John Droz

John Droz Jr.



John Droz, Jr. is an anti-wind-power activist and founder of Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions. Droz formerly served as Senior Fellow at American Tradition Institute (now known as E&E Legal Institute).5Fellows & Advisors,” American Tradition Institute. Archived February 7, 2013. URL:

He retired at age 33 after a successful career in real estate investing, but has also worked for GE: Aerospace Electronics (Utica, NY), Mohawk Data Sciences (Herkimer, NY), and Monolithic Memories (Cupertino, CA).6James Borden. “The Man WHo Makes Sea Level Rise Go Away,” Scientific American, September 30, 2013. Archived December 14, 2017. URL:

In 2011, he became a member of the Board of Directors and scientific advisor to NC-20, an advocacy group that has been outspoken against restrictions on coastal development. He was listed as science advisor until at least 2012.7Board of Directors,” NC-20. Archived July 30, 2012. URL:

Droz ran the website “Wind Power Facts8Wind Power Facts: Toolkit of Information,” Archived June 11, 2012. URL: (now called Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions)9Potpourri,” Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions. Archived December 14, 2017. URL: which asserted mainstream information about wind power was distributed primarily by industry lobbyists while the “real science” indicated we should abandon wind power as a source of energy. AWED and Droz were also behind, a website opposing production tax credits for the wind industry.10CONTACT US,” Wind Production Tax Credit Facts. Archived December 14, 2017. URL:

Droz also runs the website Mac vs. PC, where Droz writes that “It seems somewhat strange that I have to give credentials — or need to explain ‘my motivation’ — for presenting factual information.” He notes that “Most people would probably consider me a technology expert.”11Person behind the website,” Mac vs. PC. Archived December 14, 2017. URL:

Stance on Climate Change

June 17, 2014

Droz has released a position document on climate change (emphasis added):12“Global Warming: The Scientific View” (PDF). Document created by John Droz June 17, 2014. Retrieved from Black River Valley Macintosh User Group and converted to PDF.

“As a scientist I have been asked to elaborate a bit on my position regarding the Global Warming proposition — and how it relates to wind energy. These are very legitimate (and important) questions.

The main hypothesis put forward is technically called Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), where the fancy term “anthropogenic” means “man-made.”

Although I am not a climatologist, as a scientist I know how to do thorough and objective research. (BTW, skepticism is a key ingredient of true scientists.) In my capacity as a scientist, I have read literally hundreds of reports and studies on this climate issue, from numerous experts. After digesting these studies and reports, it is very clear to me that AGW is still a scientifically unresolved matter. This is what is called a hypothesis.”

Later in his document, he also claims to debunk “myths” related to climate change, then linking to a wide range of prominent climate change deniers as resources including WUWT by Anthony Watts, the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), Marc Morano‘s Climate Depot, Judith Curry’s Climate Etc., the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change’s CO2 ScienceFriends of Science, and the debunked Oregon Petition among other sources.

October 2, 2008

The following is from a paper by John Droz titled: “The Power of Energy”:13John Droz. “The Power of Energy,” October 2, 2008. Available at SSRN.

“Is Global Warming a scientifically resolved matter? No. There is some very convincing evidence (and scientists) that indicate that there is such a thing as Global Warming. But there are some very qualified scientists (with good evidence) that suggest just the opposite.

More importantly, statements often appearing in the media like ‘the majority of scientists’ believe in Global Warming, are meaningless. First of all, no legitimate survey has ever been done, and secondly, science is not about the number of people who advocate a position.”

Droz on Covid-19

John Droz is listed as a contact for a website registered on October 18, 2021 titled The website purports to provide “Science-Based Information” on Covid-19, and repeats a range of common misinformation and myths regarding the deadly virus.14COVID-19: Science-Based Information,” Archived November 8, 2021. Archive URL:

The website compares science around climate change to Covid-19 (Emphasis in original):

“We are being bombarded with numerous ‘politically correct’ products (e.g., industrial wind energy) and agendas (e.g., climate change), parading about as if they are proven by Science. They are not!

