| | | This is very much a political hit piece, thinly veiled as a renewable energy policy analysis but written with overtly partisan and inflammatory language, particularly targeting former (and now current) President Donald Trump.
Here’s a breakdown of why it qualifies as a hit piece:
Loaded Language and Ad Hominem Attacks - "Blithering idiotic goo", "vomiting up word salad", "hell-bent on blowing up domestic renewable energy opportunities", "whackadoodle", "stupidity nail into the coffin":
These are not terms used in objective journalism or thoughtful policy critique. They're rhetorical grenades meant to ridicule and delegitimize Trump personally and politically.
Trump as the Singular Villain - The article blames Trump for nearly every problem in U.S. renewable energy policy, often ignoring other political or bureaucratic factors, including state-level obstacles, market forces, or past Democratic actions.
- Any mention of Trump is framed as malicious, irrational, or petty e.g., the implication that his opposition to offshore wind is based on a "personal vendetta".
Misleading Presentation of Facts - The piece cherry-picks facts to fit its narrative. For instance:
- Offshore wind struggles are blamed solely on Trump, when in reality many issues stem from local opposition, supply chain disruptions, lawsuits, environmental concerns, and investor risk aversion, some of which existed or persisted under the Biden administration.
- The supposed revocation of final permits and stalling of projects is attributed entirely to Trump without discussing the legal or technical context.
Over-Simplified Good vs Evil Narrative - Renewables = Good. Trump = Evil.
- No discussion of nuanced policy issues like grid reliability, energy security, critical minerals, or cost-benefit tradeoffs.
- Renewable energy challenges (like intermittency, land use, transmission bottlenecks) are dismissed as solved by "21st-century technology" a claim not yet fully borne out in practice.
Conclusion: Biased Commentary Masquerading as Analysis - The piece uses renewable energy as a vehicle for political activism. It promotes a real and serious topic (energy transition) but distorts it through partisan framing, exaggeration, and mockery.
- If someone wanted to convince a neutral reader of the merits of wind or solar power, this would not be the way. Instead, this article preaches to the converted and attacks anyone outside that circle.
|
|
