CERA Misreport: Chris Tomlinson (Houston Chronicle) Goes Sarcastic

“Tomlinson is angry and sarcastic. His worldview is losing intellectually, politically, and business-wise. Is it time for him to retire and happily live off his spouse’s (ill-gotten) renewable energy riches?”

The “existential crisis” climate narrative is in meltdown. Houston solar leader John Berger has resigned, his 12-year-old company (Sunnova) positioned for bankruptcy. Other solar and wind stocks are tanking, and offshore wind is out of play. Battery and EV firms are regular restructuring news.

Climate activists find themselves out of taxpayer monies. The U.S. Department of Energy, Department of Interior, and Environmental Protection Agency are implementing President Trump’s “none-of-government” climate policy, reversing Podesta-Biden-Harris climate alarmism and the budget-busting Inflation Reduction Act.

But there is one fossil-fuel-despising business editorialist who is wed to the Climate Industrial Complex, not to mention a multi-millionaire renewables executive (thanks to your tax money). His name is Chris Tomlinson, whose climate take is so severe that he has written such statements in the New York Times-like Houston Chronicle, as:

We fundamentally have to transform our economy in ways that are unimaginable to people who are over 40. We have to cooperate, innovate and compromise, and most of all, we have to set aside our pride. (here)

Looming over the industry and the congress is the question of the long-term viability of fossil fuels as climate change becomes a greater threat to humanity. (here)

The industry’s most talented propagandists will offer advice on burnishing petroleum’s image as resentment toward fossil fuels grows. (here)

“[Oil companies] don’t want to discuss winding down their industry, even if that is the only sustainable and efficient future for the planet.” (here) 

“No wonder so many Texans refuse to acknowledge climate change; the planet’s fate relies on transforming not only our economy but our culture…. It’s not much of an exaggeration to say that climate change might come to a screeching halt if all humans switched to electric transportation and a vegetarian diet by 2030.” (here).

A lot of Texans consider an affordable steak dinner and a big pickup truck God-given rights…. We will pay for our profligacy one way or another, either by changing our sources of protein and energy or dooming future generations to worsening weather and natural disasters. (here)

Tomlinson is quite an outlier–and without a conscience to report fairly on the exaggerations of climate science and failures of political energies.

The Latest

Tomlinson’s Trump Cabinet members make Big Oil CEOs look like climate activists at CERAWeek” last week is long on sarcasm and short on underlying realities. He begins:

President Donald Trump’s Cabinet secretaries speaking in Houston at the world’s top energy conference made oil and gas executives look like left wing climate activists by comparison as CEOs struggled to adapt to another swing of the political pendulum.

Comment: The oil and gas industry was bullied, bruised, and bribed by Podesta-Biden-Harris, but rent-seeking and greenwashing are not winning strategies now. Consumers and taxpayers can rejoice!

Energy Secretary Chris Wright’s triumphal speech, awkwardly delivered to the friendliest of audiences, proved the Trump administration’s policies are extreme, even from the fossil fuel industry’s perspective. Attendees seemed almost embarrassed for him….

Comment: What a trashy mischaracterization! Other reports of the talk did not mention a flawed delivery or incoherent content. Yes, the remnants of the Climate Industrial Complex at CERA were stunned. But for the real entrepreneurs, the free market capitalists (versus the political capitalists), the DOE secretary’s talk was triumphal.

Almost every CEO speaking at CERAWeek by S&P Global reiterated their commitment to slowing climate change. They asked for a “durable policy” that did not require them to rewrite business plans every four years.

Comment: It is called rent-seeking and greenwashing. Didn’t you know this?

The CEO of Saudi Aramco, whose speeches typically have a Darth Vader vibe, felt positively progressive in his dedication to fighting climate change. “This has to be about delivering real results,” Amin Nasser said. “Let me be absolutely clear: this does not mean stepping back from our global climate ambitions. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions must still get the highest possible priority. That means prioritizing technologies that drive efficiency, lower energy use, and further reduce greenhouse gas emissions from conventional energy.”

Comment: Saudi Aramco should be privatized with its oil and gas wealth going to the citizens, not the State. If only Tomlinson thought about incentives and wealth democratization in this regard. And the same for Mexico, whose mineral wealth has been kept from the people to maintain a political elite (see the proposal of Guillermo Yeatts here).

