A recent post by Matt Yglesias on on “the case for clean energy abundance” disturbingly off pitch. One reason is that the post seems unduly dismissive of environmental harms. It pooh-poohs objections to a proposed ultra-large solar that would destroy what Yglesias describes as a “bunch of forest.” Maybe this would be warranted, but it’s not wrong to consider the environmental cost. Yglesias also opposes efforts to restrict fossil fuel production. This is partly on political grounds, because it makes it hard for Democrats to win in places like Louisiana, and partly because he doesn’t think those efforts accomplish much anyway. Yglesias could be right about the benefits of this hands-off approach, to regulating fossil fuels but it would be nice to see some acknowledgement of the harm to public health and the environment. Instead, he describes the only problem with coal as being “smoggy,” which underplays coal’s serious public health and environmental harms.