Energy Matters

  Question One and the Climate Our motivation for writing the “Energy Matters” column has always been climate change. Period. Mostly, we have tried to address practical issues that might help a typical consumer make rational choices about energy use. For example, we wrote about how heat pumps work and how much money and energy they can save you.  We have tried to stay away from more controversial issues, but the time seems to have come to talk about the NECEC powerline and Question 1 on the November referendum. A number of good reasons to vote NO on Question 1 are outlined in a Bangor Daily News editorial from October 19th. However, one area about which we have heard little is Question 1’s connection to addressing climate change. Some opponents of the power line claim there are no climate benefits. There are several reasons why this is not true.   One claim is that Hydro Quebec will be buying fossil energy elsewhere to replace what they are sending into Maine.  There is no evidence tha

  Obtanium A reader of our column recently sent us a video (see below) that claims that there is no possibility that renewable energy, specifically wind and solar, can supply our energy needs. It’s narrated by a “Senior Fellow” of the Manhattan Institute, a “free-market think-tank,”  and was produced by PragerU, itself a non-profit funded primarily by petroleum industry donors. We thought it might be interesting to take a few points from the video to see how numbers can be used to distort facts. Unfortunately there isn’t enough room in our column to address all of the misinformation in the video, but let’s make a start. First of all, the narrator sets the scene with a mocking observation that renewable energy advocates are living in a cinematic fantasy world in pursuit of “Unobtainium,” the magic power source. To snap us back into reality he proceeds to pelt us with sobering factoids and intimidating, undocumented numbers, a few apples-to-oranges comparisons and some false equivalencie