Barring any unexpected changes or legitimate legal challenges, it appears that former Vice President Joe Biden will be the 46th President of the United States. Since this appears to be the inevitable outcome, it is paramount that we turn our attention to those issues most salient to a Biden administration. Chief among these is the issue of climate change and clean energy.

If you happen to peruse Joe Biden’s campaign website, you will find a laundry list of “Biden Plans” for everything from ending racism to reintroducing the failed Cash for Clunkers program for electric vehicles. Among these patently ridiculous proposals sits a seemingly innocuous promise to “establish a technology-neutral Energy Efficiency and Clean Electricity Standard (EECES) for utilities and grid operators.” But behind its sweet sounding title, creating a national EECES could prove to be a disaster for the energy sector.

Following a decade of nearly unprecedented expansion in energy production, news agencies in mid-2019 cheered the approach of long awaited “energy independence.” Yet, by the end of the year, pundits were arguing that the “myth of U.S. energy independence” had evaporated. What happened? In short, both were correct. Although America is approaching total energy independence, we are still far from achieving this goal.

America, as well as many other places throughout the world, has witnessed mass protests, claiming catastrophic disasters if fossil fuels are not eliminated. However, only a very small percentage of protesters know the methods and science upon which they are protesting. This is dangerous to our society.

Though a far cry from ending capitalism, as protestors on the streets of Washington, D.C. espoused Monday during their attempt to shut down the city in the name of climate change, Congress is eyeing an expansion of market manipulation by further subsidizing electric vehicles.

Has the use of fossil fuels increased the amounts of carbon dioxide and created an existential threat to planet earth? Ivan Pentchoukov of The Epoch Times reports that Petteri Taalas - Secretary-General of the World Meteorological Organization - says, “No.”