My testimony before the Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy Policy, and Regulatory Affairs within the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability
‘As NERC has noted, “[e]ducation for policymakers and regulators to increase awareness of the reliability implications of policy decisions is a critical need.’
This is the key problem. I applaud your education efforts. Do you think our policy makers are bothering to get educated?
As Robert Bryce would ask, are you optimistic? Frankly, I’m not. I fear we will follow Germany into the ditch.
Excellent testimony, thank you for trying to wake congress up. However, my one criticism is that probably very few of the career politicians in congress listened carefully enough or understood what you were really saying. You spoke like the professional that you are, but remember, most of your audience didn't know beans about your subject - or else they wouldn't have approved the policies in the first place. If you have the chance to testify again, I hope you re-word everything down to a fourth grade level so they might get it. For example, by "dispatchable resources", I think I know what you mean, - reliable power generation plants that can fire up or down almost immediately to match fluctuations in demand - but will the average congressman understand that? So, wonderful as your testimony was, it was probably mostly over their heads. Sorry to be so pessimistic.
As a member of the general audience, I think this clip is very good. Glad you got the hidden harm to our growth in.
I think you should change your California wording to comparing our path to German-something. Too many useful idiots still put California on a pedestal. I live here and are surrounded by the idiocy.
This short clip was OK, but the moderators were very poorly prepared to present this topic; They seemed most interested in single catastrophic events while you are most interested in the long game. Illustrative of MSM in general: eg: they trumpet catastrophies but spend little time attempting to explain root causes.
Way too much common sense being applied to the face value assessment of ruinables vs thermal. The fact that we legislate away supply without a legit replacement tells us this is political and has nothing to do with CO2. Many other examples too. We are in the middle of a fascist authoritarian global usurpation of National interests and there’s a distinct Malthusian element. Food, energy, movement, social cohesion etc etc are all to be controlled. Everyone knows that gas to nuclear is the only transition that makes sense. We do not understand their motives and project our logic on to what they’re telling us at our own risk. Pls stop.
A fine testimony. An interesting take away from the first graphic in the article is the areas with the lowest per capita energy use has a high correlation with the areas of highest pollution by energy type.
‘As NERC has noted, “[e]ducation for policymakers and regulators to increase awareness of the reliability implications of policy decisions is a critical need.’
This is the key problem. I applaud your education efforts. Do you think our policy makers are bothering to get educated?
As Robert Bryce would ask, are you optimistic? Frankly, I’m not. I fear we will follow Germany into the ditch.
Thank you! Ultimately, policymakers are accountable to the people. It’s the people that give me hope, not politicians.
Excellent testimony on the electric grid, Travis.
Glad that you underscore the effect that high electricity costs have on low-income people. Attaboy.
Excellent testimony, thank you for trying to wake congress up. However, my one criticism is that probably very few of the career politicians in congress listened carefully enough or understood what you were really saying. You spoke like the professional that you are, but remember, most of your audience didn't know beans about your subject - or else they wouldn't have approved the policies in the first place. If you have the chance to testify again, I hope you re-word everything down to a fourth grade level so they might get it. For example, by "dispatchable resources", I think I know what you mean, - reliable power generation plants that can fire up or down almost immediately to match fluctuations in demand - but will the average congressman understand that? So, wonderful as your testimony was, it was probably mostly over their heads. Sorry to be so pessimistic.
Fair critique. Feel free to share this clip—I think it’s better for a general audience https://www.foxbusiness.com/video/6348779494112
As a member of the general audience, I think this clip is very good. Glad you got the hidden harm to our growth in.
I think you should change your California wording to comparing our path to German-something. Too many useful idiots still put California on a pedestal. I live here and are surrounded by the idiocy.
This short clip was OK, but the moderators were very poorly prepared to present this topic; They seemed most interested in single catastrophic events while you are most interested in the long game. Illustrative of MSM in general: eg: they trumpet catastrophies but spend little time attempting to explain root causes.
Thanks - I'll check it out!
Way too much common sense being applied to the face value assessment of ruinables vs thermal. The fact that we legislate away supply without a legit replacement tells us this is political and has nothing to do with CO2. Many other examples too. We are in the middle of a fascist authoritarian global usurpation of National interests and there’s a distinct Malthusian element. Food, energy, movement, social cohesion etc etc are all to be controlled. Everyone knows that gas to nuclear is the only transition that makes sense. We do not understand their motives and project our logic on to what they’re telling us at our own risk. Pls stop.
A fine testimony. An interesting take away from the first graphic in the article is the areas with the lowest per capita energy use has a high correlation with the areas of highest pollution by energy type.