“So, it’s no surprise that COVID-19 policies have fallen prey to this anti-science (and anti-American) scourge. The bottom line is that self-serving parties will continue to use a strategy as long as it works. We need to expose the deviations from real Science in ALL of our technical policies — but here our focus is on COVID-19.”

The website links to two reports and several resources arguing against Covid-19 vaccinations and advocating for alternative treatments not approved to treat Covid-19.

The first report, which listed Droz as the sole author, was titled “The FDA COVID-19 Drug Approval Process: Remdesivir vs Ivermectin: How Greed and Negligence Likely Killed 450,000± Americans.”

In that report, Droz claimed 400,000 Americans “died unnecessarily” when Ivermectin was not approved for use to treat Covid-19.15John Droz. “The FDA COVID-19 Drug Approval Process: Remdesivir vs Ivermectin: How Greed and Negligence Likely Killed 450,000± Americans,”, September 2, 2021.

The second report did not list any author, and was titled “Some Scientific Observations about the Medical Establishment’s Handling of COVID-19 to Date.”

This report referred to “thousands of medical professionals” who had “courageously spoken up, objecting to certain actions/inactions of the Medical Establishment, often at great professional risk.”

It linked to an article at Natural News16100,000 doctors & medical professionals oppose COVID-19 vaccine,” Natural News, December 18, 2020. Archived November 18, 2021. Archive URL: — “a conspiracy-minded alternative medicine website”17Mariah Blake. “Popular Anti-Science Site Likens Journalists to ‘Nazi Collaborators’ Over GMO Coverage,Mother Jones, July 25, 2014. Archived November 19, 2021. Archive URL: that is a prominent purveyor of anti-vaccine misinformation.18Alexis C. Madrigal. “The Small, Small World of Facebook’s Anti-vaxxers,” The Atlantic, February 27, 2019. Archived November 19, 2021. Archive URL:

The article talked about “doctors & medical professionals” opposing the Covid-19 vaccine. It referred positively to a video “banned on Facebook and YouTube and is being denounced by media all over the world,” and suggested (emphasis in original):

There is no pandemic, the governments are faking the death counts (simply placing all deaths in the fabricated COVID category), all the governments are using a fraudulent RT-PCR machine to mark healthy people as infected (therefore driving a fear based case-demic of people who aren’t ill) plus the vaccine is designed to kill, cripple and/or cause infertility,” the article claimed.

Droz commented on the “doctors” speaking out: “That is commendable, as this is how real Science works.”

Droz’s report claims it is beneficial for the “Medical Establishment” to hear from those who are not medical professionals:

“Since outsiders are not medical professionals, the Medical Establishment does not have an official say regarding their professional certifications, reputation, livelihood, etc. As such they can be more candid than most insiders are willing to be,” the report claimed.

The report, like the other, compared climate science to science around Covid-19:

“Unfortunately it is yet another chapter in the global fight between real Science and political science. This conflict is now going on in multiple fronts (e.g. energy, climate, education, etc.),” it claimed.

The report claimed inaccurately that “most masks are ineffective” and linked to a study claiming they could cause health issues. “The general Covid-19 rules and recommendations from the Medical Establishment have been illogical, inconsistent and/or harmful” the report suggested.

While the report claims it is not against vaccination, it goes on to describe the mRNA injection as “deceptive”:

“Calling this injection a ‘vaccine’ is like saying ‘clean energy’ or ‘wind farm’ — which are deceptive and inaccurate marketing (political science) terms,” the report claimed.

It repeats similar theories to the other report written by Droz:

“[T]hey are cooking the books regarding the COVID-19 death rate by combining those who died with COVID-19, with those that died from COVID-19,” it claimed.

