Is It Reasonable To Question The Source Of Science Behind The EPA Smart Grid Products?

by Conor Coughlin

When considering the Dept of Energy’s newest designs to accommodate a global New Green Deal, would it be reasonable to ask a few pertinent questions? Not just about the financial arrangements with members of new international non-profit groups like the Council on Inclusive Capitalism, but also the source for the original scientific evidence propping up their green money-making ventures. If that so-called science involved any groups affiliated with David Brower, then someone in Congress might want to double-check the math on their scientific reports.

David Brower was the first executive director of the Sierra Club, that boasted about receiving a back-handed compliment from a EPA Director, which was one of his favorite quotes about himself. “Thank God for Dave Brower. He makes it easy for the rest of us to look reasonable”, which basically sums up the problem with the EPA in a nutshell. Looking reasonable can be a tough part to play, even for these seasoned actors.

David Brower is highly celebrated for founding the North Cascades Conservation Council (1957), Friends of Earth (1969), Earth Island Institute (1981), the John Muir Institute for Environmental Studies (1997), but his most effective project may have been Climate Solutions. A franchise of the Earth Island Institute that was formed in 1999, which NW political elites selected to operate the government’s Harvesting Clean Energy program in Washington State.

The stated purpose for that massive government research program, was to seek out electrical energy efficiency solutions in America’s Industrial Sector. Which worked closely with the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA), that was also conducting similar research. NEEA also operated the EnergyIdeas Clearinghouse that was managed through Washington State University. Reporting on that pathetic university-run initiative had to be suppressed, or it would cast serious suspicion on other aspects of job, and wealth creation narratives that were being pushed by NW political leaders at that time. None of their spacious claims were accurate at all, or contained any verifiable evidence that a competitive clean energy economy was being built. It was all Smoke & Mirrors!

Spin Doctors had to protected these government-funded non-profits, that appeared to have morphed into the official marketing arm for the Regional Economic Agenda created by Governor Gary Locke in the weeks before he left office. Corporate news outlets needed to bury the facts surrounding Gary Locke’s other new enterprise called the Prosperity Partnership, because it was already marketing Dept of Energy products and services to fellow NGO’s and our trade allies. Gary Locke’s Prosperity Partnership was created in 2004, during the eight month long election of Governor Christine Gregoire, the WA State Attorney General that had won one of most controversial elections in US history.

This made Governor Gregoire, the defacto leader of the Prosperity Partnership. Which included Democrat US Senators and Congress members, union bosses, big business, utility executives and many of the same WA State bureaucrats that were linked to the so-called scientific studies produced for the Bonneville Power Administration. BPA is the federal agency that markets the inexpensive hydro-electric power from NW dams, which corporate environmentalist would now like to tear down. To help save salmon, and create more high-paying sustainable jobs for education bureaucrats. .

Climate Solutions had allegedly produced its first Poised For Profit report on green money-making ventures in 2001, then released another Poised For Profit report on Smart Energy in 2003. Average Americans never had the opportunity to learn of those two reports. Unless they happened to have read a media press release by the Natural Resource Defense Council, regarding the announcement of the West Coast Governors Global Warming Initiative on September 28, 2003. There was no mainstream media coverage of that legally questionable environmental pact, because few honest Americans would have bought into the twisted logic of the scheme.

The NRDC media release claimed “We have the technology to beat global warming. All it takes is the political initiative to make it happen. The governors’ plan demonstrates the marriage of business and political leadership required to unleash the solutions we need,”. That media release also contained a statement from Climate Solutions’ Policy Director claiming “Trends in business, technology and environmental stewardship that start on the West Coast tend to sweep the rest of the nation”, but offered no evidence to back-up that hypothesis.

Mainstream media had to bury the secret West Coast Governors scam, because California’s Governor had just been recalled from office for his role in the California Energy Crisis of 2000-2001. When the CA governor Gray Davis signed on to that bogus initiative, he was only two weeks away from being removed from office for his role in the manufactured energy crisis that drove electric rates up by 50% in the West Coast states. Voters would have gone ballistic, had they known they had been stabbed in the back by corporate media and environmentalist. Bureaucrats were essentially claiming that these three Democrat governors, had a greater authority than the US Senate, which had recently rejected the UN’s Kyoto Protocols.

