For several years, Arizonans have faced a threat of radical renewable energy mandates being imposed on our grid. In 2018, the voters overwhelmingly rejected a measure that would have required utilities to generate 50% of their energy with “renewables” by 2030. Then, in 2021, the Arizona Corporation Commission considered, and rejected, a 100% renewable mandate completely banning fossil fuel generation by 2050. But now, the utilities have voluntarily committed themselves to these goals, known as “Net Zero by 2050”, under the broader requirements of their Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) commitments.
It didn’t make a ton of news in the United States media, but a new study published by the International Energy Agency in mid-October emphasizes the enormous potential roadblock to a successful energy transition posed by a projected need to refurbish and double capacity on global electricity grids.
The study, titled, “Electricity Grids and Secure Energy Transitions,” advises governments that investments in expanding and refurbishing power grids must “nearly double by 2030 to over USD 600 billion per year after over a decade of stagnation at the global level, with emphasis on digitalising and modernising distribution grids.” That level of new investment in just this single piece of the overarching plans for a complete re-tooling of the global energy system is not currently a part of existing policies around the world. Given that most developed countries are already saddled with overwhelming public debt and the lack of means in developing countries, the prospect for a doubling of current grid investments seems dubious at best.
But, if anything, the goals laid out in this IEA missive only become more implausible as one reads through the list. Perhaps the most extraordinary among them is the agency’s estimate that reaching the UN’s goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 would require the refurbishment, upgrading and build-out of 80 million kilometers of new transmission lines by 2040. For those who struggle with conversion factors, 80 million km is roughly the equivalent of 50 million miles, or 2,000 times the Earth’s circumference.
That is the equivalent of all the transmission capacity built by mankind in history, and the IEA says it must be accomplished in just 17 years for this energy transition to succeed. IEA notes that achieving this extraordinary goal – among other improbable propositions laid out in the report – will require “secure supply chains and a skilled workforce,” neither of which currently exists.
How will this massive expansion in necessary skilled workers be achieved? The report doesn’t really say.
How will those supply chains – almost all of which are currently dominated by a single country, China – be secured? The report says only “Governments can support the expansion of supply chains by creating firm and transparent project pipelines and by standardising procurement and technical installations.” Sounds easy, right? But the U.S. congress has a hard time just agreeing what day of the week it is: The thought that it will suddenly develop the ability to engage in that sort of complex thinking and legislating in a constructive way is absurdly unlikely.
The report then somewhat hilariously points to another elephant residing in the energy transition’s living room, noting that governments all over the world need to streamline their energy permitting processes to accommodate this massive grid expansion. Again, using the U.S. congress as an example, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin has spent the last 19 months trying to put together enough votes to approve legislation that would address just a small portion of what is really needed in this realm and had no success, with no real prospects of that changing until, at best, 2025, when the next congress will be sworn into office.
Think about this in the context of a story I wrote in June about the TransWest Express transmission project, which had finally received its final permits from the federal government. This is a line that is about 1300 miles long, designed to carry electricity generated by Wyoming wind farms to customers on the West coast. The punch line on this single transmission project is that the permitting process took 17 years to achieve. Assuming no new litigation arises, it will now take about another 3 years to complete and place into service.
Like so many of the work products published by the IEA in recent years, this report’s findings seem to be motivated mostly to help achieve political goals based mainly on wishful thinking, with little consideration given to long-ingrained dynamics at play in the real world. Even if overwhelming debt burdens and resource and supply chain challenges could be just wished away, the political impediments to achieving these unrealistic goals seem destined to force a day of reckoning for the entire energy transition plan.
David Blackmon is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, an energy writer, and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
You know something is seriously wrong with our nation’s universities when the ultra-liberal Bill Maher vigorously advised our youth, on his nationally syndicated cable TV show, to stay far away from college because “it just makes you stupid.” Clearly the majority of Americans agree with Bill’s denunciation, for according to a survey by Gallup, just 14 percent of Americans—and only 11 percent of business leaders—strongly agreed that graduates have the necessary skills and competencies to succeed in the workplace.
Charles J. Sykes, author of Failed U:TheFalse Promise of Higher Education, succinctly describes the circus-like campus atmosphere that is currently indulged by university students:
The four-year or longer sojourn in the groves of academe is a kaleidoscopic experience of classrooms, frats, lectures, keg parties, all-nighters, political correctness, hookups, alcohol, athletic spectacle, and the occasional intellectual insight.
At some point in their college experience, students are thankful that their parents have only the vaguest idea what they have been paying for on campus—not just the extracurricular drunken feasts but also the bizarre cultural intolerances, the obsessive rituals of conformity, the absentee faculty, teaching assistants unable to speak English, the hair-trigger racial, cultural, gender, and political sensitivities, and the junk courses with their effort-free As.
To drive this point home, a progressive college preparatory book entitled: The Her Campus Guide to College Life (please note the absence of a Him in the title), unwittingly exposed the amoral world that is commonly experienced nowadays on a college campus near you. The book’s contents are filled with wicked subtitles:
PREVENTING THEFT • PROTECTING AGAINST INTRUDERS • STAYING SAFE AT PARTIES AND BARS • BEING SAFE WHILE HOOKING UP • STAYING SAFE LATE AT NIGHT • PREVENTING SEXUAL ASSAULT • STALKERS • EATING DISORDERS IN COLLEGE • DRINKING • SMOKING • VAPING • DRUGS • STRESS • ANXIETY • DEPRESSION • EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT HAVING SAFE SEX • HOOK-UPS • SEX • ROTTEN ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS • FRENEMIES • TOXIC FRIENDSHIPS • ROOMMATE CONTRACTS
What responsible parent would knowingly want to send her beautiful child to this depraved environment for four years? But if not college, then what? Well, realize that there are over 12,000 occupations to choose from, yet the typical university offers roughly 76 majors—just 76 career choices. It’s this vast world of 12,000 occupations that is largely ignored by high school guidance counselors, who for decades have forcefully issued a dire edict: any high school graduate who fails to attain the right to walk the hallowed halls of a university will be banned from achieving the American Dream. The lie worked. College was tattooed on nearly everyone’s lips, and the nation’s parents suddenly took issue with the son or daughter who wanted to join the ranks of the “washouts” who were enrolled in a “lowly” trade school.
So now, the country is inundated with unskilled college graduates who are recipients of useless diplomas, a mountain of debt, and a seething hatred toward capitalism and Old Glory. Nevertheless, because of a staunch belief in the college “dream,” a young alumnus will proudly reference to potential employers the degree she earned five years ago in Women’s Studies from State University, even though she is currently living in her childhood bedroom while earning $13.65 an hour as a coffee shop barista. Meanwhile, due to a huge shortage of skilled trade professionals, millions of open and high-paying trade positions will be left vacant. The nation urgently needs more security, fire, and service technicians, solar energy technicians, 3D printing technicians, pipe fitters, sales representatives, plumbers, pile-driver operators, drone pilots, stonemasons, diesel mechanics, dental hygienists, cybersecurity experts, glaziers, physical therapy assistants, reinforcing iron and rebar workers, pilots, and elevator mechanics—who can earn $50 an hour without a college degree!
In reality, the land of opportunity is found in over 30,000 apprenticeship programs that will pay a student to learn a blue- or white-collar skill. It is also found in trade schools, cyber bootcamps, sales, community colleges with corporate alliances, mentorships, entrepreneuring, and jobs offered to high school graduates. So long as a young adult can solve every day math problems, can read, write and speak well, it is within this vast world of career training opportunities—offered outside the college arena—that young adults will find the positions in life that will be both financially and spiritually rewarding.
For example, we had a deeply shy young man come to our home to repair our refrigerator ice making machine. After nine months of training, and 14 months of work experience, he is now earning $72,000 annually at the age of 22. Then, too, the new CEO of Costco started working for the company as a forklift driver. And the high school dropout John Marriot, founder of Marriot Hotels, started his career as a long john salesman to lumberjacks in the Pacific northwest. There are millions of similar inspirational stories that serve to utterly destroy the college-is-superior myth—over and over and over again.
In summation, what do each of the following trade school programs have in common: Plumbing, Ship Building, Dental Hygienist, HVAC, and Surgical Technician? Well, they each provide a graduate with a real, high-paying job skill that will serve him or her for life. Now, let’s pick five Harvard University majors that are deemed by its governing board to be worthy of a $217,000 tuition price tag (excluding room and board and other fees): Folklore and Mythology, African and African American Studies, History of Art and Architecture, International Relations, and Women, Gender, and Sexuality. Seriously, what job skills does a Folklore and Mythology graduate bring to the table? And couldn’t this subject be mastered inexpensively simply by reading $300 worth of textbooks? And how are these graduates going to afford to pay a $2,500 monthly student loan payment while possibly earning $100 a day for regaling entertaining folklore stories at a Renaissance fair?