It goes on to claim up to 50,000 deaths were caused by the vaccine:

“There are Medical Establishment insiders who claim that the actual data indicates that the COVID-19 bio-chemical injection has caused significant problems — e.g., 50,000± US deaths and here.”

The report linked to an interview with Dr. Peter McCullough, who received a restraining order from Baylor in 2021,19Alicia Ault. “Baylor Gets Restraining Order Against COVID Vaccine Skeptic Doc,” Medscape, September 16, 2021. and has made false claims about Covid-19 vaccinations.20Rémi Banet,”US cardiologist makes false claims about Covid-19 vaccination,” AFP Fact Check, April 9, 2021.

Droz’s website links to a wide range of other similar content on the website.

Key Quotes

January, 2012

In a PowerPoint presentation opposing the Pantego wind project, Droz said:

“When I first heard about wind energy I was a supporter. Quite frankly, I never liked the looks of turbines but felt that we would have to live with the unsightliness as a trade-off for the good I initially assumed they were doing. Then I did some research and Critical Thinking. My conclusion now (as a scientist, economist, and environmentalist) is that industrial Wind Energy is not based on sound science.”21Does the Pantego Wind Project Make Sense?”, Power Point Presentation by John Droz, Jr., January 2012.


The following is an archived excerpt from the “Toolkit of Information” on the Wind Power Facts website:

“A critical fact to understand is that just because a power source is an alternative, or a renewable, does NOT automatically mean that it is better than any conventional or fossil fuel source!”22Wind Power Facts: Toolkit of Information,” Archived March 11, 2012. URL:

“90% of my time is spent on science. My focus is to try to educate citizens. Citizens could care less whether I have a peer-reviewed article.”23Laura Leslie. “Sea-level bill: Who is John Droz?”,, June 6, 2012.

Key Actions

February 5, 2021

Droz, identified as “physicist, North Carolina,” was the only signatory on a two-page Feb. 5, 2021 report claiming that Trump, who lost 61 of the 62 lawsuits24William Cummings, Joey Garrison and Jim Sergent. “By the numbers: President Donald Trump’s failed efforts to overturn the election,” USA Today, January 6, 2021. Archived February 11, 2021. Archive URL: he and his allies filed seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election, had “WON the majority of 2020 election cases fully heard, and then decided on the merits.” His report was cited by news sites including Christianity Daily25Olivia Cavallaro. “Trump Actually Won Two-Thirds Of Election Lawsuits Heard In Court, Report Says,” Christianity Daily, February 5, 2021. Archived February 1o, 2021. Archive URL: and the Epoch Times.26Matthew Vadum “Trump Won Two-Thirds of Election Lawsuits Where Merits Considered,” Epoch Times, February 7, 2021. Archived February 8, 2021. Archive URL:

The article was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed,” PolitiFact reported. Referring to an Epoch Times article that had used Droz’s 2-page “report” to allege that Trump “won two-thirds of election lawsuits where the merits [were] considered,” PolitiFact wrote, “That claim is literally not true.”27Trump Won Two-Thirds of Election Lawsuits Where Merits Considered,” Politifact. Accessed February 12, 2021.

Trump and his allies have won one lawsuit related to the results of the 2020 election, and that case did not prove that widespread voter fraud affected the outcome,” PolitiFact wrote. “Judges across the political spectrum have rejected dozens of other cases filed after Nov. 3 that sought to overturn the election. Just because a case is dismissed on procedural grounds does not mean it wasn’t duly considered.”

April 2020

As reported at DeSmog,28Dana Drugmand. “Under Cover of Pandemic, Fossil Fuel Interests Unleash Lobbying Frenzy,” DeSmog, April 2, 2020. Life:Powered sent a letter to Congress critical of the COVID-19 stimulus package for including “tax incentives and spending for unreliable ‘green’ energy
programs.”29Coronavirus Stimulus Letter, Life:Powered, March 23, 2020. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.