As the de facto leader of OPEC, Saudi Arabia’s policies carry weight. The kingdom is focused on creating new technologies that capture carbon emissions so the world can keep using oil and natural gas. Climate activists may denounce this strategy, and economists may question its affordability, but at least Nasser acknowledges the need to fight climate change.

Comment: The leader of a centrally planned, autocratic State can afford to greenwash and try to get some good international diplomacy at the same time. There is little altruistic about this, as Tomlinson admits elsewhere. And watch OPEC members deemphasize uneconomic ventures in the new environment.

Wright, Burgum and Trump never talk about reducing emissions; their policies would increase them, thereby speeding up global warming. Burgum argued that the artificial intelligence arms race with China was a bigger problem than overheating the planet.

Comment: Check your alarmist premises, Chris! If only you would question high-sensitivity climate models that make carbon dioxide a political pollutant. CO2 is not a pollutant, and CO2 enrichment is a positive externality.

Wright insisted climate change was simply the price of doing business. “The Trump administration will treat climate change from what it is (sic), a global physical phenomenon that is a side effect of building the modern world,” Wright said. “Responses to climate change bring their own set of trade-offs. The Trump administration will end the Biden administration’s irrational quasi-religious policies on climate change.”

Comment: Correct! Speaking Truth to the Climate Industrial Complex. The Church of Climate, resting on naive Deep Ecology notions, needed this takedown.

Wright and [Interior Secretary Doug] Burgum] went long on criticizing the previous administration, but were short on what they would do to stop rising greenhouse gas emissions. They said the Trump administration’s priority is only to produce more energy.

Comment: Were you listening? Climate mitigation is a fool’s errand and budget buster. The emphasis is on adaptation to and resiliency against weather extremes, which goes far beyond exaggerated ‘climate change’.

My colleagues and I had joked before CERAWeek that we should tally how many times executives would say “drill, baby, drill”….

Comment: Your press colleagues? From the New York Times or Inside Climate News? Maybe that is your problem; confirmation bias from hanging around those you agree with, including your spouse (below).

When CERAWeek founder Dan Yergin asked Chevron CEO Mike Wirth what he was looking for from the administration, he answered: “Durability.” “Swaying from one experience to the other is not the right policy approach. In a long-cycle industry like this, we allocate capital that’s out there for decades, and so we really need consistent and durable policy,” Wirth said. “We’ve seen a lot of things done already by the Trump administration, executive actions, which I think are intended to send a signal. The more durable policy will come through the legislative process.”

Comment: Durability? Yes. The legislative process? Politics has failed freedom, consumers, taxpayers. The abhorrent Inflation Reduction Act (note the fraudulent title) failed Democracy too. With a fiscal emergency upon us (check the US Debt Clock here), executive orders are badly needed, with positive legislation to come.

Global oil and gas companies, most of them based in Texas, spent billions to take advantage of President Joe Biden’s signature Inflation Reduction Act. The IRA promises tax credits for clean energy, including wind, solar, nuclear, hydrogen and geothermal power. It also rewarded companies that capture and sequester carbon.

Comment: A very bad bet by the political capitalists. There is no reason to throw good (taxpayer, investor) money after bad, and reason to welcome this reduction in the federal deficit and national debt.

The Trump administration has promised to repeal the IRA, potentially turning tens of billions of dollars of investments into losses. Houston-based Occidental Petroleum bet big on pulling carbon from the air and using it to pump oil from old wells. CEO Vicki Holub is struggling to rebrand the innovative business to appeal to a White House that does not care about reducing carbon dioxide concentrations. Should she abandon Oxy’s direct air capture work or keep working on it, hoping the next president will restore the tax incentives when the facility comes online in four years?

Comment: Shame on ExxonMobil, shame on Oxy. Never again. They should lose their investments and dare not invest on a government promise in the future.

Trump’s lackeys mistakenly believe they are doing the industry a favor. Serious CEOs know his policies will not last; meanwhile, the rest of the world’s climate regulations remain in effect. Welcome to climate activism, Big Oil, even if it’s only for four years.  