So, Bill Maher was spot on when he emphatically declared: “Don’t go to college!” For their sake, and the sake of our country, may our young adults heed his clarion warning.
Bruce Goodmansen is the president of Fire Up the Soul, LLC, and the author of the bestselling book: 100% Success Without College, which can be reviewed at anythingbutcollege.com. He is often invited to speak at conservative and homeschooling events.
K-12 schools in Arizona are currently flush with cash. Between billions in increased state spending from the legislature, COVID cash from the feds, and declining student populations, district school spending is at an all time high. But next week, voters across Arizona will decide the fate of 23 bond requests from schools that total a historic $3.5 billion.
This level of borrowing being sought by local school districts is both unwise and unnecessary, especially given the large amounts of money that have been pumped into the system. State funding has increased so quickly in the last 36 months that the legislature decided to override the constitutional spending limit the last two fiscal years. This is funding over and above the formulaic cap in the constitution that exists to protect taxpayers from runaway and unaccountable spending.
And contrary to what you probably hear from teachers’ unions and their sycophant friends in the media, lawmakers continue to increase school spending with every state budget. With all this new spending, district schools receive more money per student than ever before, and it’s not even close.
Not included in the state spending cap, however, are federal funds. And when schools were shut down during COVID, the federal government poured trillions of dollars into them. Many of the school districts asking their taxpayers to hand over hundreds of millions of dollars in bonds next week are still sitting on a pile of unspent COVID cash…
Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego continues to govern as a tyrant. Just look at item 37 on the next agenda she set for the November 1 Phoenix City Council meeting. The item calls for the City of Phoenix to accept a grant from a Rockefeller-sponsored entity headquartered in Copenhagen to implement meat consumption mitigation. But it’s not just the item alone that’s the problem.
In the dark behind closed doors, the Mayor of Phoenix told city staff to limit public comment to only 5 agenda items per person. By doing so, she possibly went against city code and violated state open meeting law and her loyalty oath to uphold and protect both the Arizona and U.S. Constitutions.
The Mayor suppressing voices of constituents was imposed without the other city council members being informed. Although this regulation was discovered at the September 6 meeting, city staff admitted at the October 18 meeting that the Mayor is the one who directed them to limit public comment to a maximum of 5 total agenda items per person.
During the Call to the Public at that October meeting, I called out Mayor Gallego for her policy.
Before we delve into the destruction to public opinion that the Mayor’s regulation causes, the Phoenix City Clerk’s site says, “Citizens may… express their views on any published agenda item.” Phoenix City guidelines on public comment say people have the ability to speak for two minutes on agenda items outside of the public comment section.
While the limitation of commenting on 5 agenda items may not sound like a big deal, city meetings can have anywhere between 20-200 agenda items plus a general public comment agenda item. To put that into context, 5 out of 200 items is only 2% of the meeting.
Furthermore, Mayor Kate’s restriction prevents the public from petitioning their elected officials if there are more than 5 agenda items that need public input.
Let’s say there are the following 7 items on the agenda for the next meeting:
Issue a $200 million bond that is backed by raising taxes
Road diets where the city reduces traffic lanes
Mitigation of meat consumption
Implementation of facial recognition technology
Solidifying the 15-minute city framework
Recommitting to red light surveillance cameras
Reducing parking around the city with the goal to get people to stop driving less
A person from the public is limited to speak on only 5 of those 7 items. Furthermore, that person cannot sign up to give public comment, which is protected in city code. Not only does this regulation restrict content from being brought forth by the public, but it also inhibits the ability of the people to petition their elected officials to let them know which way the people desire them to vote on specific policies.
Petitioning the government is protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 2, Section 5 of the Arizona Constitution. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution says, “Congress shall make no law respecting the right of the people to petition the Government.” The Arizona Constitution also states, “The right of petition, and of the people peaceably to assemble for the common good, shall never be abridged.” Restricting people’s right to petition their elected officials is a direct infringement on both constitutions.