The letter, to which Droz is a signatory, concludes:30Coronavirus Stimulus Letter, Life:Powered, March 23, 2020. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.

“This is no time for political games. Climate change is not an immediate threat to humanity. Climate-related deaths have declined 98.9% in the last century, and humanity is growing more and more resilient thanks to the availability of affordable, reliable energy. On behalf of all Americans, we urge you to oppose any stimulus proposals that carve out special treatment for or bail out any energy companies and focus instead on stopping COVID-19.”

The full list of signatories is below:31Coronavirus Stimulus Letter, Life:Powered, March 23, 2020. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.

Jason IsaacSenior Manager & Distinguished FellowLife:Powered/Texas Public Policy Foundation
Myron EbellDirector, Center for Energy and EnvironmentCompetitive Enterprise Institute
Bette GrandeCEORoughrider Policy Center
Ellen WeaverPresident & CEOPalmetto Promise Institute
Isaac OrrPolicy FellowCenter of the American Experiment
Bethany MarcumExecutive DirectorAlaska Policy Forum
David T. StevensonDirector, Center for Energy and EnvironmentCaesar Rodney Institute
Donald van der VaartSenior FellowJohn Locke Foundation
Jason HayesDirector of Environmental PolicyMackinac Center for Public Policy
John Droz, Jr.FounderAlliance for Wise Energy Decisions
George K. Rasley, Jr.Managing
Becky Norton DunlopFormer Secretary of Natural ResourcesCommonwealth of Virginia
James L. MartinFounder/Chairman60 Plus Association
Saulius “Saul” AnuzisPresident60 Plus Association
Ken BlackwellSenior FellowFamily Research Council
Eunie SmithPresidentEagle Forum
Jenny Beth MartinHonorary ChairmanTea Party Patriots Action
Jon CaldaraPresidentIndependence Institute
L. Brent Bozell, IIIFounder and PresidentMedia Research Center
Jason PyeVice President of Legislative AffairsFreedomWorks
Jameson TaylorVice President for PolicyMississippi Center for Public Policy
Carol Platt LiebauPresidentYankee Institute
Mike StenhouseCEORhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity
Daniel ErspamerCEOPelican Institute for Public Policy
Christian N. BraunlichPresidentThomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy
Todd MyersEnvironmental DirectorWashington Policy Center

October 2019

Droz signed the “Realist Catholic Climate Declaration,” drafted by Heartland Institute policy analyst William Briggs, which stated, “the earth’s climate has always changed, is changing now, and will never cease changing. The extent to which man is responsible for climate change is not known, only surmised. There is no earthly force capable of stopping climate change,” and that, “the salvation of souls is of more pressing concern than the air temperature. Pray to God and pray for your neighbor, not to the planet.”32The Declaration,” Realist Catholic Climate Declaration, Archived October 29, 2020. Archive URL: 33William Briggs,”The Heartland Institute, Archived October 26, 2020. Archive URL:

The declaration was endorsed by Anthony Watts’ blog Watts Up With That, in a post by Charles Rotter, which stated, “please share this as widely as possible. With the concept of ‘eco-sins’ being bruited, and the return of paganism, this declaration is timely and important.”34Charles Rotter,“Realist Catholic Climate Change Declaration,” Watts Up with That, October 13, 2019. Archived October 23, 2020. Archive. URL:

According to a post at William Briggs’s website: “This statement is to be in contradistinction to the hyperbolic and inaccurate ‘U.S. Catholic Climate Declaration’,” Briggs wrote of the draft. “The goal is to have something short, sweet, certain, and Catholic.”35Draft Realist Catholic Climate Declaration: Please Share!” William M. Briggs, October 7, 2019. Archived October 8, 2020. Archive URL:

