'Astonishing' NY Times article prompts response from Stanford University Professor

Mark Jacobson.

The New York Times published an astonishing article last week that blames green power for difficulties countries are facing to mitigate climate change.

The article by Eduardo Porter, How Renewable Energy is Blowing Climate Change Efforts Off Course, serves as a flagship for an on-going attack on the growth of renewables. It is so convoluted and inaccurate that it requires a detailed response.

As Mark Jacobson, director of Atmosphere/Energy Program at Stanford University, pointed out to me via email:

The New York Times article "suffers from the inaccurate assumption that existing expensive nuclear that is shut down will be replaced by natural gas. This is impossible in California, for example, since gas is currently 60 percent of electricity supply but state law requires non-large-hydro clean renewables to be 50 percent by 2030. This means that, with the shuttering of Diablo Canyon nuclear facility be 2025, gas can by no greater than 35-44 percent of California supply since clean renewables will be at least 50 percent (and probably much more) and large hydro will be 6-15 percent. As such, gas must go down no matter what. In fact, 100 percent of all new electric power in Europe in 2015 was clean, renewable energy with no new net gas, and 70 percent of all new energy in the U.S. was clean and renewable, so the fact is nuclear is not being replaced by gas but by clean, renewable energy.

Read the EcoWatch story - “NY Times Pushes Nukes While Claiming Renewables Fail to Fight Climate Change.”

(A corporate-owned newspaper pushing an idea that only corporations can benefit from, steering the solution away from community-owned renewable energy systems – Robert McLean.)

'Astonishing' NY Times article prompts response from Stanord University Professor

Mark Jacobson.

The New York Times published an astonishing article last week that blames green power for difficulties countries are facing to mitigate climate change.

The article by Eduardo Porter, How Renewable Energy is Blowing Climate Change Efforts Off Course, serves as a flagship for an on-going attack on the growth of renewables. It is so convoluted and inaccurate that it requires a detailed response.

As Mark Jacobson, director of Atmosphere/Energy Program at Stanford University, pointed out to me via email:

The New York Times article "suffers from the inaccurate assumption that existing expensive nuclear that is shut down will be replaced by natural gas. This is impossible in California, for example, since gas is currently 60 percent of electricity supply but state law requires non-large-hydro clean renewables to be 50 percent by 2030. This means that, with the shuttering of Diablo Canyon nuclear facility be 2025, gas can by no greater than 35-44 percent of California supply since clean renewables will be at least 50 percent (and probably much more) and large hydro will be 6-15 percent. As such, gas must go down no matter what. In fact, 100 percent of all new electric power in Europe in 2015 was clean, renewable energy with no new net gas, and 70 percent of all new energy in the U.S. was clean and renewable, so the fact is nuclear is not being replaced by gas but by clean, renewable energy.

Read the EcoWatch story - “NY Times Pushes Nukes While Claiming Renewables Fail to Fight Climate Change.”

(A corporate-owned newspaper pushing an idea that only corporations can benefit from, steering the solution away from community-owned renewable energy systems – Robert McLean.)

Energy conversation 'heats up'

Humanity is a voracious user of energy and as conventional sources worsen climate change the conversation about what we do now is really heating up.

NASA scientist Dr James Hansen, who in the early 80s warned the U.S. Congress of the difficulties arising from climate change, is an advocate of nuclear energy arguing that is will both help address climate change and air pollution.

Stanford University’s Professor Mark Jacobson has responded to a recent article from Dr Hansen arguing that nuclear energy is not needed to resolve the world’s climate crisis.

Read the EcoWatch story - “Mark Jacobson to James Hansen: Nukes Are Not Needed to Solve World’s Climate Crisis.”

Letterman learns about renewable energy

U.S. TV host David Letterman
learning about renewable energy.

David Letterman puts aside the frivolities of Hollywood for a moment to learn a little about renewable energy.

The U.S. television host who usually dabbles in celebrity chat and matters from a similar dynamic, changed speed recently to talk with a professor of civil and environmental engineering from Stamford University, Mark Jacobson.

Jacobson, who is also the director of the university’s atmosphere watchdog, said that more that more than 2.5 to four million deaths occur worldwide because of air pollution.