Time to grok some graphics. . .
• The Biden-Harris Administration is determined to be anti-energy, the opposite of Alexander Hamilton’s hopes for “energy in the executive.” They want to start by ending fossil fuel subsidies. This first chart is hard to make out (you may be able to enlarge it), but it shows that “renewables” receive ten times the amount of subsidies as fossil fuels.
But federal subsidies on fossil fuels represent less that 3% of the revenues of the fossil fuel industry. This action will have essentially no impact on an economy that still runs on fossil fuels. That 3% will be voluntarily paid by the consumer, just directly rather than through subsidies.
In contrast, renewables currently enjoy 25 times the level of subsides per unit of energy produced as do fossil fuels, and the market penetration of EVs is still only 1.2%. One can see that massive government meddling in the energy market is the only way that people will — at least for the foreseeable future — “choose” renewables over fossil fuels.
So, while environmentalists might applaud Biden’s decision, the effect on the energy markets will be barely measurable, if at all.
Meanwhile, as Holman Jenkins points out in the Wall Street Journal today that if the Harris-Biden Administration was actually serious about climate change, they’d push nuclear power. Instead:
• Here’s what technological innovation and cheap natural gas have produced:
• Prediction: the Harris-Biden Administration will propose to raise gasoline taxes at some point.
• Violent weather is getting worse! Oh, wait:
• Fact: There are no high-income, low-energy nations.
• Biden the taxman:
• Compare and contrast:
• It is a commonplace that American manufacturing has been in a long decline, but that’s not quite accurate. What has declined is manufacturing employment. You can thank (or destroy) a robot.
• Some animal are more equal than others:
• The residue of Communism?
• Looks scientific to me:
• 40 of the 50 least affordable housing markets in the nation are in California.