February 4, 2018

In January 2018, more than 200 scientists endorsed an open letter calling on the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) to remove climate change denier Rebekah Mercer from its board and to “end ties to anti-science propagandists and funders of climate science misinformation.” The New York Times reported that those among the AMNH letter calling for Mercer to step down were Michael E. Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, and Katharine Hayhoe, director of the Climate Science Center at Texas Tech University.36Robin Pogrebin and Somini Sengupta. “A Science Denier at the Natural History Museum? Scientists Rebel,” The New York Times, January 25, 2018. Archived February 13, 2018. URL:

Droz was among a group of climate change deniers who responded with their own open letter, calling for the AMNH “not to cave in to this pressure.” The letter was signed by numerous individuals with ties to groups funded by the Mercer Family Foundation such as Will Happer of the CO2 CoalitionRichard Lindzen, a fellow at the Cato InstituteCraig Idso, the chairman of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. There are a number of signatories affiliated with the Heartland Institute, which has received over $5.78 million from the Mercer Family Foundation since 2008.37Graham Readfearn. “Climate Science Deniers Defend New York’s American Museum of Natural History From Calls to Drop Trustee Rebekah Mercer,” DeSmog, February 6, 2018.

The letter reads:38amnh18-feb4-petitionletter (PDF – Untitled). Retrieved from Watts Up With That.

The Earth has supported abundant life many times in the geological past when there were much higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It is quite likely that future generations will benefit from the enrichment of Earth’s atmosphere with more carbon dioxide.

Make no mistake, the agitators are not defending science from quackery — quite the contrary!”

May 8, 2017

John Droz, representing Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions, is a signatory to an open letter to President Donald J. Trump urging him “to withdraw fully from the Paris Climate Treaty and to stop all taxpayer funding of UN global warming programs.”39“Dear Mr. President” (PDF), retrieved from Competitive Enterprise Institute. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.

DeSmog reported that the 40 groups represented in the letter, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), The Heartland Institute, and the Heritage Foundation, have received a combined total of millions of dollars from the Koch Brothers, ExxonMobil, and other industry groups.40Graham Readfearn. “Conservative Groups Pushing Trump To Exit Paris Climate Deal Have Taken Millions From Koch Brothers, Exxon,” DeSmog, May 10, 2017.

Analysis also showed that the groups accepted about $80 million through Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust, two groups that have been confirmed is a key financial source for key U.S-based climate change denial groups.41Susanne Goldberg. “Conservative groups spend up to $1bn a year to fight action on climate change,” The Guardian, December 20, 2013. Archived May 12, 2017. URL:

February 23, 2017

John Drox, Jr. was a signatory of a petition (PDF) organized by Richard Lindzen of the Cato Institute urging President Donald Trump to pull the United States out of the United Nations international convention on climate change (UNFCCC).42“PETITION” (PDF), February 23, 2017. Richard Lindzen. PDF Archived at DeSmog.

In just a few weeks, more than 300 eminent scientists and other qualified individuals from around the world have signed the petition below,” Lindzen wrote in the letter.43“PETITION” (PDF), February 23, 2017. Richard Lindzen. PDF Archived at DeSmog.

DeSmog investigated the list, and found that only a small handful of the signatories could be considered “even remotely ‘qualified’ or ‘eminent’ — but not in the field of climate science.” The list included individuals “interested in climate,” and one signatory who only identified as an “emailer who wished to sign the petition” while some signers provided no affiliation or address whatsoever.44Graham Readfearn. “Climate Science Denier Richard Lindzen’s List of 300 “Scientists” Sent to Trump Is the Usual Parade of Non-Experts,” DeSmog, February 27, 2017.

January 5, 2017

John Droz was a signatory to a Cornwall Alliance open letter supporting Scott Pruitt for EPA Administrator under the Trump administration.45Open Letter Supporting Scott Pruitt for EPA Administrator,” Cornwall Alliance, January 5, 2017. Archived January 19, 2017. URL:

Mr. Pruitt has also demonstrated understanding of and open-mindedness toward scientific insights crucial to the formulation and implementation of environmental regulation. He is prepared to hear all sides in debates over the risks and benefits of various activities that come under the purview of the EPA,” reads the letter.

