Latest Posts

Home

Facebook

Twitter

Search
About

The Case for a Green ‘No Deal’

Those who advocate for Minnesota's "Green New Deal" are not the adults in the room. How can one credibly claim that global warming is an "existential crisis,"  yet refuse to utilize the most reliable, affordable, and scaleable sources of carbon-dioxide free electricity available? I submit that they cannot. But do we need to make a Green New Deal at all? The following article argues that we do not....

Continue reading

Walz’s Comments on Public Utilities Commission Appointment is an Ominous Sign for Line 3, Rational Energy Policy

Line 3 opponents often argue the Governor should deep-six the oil pipeline replacement project because it would lock in oil use for the foreseeable future when we should, in reality be transitioning away from oil in favor of electric cars. But these arguments are pure wishful thinking with no basis in reality....

Continue reading

Isaac Orr: Lower Electricity Costs From Going Carbon-Free? Wanna Bet, Gov. Walz?

The following article originally appeared in the St. Paul Pioneer Press: Gov. Tim Walz recently announced his plan to make Minnesota’s electricity 100 percent carbon-free by 2050, and while the governor claims his plan will reduce energy costs for Minnesota families due to improvements in energy efficiency, I could not disagree more with his assessment. Therefore, I am willing to bet the governor a month’s salary that his claim is incorrect and that electricity costs will skyrocket under his plan. Increasing quantities of renewable energy result in increasing electricity prices because they are more expensive than conventional sources of electricity, like coal....

Continue reading

Doubling Down on Failure Installment Four: Renewable Energy Fails Cost/Benefit Analysis Using Minnesota Public Utilities Commission Social Cost of Carbon

This article is the fourth installment explaining the findings of our new study entitled Doubling Down on Failure, How a 50 percent by 2030 Renewable Energy Standard Would Cost Minnesota $80.2 Billion. This installment explains how the cost of reducing carbon dioxide emissions under the Renewable, Short-Term Nuclear, and Long-Term Nuclear would exceed the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) established by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) scenario, is the only scenario that passes this cost-benefit analysis. This post is pretty in the weeds, so the main takeaway is that the costs of reducing our carbon dioxide emissions...

Continue reading

Doubling Down On Failure Installment Three: Carbon Dioxide Emissions

This article is the third installment explaining the findings of our new study entitled Doubling Down on Failure, How a 50 percent by 2030 Renewable Energy Standard Would Cost Minnesota $80.2 Billion. This installment explains how carbon dioxide emissions would be affected in each of the four scenarios we examine, Renewable, Short-Term Nuclear, Long-Term Nuclear, and Affordable Clean Energy (ACE). While the Renewable, Short-Term Nuclear, and Long-Term Nuclear scenarios would impose significant yearly financial burdens on Minnesota households, they all would reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Emissions would eventually rise under the ACE plan as existing wind turbines reach the end of their useful lives. The graph...

Continue reading

The Dirty Secret Behind “Clean Energy”

Renewable energy advocates often talk about wind and solar as "clean" energy resources, and talk about "dirty" fossil fuels, but how accurate is their assessment that renewables are actually clean? Not very. We've talked about the fact that wind solar, and batteries require massive amounts of copper, nickel, rare earth metals, lead, cadmium, and cobalt. Many times, these materials are mined in countries where there are few, if any, protections for the environment or workers. The Clear Energy Alliance has produced a very good video debunking the claims that fossil fuels are inherently dirty, and video shines a much-needed light on the...

Continue reading

Doubling Down on Failure Installment 1: Comparing the Costs of Wind and Solar, Nuclear, and Coal

As you probably know by now, American Experiment has released a new study entitled Doubling Down on Failure, How a 50 percent by 2030 Renewable Energy Standard Would Cost Minnesota $80.2 Billion.   The study is more than 80 pages, including appendices and citations, so I will be breaking down the key findings in more manageable bites on the website. Today, I'll break down the four main energy scenarios we examined and why we chose them....

Continue reading

Two Answers I’d Like on Xcel Energy’s Carbon Report

Xcel Energy made headlines by announcing they would be the first electric utility to derive 100 percent of their electricity from sources that don't emit carbon dioxide by 2050. Earlier this month, the government-approved monopoly utility company released a 28-page report outlining their plan for "Building a Carbon-free Future." After reading the document, I was left with two nagging questions that should have been answered in the report: what would it cost, and how much future warming would it prevent?...

Continue reading

American Experiment Releases Groundbreaking New Study on the High Cost of Renewable Energy Mandates in Minnesota

American Experiment is pleased to announce we are releasing a groundbreaking new study detailing the high cost renewable energy mandates in Minnesota. On the 2018 campaign trail, many DFL candidates, including Governor Tim Walz, said they would make obtaining 50 percent of Minnesota's electricity by 2030 a top priority in their policy platform. Now DFL'ers in Minnesota are pushing their own version of the Green New Deal, mandating that Minnesota must get 100 percent of its electricity from "carbon free" resources by 2050. Our study found that attempting to achieve a 50 percent renewable energy mandate would cost Minnesota $80.2 billion...

Continue reading