From redstate.com

Wait— it wasn’t supposed to be this way. That is, according to Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, John Kerry, and Joe “Existential Threat to Mankind” Biden, et al. “It,” of course, being the utopian green energy of the Shangra-La of tomorrow — which Sweden is abandoning and returning to nuclear power.

That’s right, climate loons. Sweden just dealt a severe blow to the globalist climate agenda by scraping its green energy targets. In a statement announcing the new policy in the Swedish Parliament, Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson warned that the Scandinavian nation needs “a stable energy system.”

Svantesson said wind and solar power are too “unstable” to meet the nation’s energy requirements. Instead, she said, the Swedish government is shifting back to nuclear power and has scrapped its goal of a “100 percent renewable energy” supply to meet the nation’s energy requirement, as reported by Slay.

Gavin Newsom’s California was unavailable for comment.

The decision is a major blow to unreliable and inefficient technology, not to mention the bitter climate gnome, Greta Thunberg, who continually warns mankind about the next climate armageddon that never comes.

The World Economic Forum vs. Net Zero Watch

European countries are under constant pressure from multiple directions to shift to renewable energy to meet the goals of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) green agenda. The WEF’s vision is being heavily pushed by the United Nations, the World Health Organization (WHO), Paris Climate Agreement, World Bank, and climate catastrophizer Joe Biden and his just-as-wacky administration.

Svantesson continues to warn other Western nations that blindly push the WEF’s green agenda.

In contrast to the WEF and the other aforementioned groups, the environmental campaign group Net Zero Watch has welcomed the move.

The Swedish decision is an important step in the right direction, implicitly acknowledging the low quality of unstable wind and solar, and is part of a general collapse of confidence in the renewable energy agenda pioneered in the Nordic countries and in Germany.

The United Kingdom has every reason to follow Sweden’s lead but should go further.

A small population in a large country such as Sweden can afford to reject fossil fuels, relying on nuclear and hydro and biomass, but the United Kingdom, and other substantial industrialised economies need to face the facts, and understand that only a gas to nuclear pathway is viable to remain industrialised and competitive.

In “substantial industrialized economies,” Svantesson said, “only a nuclear pathway is viable to remain industrialized and competitive.”

Paging Biden’s “climate envoy,” John Kerry. Mr. Kerry? Brother, where art thou?

Kerry is no doubt jetting around in his carbon-belching private plane, waxing ultracrepidarian about impending climate-change disasters, as mumbling Joe Biden continues his war against everything from gas-powered passenger vehicles to gas furnaces to God knows what’s next.

The Bottom Line

For more than six decades, the Democrat Party has pursued utopian goals based on unfounded theories, little or zero fact-based data to support its left-wing narratives, and going about the silly task of fixing things that aren’t broken. Is protecting the environment a necessary cause? Yes, of course, it is.

I grew up not far from Lake Michigan’s South Shore, which, back in the day, meant coal-fired steel mills belching pollution. While my hometown was far enough removed from the area, I vividly remember the polluted skies to the north.

Early on, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) — created in 1970 by Republican President Richard Nixon via executive order, by the way — was a necessary and effective federal agency. But like most if not all federal government agencies, the EPA’s drastic regulations and unreasonable objectives led to unnecessary price hikes for consumers.

How ironic that a European country — Sweden, to boot —finally wakes up to the reality of green energy vs. the stability and efficiency of the pretend “menace” of nuclear energy.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was unavailable for comment. Source

But Greta Thunberg was available: