts that the signatures on the EOs match Biden’s autopen signature instead of his genuine signature, thus calling into question whether the president ever knew about the executive orders. 

Power the Future, the organization who examined the orders, is now urging investigations from multiple bodies to determine if Biden knew of the executive orders and, if not, who did, and what course of action should be taken next. 

No evidence Biden knew about the EO’s signed with his name

Daniel Turner, the founder and executive director of Power the Future, spoke to the Furthermore with Amanda Head podcast and said, “The curious thing about these executive orders is that we found no evidence at all that the President spoke of them on the record. He wasn’t asked a question by the media. He wasn’t stopped on Air Force One. He didn’t give a speech about it.”

“There’s no evidence that the president was cognizant that this was done, that he directed it, that he was part of the decision. There was never any follow-up,” Turner continued. “The only evidence we have that the President signed it is the autopen signature and then some little statement on social media.”

Turner said that his organization highlighted these specific orders because of their scope, how much damage they did to the energy industry and, by extension, to the overall economy and national security.

Power the Future sent their findings to multiple federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Energy, along with the House and Senate Oversight Committees. 

Among the most critical of Biden’s executive actions on climate and energy include an Inauguration Day executive order in 2021 committing the federal government to net-zero emissions by 2050, a 2023 order banning arctic drilling, and an order requiring “clean energy” artificial intelligence centers, and a last-minute offshore drilling ban shortly before leaving office in 2025. 

Keep reading

‘Cheap’ solar and wind is a lie, green countries pay more!

Ask families in Germany and the UK what happens when more and more supposedly “cheap” solar and wind power is added to the national power mix, and they can tell you by looking at their utility bills: It gets far more expensive.

The idea that power should get cheaper as we get more green energy is only true if we exclusively used electricity when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing.

But modern societies need power around the clock. When there is no sun and wind, green energy needs plenty of backup, often powered by fossil fuels. What this means is that we pay for not one but two power systems.

And as the backup fossil fuel power sources are used less, they need to earn their capital costs back in fewer hours, leading to even more expensive power.

This means real energy costs of solar and wind are far higher. One study looking at China showed that the real cost of solar power on average turns out to be twice as high as coal, while a peer-reviewed study of Germany and Texas shows solar and wind are many times more expensive than fossil fuels.

Keep reading

Department of Interior emails reveal Biden’s offshore wind waivers could cost taxpayers millions

Newly uncovered emails from the Biden administration’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) show that taxpayers could be on the hook for $191 million in removal costs for Vineyard Wind, a 62-turbine wind farm being constructed off the coast of Nantucket, as a result of waivers the administration granted Vineyard Wind and other East Coast projects. 

In its rush to fulfill former President Joe Biden’s goal of constructing 30 gigawatts of wind farms off the coasts of America, the Biden administration had issued waivers for financial assurances on offshore wind projects, saying they present an unnecessary burden to the industry. 

The financial assurance requirement protects the public from decommissioning liabilities. If companies can’t afford to remove the wind towers they’re building after their useful life, the public has an assurance that those liabilities will be covered.

In 2017, Vineyard Wind requested a waiver to delay the assurances for 15 years after the project was built, and it was denied. They requested the same waiver in 2021 under the Biden administration, and the request was granted. The waiver cited long-term power purchase agreements, which guarantee the facility operators a set price for the electricity they produce over 20 years, “robust insurance policies,” and the “use of proven technology.”

Keep reading

The Net Zero Agenda’s Continued Collapse Into Chaos

Last week, Ofgem announced that the Energy Price Cap would be lowered. From July, average bill payers will see “a decrease of 7% compared to the cap set between April 1st to June 30th, 2025”. The likes of Ed Miliband were quick to capture the good news by reaffirming the Government’s commitment to the 2050 Net Zero and 2030 Clean Power agendas. But a closer look at the detail of the price cut and other news shows just how fragile those agendas really are.

The news that there would be a price cut was not unexpected. Energy price caps are announced quarterly. As reported here, the Spring (April-June) price cap rise was announced in February – the third since the Labour Government was elected in July last year on the promise of “lower bills”. “Energy bills are set to rise again due to a spike in global gas markets,” claimed Ed Miliband ahead of Ofgem’s February rise. But there is no such thing as “global gas markets”. And that “spike” had already passed.

A post-pandemic low price of gas on UK markets had occurred in February 2024 at around 56p per therm (29.3 kWh). But over the next year, this price increased to 142p, peaking on February 11th. On February 25th, Ofgem announced a 6.4% price cap increase for the second quarter of this year. But by the time of Ofgem’s announcement, a mere fortnight later, the price had fallen to 106p – a fall of 25%. Into the second quarter, the price fell further, reaching a low of 69p – or less than half of February’s spike price – on April 7th. The price then stabilised at around 83p (around 42% of the peak price).