Not only is petitioning the government protected, but content is also protected. The Arizona Attorney General states, “Public bodies may impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on speakers, but any content-based restrictions must be narrowly tailored to effectuate a compelling state interest.” The Arizona Ombudsman Guidance further solidifies the opinion from the Attorney General. When discussing what could be a compelling state interest in court of law, the Military Leadership Diversity Commission of the United States Department of Defense states, “Only important, specific goals may satisfy this level of judicial scrutiny.”
As stated at the beginning of this article, the loyalty oath is swearing to protect and uphold both the U.S. and Arizona Constitutions. Because Mayor Kate has won multiple elections, she has sworn multiple times to the loyalty oath. If the oath is found to be violated, the maximum penalty is a class 4 felony and removal from office.
For public bodies and elected officials like those at the City of Phoenix to avoid possibly breaking the law, the Arizona Attorney General says, “The best practice is to decide [public comment changes] in advance [of the meeting] so that speakers have prior notice about the restrictions that the public body has set. In this way, the public body may be able to prevent allegations that it either treated speakers differently or used content-based restrictions.” Mayor Kate’s public comment limitation was not published, not written down, and staff has no idea where it came from other than her mouth.
While we have covered the possible content and petition limitations from the Mayor, another interesting issue stemming from the Attorney General’s recommendations is the potential targeting of specific voters. Since Mayor Kate’s regulation is not written down, it appears the Mayor decided to implement this policy after the June 28 Phoenix meeting. At this meeting, members of the public and Mayor Kate’s 2020 opponent showed up to speak against the Phoenix water rate hikes, water allotment reduction, and mismanagement of funds. It was at the next meeting, after summer break, that the public discovered the 5-agenda-item limitation. It looks like Mayor Kate may be targeting specific speakers and is treating members of the public differently.
Instead of allowing folks to freely express themselves, people like Kate Gallego will do anything to silence anyone in the mission to obtain all the power and control they possibly can. They are tyrants that use their power to implement radical policies and agendas to control others.
Limiting the number of items someone can speak on is way outside the bounds of Phoenix City Code, Phoenix’s public comment guidelines, the Attorney General’s opinion, Arizona state law, Ombudsman Guidance, the Arizona Constitution, and the U.S. Constitution. The Mayor of Phoenix crossed the line with her latest shenanigans by suppressing the voters of Phoenix, and in doing so, denied the city council members from considering their constituents’ views before voting. Kate Gallego has completely disgraced the sanctity of the institution and democracy. This public comment regulation is a violation of the bedrock of our Republic – consent of the governed. By limiting public comment content from her constituents, Mayor Kate exposes her true self. Her policy restricting free speech needs to be abolished.
Further, Arizona state law says, “A member of the public body may not knowingly direct a staff member to communicate in violation of [open meeting law].”
Elected officials and city staff work for us, not the globalist organizations. It’s why they swear an oath to protect and uphold the State and U.S. Constitutions. By restricting the ability to address officials through public comment, Mayor Kate is preventing the people from having the last say to stop bad policies. The Arizona State Legislature needs to take this up, review the open meeting laws, and codify public comment as a guaranteed First Amendment right to guarantee the public can petition their elected officials. In the meantime, we’ll see what happens at the next Phoenix City Council Meeting on November 1.
Jeff Caldwell currently helps with operations at EZAZ.org. He is also a Precinct Captain, State Committeeman, and Precinct Committeeman in Legislative District 2. Jeff is a huge baseball fan who enjoys camping and exploring new, tasty restaurants! You can follow him on X here.
Following in the footsteps of his predecessor (now-Governor Katie Hobbs), Secretary of State Adrian Fontes appears determined to implement an Election Procedures Manual (EPM) that is ripe with unlawful provisions. The EPM is used by election officials throughout the state as the rulebook to conduct and run elections, so it is critically important that every provision in the manual strictly adheres to state law.
Now, fresh off an important legal win over the illegal signature verification process in the EPM, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, along with the Thomas More Society, is suing Fontes once again—this time over unstaffed ballot drop boxes…
An Illegal Method of Voting
Arizona law establishes four different methods for secure early voting. According to A.R.S. § 16-548(A), an early ballot shall either be:
Delivered to the officer in charge of elections, typically the county recorder.
Mailed to the officer in charge of elections, typically the county recorder.
Deposited by the voter at any polling place in the county.
Deposited by the voter’s agent (family member, household member, caregiver) at any polling place in the county.
Did you catch that? Nowhere in the law does it allow for the use of unstaffed drop boxes. In fact, if you read through Fontes’ EPM, you’ll notice something…
