Earth Day is the perfect day to inform our readers that new data show the benefits of non-ferrous mining could be even bigger than our report indicated last summer, if we don't screw it up with bad energy policy...
Continue reading
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
With President Trump visiting Minnesota today, there is no better time to emphasize the fact that Minnesota would save $87.7 billion dollars through 2050 by continuing to burn clean, beautiful coal to generate electricity instead of pursuing more wind and solar. Despite claims to the contrary, coal-fired electricity is far more affordable than wind or solar. Minnesota can only reap these massive economic benefits if we implement the Trump Administration’s proposed Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, which requires coal plants to make common sense, and cost effective improvements to reduce carbon dioxide emissions....
Continue reading
Hello! In the first segment, Isaac gives us a rundown on how "clean energy job creation numbers [are] artificially inflated." In an effort to pass off renewable energy mandates as a potential job creator, advocates suggest renewable energy is responsible for thousands of jobs. Isaac reveals why this idea is "bunk." Next, the trio talk about the idea of geoengineering. A Reason Foundation article titled "New Research Suggests Solar Geoengineering Could Safely Lower Global Temperatures," makes the case that we should be able to discuss and experiment with these theories. Supplemental article: 7 Geoengineering Solutions That Might Cause More Damage Than Good Moving on...
Continue reading
It is clear that the Citizens Utility Board is either unwilling or unable to advocate for the policies that will actually reduce costs for consumers. Center of the American Experiment is the leading advocate for energy consumers in Minnesota, and we can say that utilizing Minnesota's existing coal-fired power plants for the foreseeable future is the single-best way to keep our energy bills low, not adding unreliable and expensive sources like wind and solar. ...
Continue reading
The Clean Energy Economy Minnesota jobs report will likely draw favorable media coverage, but a deeper look at the numbers exposes the fact that these numbers are artificially inflated by including workers who are only tangentially related to energy efficiency, and that only 2.2 percent of the wind and solar jobs are non-temporary construction jobs....
Continue reading
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
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
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
This article is the second 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. Today, I’ll break down four main components that drive the cost of our energy system that we explored in our study. As you can see below, generation accounted for 59 percent of the total cost of electricity in the Renewable Scenario, utility profits constituted 22 percent, property taxes accounted for 11 percent, and transmission accounted for 8 percent of the total cost of electricity....
Continue reading