Comment: Chris Tomlinson is a lackey for the Climate Industrial Complex, which includes his wife Shalini Ramanathan, who will provide well for her retired journalist who stubbornly and angrily lobbied for a wasteful cause that had no effect on global climate.

Appendix A: A Fair CERA Report

Consider this realistic summary of CERAWeek 2025 by Jack Schenker, a renewables fuel (yes) businessman:

After a few days of deep discussions at CERAWeek, one thing is clear: the energy industry is shifting from ideology to execution. The narrative of an overnight energy transition is fading, replaced by a more pragmatic approach that prioritizes affordability, reliability, and security—with sustainability now following, rather than leading, the conversation.

Here are the biggest takeaways from the past few days:

1⃣ The Energy Transition Is Stalling—And Realism Is Taking Over

Despite $10 trillion in global investment, the energy transition has not delivered transformative results. CEOs and policymakers are acknowledging that:
Intermittent renewables alone won’t meet demand—fossil fuels, nuclear, and natural gas remain essential.
Natural gas & LNG are no longer “bridge fuels”—they are the backbone of future energy security.
Grid modernization & infrastructure expansion are critical as AI-driven electricity demand surges.

2⃣ AI and Data Centers Are Driving an Energy Demand Shock

Tech is now a primary force in shaping energy strategy:
Google is spending $75B in 2025 on data centers, and hyperscale growth is rewriting electricity demand forecasts.
AI workloads are pushing energy demand up 25%+ by 2050, making grid upgrades and new generation sources an urgent priority.
Natural gas, nuclear, and renewables must scale rapidly to support this digital revolution.

3⃣ Oil Isn’t Going Anywhere—The Production Plateau Keeps Moving

Chevron, Exxon, and BP see no near-term peak for oil.
Major investments continue in Gulf of Mexico, Guyana, and the Middle East for low-cost, high-return oil projects.
Decarbonization efforts are shifting toward efficiency gains rather than reducing output.

4⃣ Carbon Capture & Hydrogen Face Cost and Policy Uncertainty

CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization & Storage) is gaining traction but remains costly.
Hydrogen still lacks economic viability due to infrastructure and market limitations.
Unstable policies & overregulation are holding back large-scale investment.

5⃣ Energy Security & Affordability Are Now the Priority

Governments are being challenged on over-regulation and prescriptive energy policies.
Permitting reform is now a top industry concern across fossil fuels, renewables, and nuclear.
The industry is demanding clear, stable policies that enable investment—without political roadblocks.

The energy industry is no longer debating if fossil fuels will remain part of the mix—it’s now focused on how to balance energy security, affordability, and sustainability…

AI-driven demand, infrastructure bottlenecks, and regulatory uncertainty are the key challenges ahead.

This summary, polite, fair, and free of charge, sure beats Chris Tomlinson, who increasingly is a liability at the Houston Chronicle.

Appendix B: Tomlinson’s Op-Eds (for the record)

Tomlinson Bullies the “Bullying” Oil Industry December 14, 2021

Chris Tomlinson Gets Ugly against Petroleum (Houston Chronicle bias shines through) December 9, 2021)

Business Columnist vs. Fossil Fuels & Capitalism (Houston Chronicle’s biases shine through) March 5, 2019

Also see:

On the Houston Chronicle’s Editorial Crusade Against Fossil Fuels (September 10, 2019)

Getting in the Houston Chronicle (back window better than nothing, I guess) (July 28, 2021)

Houston Chronicle vs. Petroleum: The Latest (May 6, 2020)

“Save Earth”: Houston Chronicle Goes 1970s (Malthusian alarm getting long in the tooth) (April 30, 2019)

Houston Chronicle: Preaching Climate Alarmism Post Harvey (October 4, 2017)

Politicizing Harvey in the Houston Chronicle (September 6, 2017)

Houston Chronicle Editorial: A Global-Warming Scare Story (January 18, 2017)

Houston Chronicle: Former Environmental Writer Documents Origins of Left/Alarmist Bias at the Paper (November 12, 2009)

The post CERA Misreport: Chris Tomlinson (Houston Chronicle) Goes Sarcastic appeared first on Master Resource.