“It’s great news the energy price cap is going down, but we have more to do”, tweeted Ed Milband in response to last week’s announcement from Ofgem – as if he and his policies had caused the price drop. “Our clean power mission is the route to long-term energy security and lower bills,” he added. Odd, isn’t it, that a 6.4% increase in the cap was blamed on (non-existent) “global gas markets”, but that a 7% drop in the cap, following a 42% reduction in UK gas prices, is not blamed on the same outside forces, but is instead given as cause to double down on the green agenda.

The clues are there for those whose capacity for simple maths is not hindered by green ideology… a 42% reduction in UK gas prices yielded only a 7% drop in the energy price cap. But doesn’t Miliband tell us that “global gas prices” are the cause of all our problems? 

And not just Milband. In the Times, the Green Blob’s favourite du jour talking point is reproduced uncritically by the newspaper’s Energy Editor, Emily Gosden. “Unlinking electricity prices from gas ‘would cut energy bills’,” claims the headline. According to this meme, remastered by energy market consultant Adam Bell, formerly Head of Energy Strategy at BEIS and Senior Policy Advisor at DECC, the “link” between gas prices and electricity prices could be “cut”. According to the article, “Britain’s wholesale market operates on a system of ‘marginal pricing’ whereby the most expensive plant needed to keep the lights on determines the price all generators are paid”.

Keep reading

Green Agenda Has Cost British Households £220 Billion Since 2006: Study

British consumers have paid nearly £220 billion more on their energy prices over the past two decades as a result of Westminster’s radical green agenda schemes, a report from a leading energy consultancy firm has found.

The UK public has been “seduced by narratives that renewables are cheap,” however, according to a study conducted by Watt-Logic’s Kathryn Porter presented by Lord Offord, the Shadow Energy Minister in the House of Lords, has found that the opposite is true, with the green agenda not only siphoning off taxpayer cash subsidies but also driving up energy costs for consumers.

“That renewables are not cheap should be clear, based both on the evidence that after 35 years of subsidies, we are yet to see any benefits through lower bills,” the report found.

According to Porter’s calculations, if the British government had not embarked upon its so-called green energy transition programme, British households would have saved £218 billion since 2006.

The report found that the direct cost of net zero policies in 2023-24 accounted for £17 billion in additional costs on consumer energy bills, and it predicted that this would continue to rise to more than £20 billion in 2029-30.

Porter acknowledged that gas prices were impacted by the Ukraine War and broader Western conflict with Russia, however, she noted that this would not explain why energy prices have steadily risen for the two decades prior to the 2021-23 gas crisis in Europe.

Keep reading

‘Green Energy’ Is Quietly Polluting A Landfill Near You

While green advocates commonly use the terms renewable, sustainable, and net zero to describe their efforts, the dirty little secret is that much of the waste from solar panels and wind turbines is ending up in landfills. 

The current amounts of fiberglass, resins, aluminum and other chemicals — not to mention propeller blades from giant wind turbines — pose no threat currently to local town dumps, but this largely ignored problem will become more of a challenge in the years ahead as the 500 million solar panels and the 73,000 wind turbines now operating in the U.S. are decommissioned and replaced.

Greens insist that reductions in carbon emissions will more than compensate for increased levels of potentially toxic garbage; others fret that renewable energy advocates have not been forthright about their lack of eco-friendly plans and the technology to handle the waste.

“Nobody planned on this, nobody had a plan to get rid of them, nobody planned for closure,” said Dwight Clark, whose company, Solar eWaste Solutions, recycles solar panels. “Nobody thought this through.”

The discussion about what to do with worn-out solar and wind equipment is another topic usually elided in net zero blueprints, which often focus on the claimed benefits of projects while discounting or ignoring the costs. As RealClearInvestigations previously reported regarding the lack of plans for acquiring the massive amounts of land for solar and wind farms needed to achieve net zero, the math can get fuzzy, and the numbers cited most frequently are those rosiest for renewables.

“They’ve been either silent, or incoherent — or just hand-wave that we should recycle all this stuff without telling us how,” said Mark Mills, executive director of the National Center for Energy Analytics. In the headlong effort to make solar and wind seem as inexpensive as possible, they have not included fees that address the eventual cost of disposal, which could leave taxpayers holding the bag.

Some renewable supporters acknowledge Mills’ point. The Alliance for Affordable Energy, which supports government-funded research on recycling panels and turbines, said the “circular economy” Mills referred to has yet to materialize.

“With the existing energy infrastructure, a lot of end-of-life questions have never been addressed,” the Alliance’s executive director, Logan Burke, told RCI. “It may be that those costs have to be embedded in the front-end, but somehow we need to make the market circular. How do we find that market at the end of their useful life?”

Just how many panels the U.S. will dispose of or retire each year is also unclear. No clearing house keeps track of national figures, according to Meng Tao, an energy engineering professor at Arizona State University and a consultant on renewable waste issues.

Keep reading