
Editorās note: Big Tent Ideas always aims to provide balancing perspectives on the hottest issues of the day. Below is a column from Steve Milloy, where he argues that wind is hopelessly useless as an energy source and the wind industry doesnāt actually believe in āall of the aboveā energy. You can find a counterpoint here, where Hilary Bright and Heather Reams argue that support for wind energy is actually consistent with President Trumpās energy strategy, and that progressives merely used the industry for their own purposes.Ā
The Restoring Energy Dominance (RED) Coalition recently produced an ad advocating for āall forms of energy.ā āYou voted for it, you got it,ā the ad starts. It features a clip of President Trump saying āAll forms of energy, yepā¦ā What exactly does āall forms of energy,ā or its 21st century shorthand, āall of the aboveā really mean? Is it good policyā And, is President Trump for it?
The concept of āall of the aboveā dates back to a mid-2000s convergence of energy-related events including: (1) the then emerging but imaginary āclimate crisisā and (2) an actual energy crisis caused by a combination of factors including the Iraq war, US dependence on OPEC, the rise of energy-hungry China and India, the notion of Peak Oil and more. Congressās solution to this was the Energy Policy Act of 2005 signed into law by President Bush. It called for expanding domestic energy production, including: oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, and renewables. āAll of the aboveā wasnāt in common usage at the time, but the law essentially embodied it.
āAll of the aboveā subsequently came into more common use, albeit with different variations, during President Obamaās āwar on coalā and his embrace of Executive action to cut emissions because of āclimate change.ā For President Obama, āall of the aboveā meant all forms of energy except for coal, which he tried to regulate into extinction. To counter Obama, the coal industry and its Republican supporters used āall of the aboveā as a desperate means of including coal in the US energy equation.
But the tables have now turned. President Trump supports the booming oil and gas industry, the now-crippled coal industry; the flailing nuclear industry and solar power. He campaigned and has repeatedly spoken against the onshore and offshore wind industry. He has also issued an executive order to review offshore wind projects and has, thus far, paused one specific project. It is now the wind industryās turn to scream āall of the aboveā in hopes of remaining part of the US energy equation.
President Trump also campaigned and has taken executive action against what he often calls the āGreen New Scam,ā which means the climate spending and energy subsidies contained in President Bidenās 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. Opponents of the Green New Scam hope to repeal the subsidies in President Trumpās upcoming Big Beautiful Bill.
The RED Coalition ad would take us back to the days of the Energy Policy Act and its focus on producing domestic energy from all sources. While that may sound reasonable, it ignores the realities weāve experienced and lessons weāve learned over the past 20 years.
First, Energy Policy Act proponents did not foresee the late-2000s advent and impact of fracking for oil and gas. Whereas in 2005 we were dependent on imports of natural gas and were running out of cheap oil production options, fracking changed the global energy situation almost overnight. Fracking gave the US essentially a limitless supply of oil and gas. That has essentially crushed OPECās ability to control the global price of oil. Thanks to fracking, we probably have enough oil and gas to run the entire US economy without any other form of energy.
Second, we have been told for decades that wind and solar were cheaper than fossil fuels and were a solution to the alleged āclimate crisis.ā Both claims have been proven to be false. Wind and solar have not reduced the price of electricity for anyone. At best, they have only reallocated energy costs to taxpayers. Wind and solar have only increased the price of electricity for consumers, even when it is subsidized by taxpayers.
Worse, solar and wind have jeopardized the reliability of our grid. Grid operators now routinely warn of possible grid failure during peak demand. A February winter storm in Texas froze the wind turbines, resulting in hundreds of deaths and almost causing catastrophic grid failure. Too much solar and wind caused a similar grid crisis in Spain and Portugal just last month.
Wind and solar have never been economically viable without subsidies. Thatās why wind and solar supporters oppose the end of the Green New Scam. Not only do wind and solar require taxpayer subsidies, they are also intrinsically subsidized by government mandates, and the sourcing of materials and labor from Communist China. This has also had the national security-imperiling effect of making our electricity grid dependent on our geopolitical rival.
Finally, wind and solar have also been an environmental disaster in terms of great birds, bats, whales and much other marine life killed. Their oversized footprints are made essentially a permanent part of the environment because of the vast amounts of concrete and iron rebar used in their foundations. There are also national security concerns with offshore wind.
We need energy that works. After 20 years of experience, āall of the aboveā is just affirmative action for wind and solar energy. If energy decisions were made on the basis of standard economic merit, like cost and functionality, then oil, gas, coal and nuclear power would win hands down. President Trump occasionally says kind things about solar, but not about wind. He saves his lavish praise and attention for those most deserving: oil, gas and coal.
Steve Milloy is a biostatistician and lawyer, publishes JunkScience.com and is on X @JunkScience.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporterās byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contactĀ [email protected].
