David Stockmans Contra Corner

Share this post

User's avatar
David Stockmans Contra Corner
A “Must Read” Green Energy Critique That Forbes Censored

A “Must Read” Green Energy Critique That Forbes Censored

Guest Post By Jude Clemente, editor of RealClearEnergy

david stockman's avatar
david stockman
Jun 01, 2023
∙ Paid
3

Share this post

User's avatar
David Stockmans Contra Corner
A “Must Read” Green Energy Critique That Forbes Censored
Share

Please note: this article was pulled down offline from Forbes. I will let you draw your own conclusions as to why. Factually, there was no justification for it. 

his list could be closer to 50 but let’s just stick to a handful of them. I literally live in this business every day, and I’m just so confused.

1. In a world that is apparently getting both warmer and colder because of global warming, how is it that we can increasingly rely on non-dispatchable (i.e., intermittent, usually unavailable), weather-dependent electricity from wind and solar plants to displace, not just supplement, dispatchable (i.e., baseload, almost always available) coal, gas, and nuclear power?

In other words, if our weather is becoming less predictable, how is it that a consuming economy like ours can, or should even try, predictably rely on weather-dependent resources? ERCOT exemplifies this: the Texas grid operator has around 31,000 MW of wind capacity but goes into winter expecting only 6,000 MW (just 20%) of wind farms to be available to generate electricity. Again, in the marketplace, the “alternatives” you keep hearing about are proving to be far more supplemental than alternative.

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial

Subscribe to David Stockmans Contra Corner to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 david stockman
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share