That same corrupt logic was applied again, when Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels created a new US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement in 2005. Which was used by over a thousand mayors to loot billions of dollars from social programs in their cities, for use in totally non-productive green-washing schemes. By 2006, Greg Nickels had received an EPA award for his initiative, which had already failed in an epic manner. None of the cities had met their emission reduction goals. That failed program, was expanded into the Climate Mayors initiative in 2014, which was represented at the COP-28 Clown Show, to lend the mayoral perspectives to transformative conversations.

All of these programs were fed by another DOE initiatives, like the Save Energy Now program. A $100 billion boondoggle, that paid universities to conduct 200 “industrial assessments” by staff to assist EPA private-sector partners in making their facilities become more profitable and productive.

To be clear, that $100 billion didn’t buy any technology, or provide any evidence that those facilities ever implemented any of their cost-saving recommendation. US tax-payers may have paid for 200 expensive industrial assessments”, but those university assessments were a joke. That are as worthless today, as the FTX cryptocurrency that were used to influence the outcomes of the 2020 elections.

We now have Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, teaming up with the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) in a plan to ban natural-gas stoves and appliances, as if that was a policy position that somehow made sense. Secretary Granholm is the type of partisan political hack, that doesn’t have any real experience in energy related policy. She is pushing the new corporate business model for DOE’s Climate Corps, and the sales-force for EPA ENERGY STAR® Smart Grid product line, that could be worth potentially several trillion dollars to its Public/Private partners at the World Economic Forum.

These are same shadowy investors that have been making the big-bucks from programs designed to protect our National Security, from cyber-attacks by foreign actors. The Office of Electricity was created back in 2003, to protect our National Electrical Grid from a multitude of serious threats presented by hostile forces. In May of 2022, the Office of Electricity released a 2020 Smart Grid report that spoke about private-sector investments in the operation of the grid, but not about how they made money off of their efforts.

This may be due to the fact, those corporate partners were associated with groups engaged in an entirely new genre of industry; M&A Investment Consortiums. The term of Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) refers to combining of two businesses, which in this case would apply to educational institutions and Off-Budget-Enterprises operated by NGO’s. According to Investopedia, Consortiums are often found in in the non-profit sector, among educational institutions that pool the resources of libraries, research activities, and professors that share them throughout the members of the group. The students do not benefit from these financial ventures, but they do pay for them.

Education Consortiums have a tremendous potential for abuse of civil rights from antitrust activities, as these organizations are often involved with government in setting standards for industries. Bureaucrats have absolutely no experience in business or commerce, and are the last people an honest business owner would trust to create regulations. Check out any of these Education Consortiums, such as the The Five Colleges group. You will quickly understand how these institutions are failing their students.

Its also why the average American can’t be informed about groups like the Climate Group, that are pretending to be dedicated public servants. The average citizen would never look to groups like the Global Covenant for Mayors On Climate and Energy for advice on energy policies, they would be happy if their mayors would fix the problems in own backyard. These groups may claim to represent thousands of cities, but they definitely don’t represent the interest of the people residing in those cities.

That would be as ridiculous, as thinking that California’s SEI’s Climate Corps was really providing professional development opportunities for sustainability and resiliency projects. The SEI Climate Corps claims to have worked with over 600 partners, and 800 Fellows at agencies like the ‘Workers Ownership Initiative” to Build Wealth, Retain Quality Jobs, and Stabilize Businesses in Los Angeles County. Try joining one of those clubs, and you’ll quickly learn how Inclusive Capitalism works.

Its important to understand, all of those government business ventures are presented as legitimate corporations that anticipate achieving a return on their investments. Just don’t ask how non-profit organizations generate such tremendous wealth, or you may be labeled a right-wing conspiracy nut.

So the next time you hear a journalist repeating the “Silence Is Violence” narrative, you might ask them if they still embrace the old “Silence Is Golden” media business model?