On January 12, 2017, Senate Democrats raised conflict of interest concerns regarding Scott Prutt‘s fossil fuel ties. Pruitt had spent years working to combat the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan.46Ben Jervey. “Mapping EPA Nominee Scott Pruitt’s Many Fossil Fuel Ties,” DeSmog, January 13, 2017.

In an open letter to the Office of Government Ethics, members of the Senate’s environmental panel commented:

During his tenure as Attorney General of Oklahoma, Mr. Pruitt has blurred the distinction between official and political actions, often at the behest of corporations he will regulate if confirmed to lead EPA,” the letter said. “Public reporting based on documents produced by Freedom of Information Act requests illustrate how Mr. Pruitt and members of his staff have worked closely with fossil fuel lobbyists to craft his office’s official positions.”

Pruitt was further grilled on his fossil fuel ties at his confirmation hearing on January 18.47Ben Jervey and Steve Horn. “EPA Nominee Scott Pruitt Gets Grilled on Fossil Fuel Ties at Confirmation Hearing,” DeSmog, January 18, 2017.

Some notable signatories of the Cornwall Alliance letter, as of January 5, 2017, included:

October 23, 2014

John Droz assembles a collection of anti-wind billboards and yard signs on Droz asks the website’s visitors to send him “an example of an additional good wind related billboard … The criteria we are looking for,” he writes, “are: 1) universal applicability, 2) brevity [KISS], and 3) powerful message.”48John Droz. “PR-Sample Billboards,”, October 23, 2014.

February 3, 2013

John Droz delivered a presentation titled “Science Under Assault” which suggests that modern climate science is being threatened by environmentalists, educators and the media. He highlights articles that claim environmentalism is a “new religion” with a primary goal to “undermine the authority of science,” and that mainstream climate science is based on “fiction.”

Facing South notes that Droz cites a number of less-than-credible sources:

“sources like WorldNetDaily, a website that promotes conspiracy theories about topics such as President Obama’s citizenship; Quadrant, a conservative Australian magazine that was involved in a scandal over publishing fraudulent science; and the Institute for Creation Research, a Texas outfit that rejects evolution and promotes Biblical creationism and the notion that “All things in the universe were created and made by God in the six literal days of the Creation Week.”49Sue Sturgis. “Climate conspiracy theorist returns to NC legislature, warns of threat from science ‘elite’,” Facing South, February 7, 2013. Archived May 10, 2013. URL:

Sam Pearsall, a UNC environment and ecology professor and retired program manager for the Environmental Defense Fund described the presentation as “the most remarkable example of propaganda delivered as anti-propaganda” he had ever witnessed. 

August 2012

According to WHOIS records, John Droz registered the domain on August 17, 2012.50Domain Dossier for Accessed December 14, 2017. The website, titled “Wind Production Tax Credit Facts” is focused on preventing the renewal of the Wind Production Tax Credit (PTC) and includes directions and specifies wording on how to contact Congress to oppose it, including links to initiatives by Americans for Prosperity (AfP) and FreedomWorks.51Contact Congress,” Wind Production Tax Credit Facts.

June 2012

NC-20 brought forward a bill that would restrict how state agencies and planners predict sea-level change. An early version set out to ban the state from using current data models to predict sea-level change caused by climate change. A later version bans predictions of sea level rise “unless such rates are from statistically significant, peer-reviewed data and are consistent with historic trends.”

According to WRAL, that would essentially ban projections based on cliamate change as these results would be inconsistent with historic trends. The following is an excerpt from the NC-20 memo that was obtained by (emphasis added):52Laura Leslie. “Sea-level bill: Who is John Droz?”,, June 6, 2012.

Bottom Line: we got everything we asked for. I’ll send the technical details later, but we got a commitment to totally abandon any reference to accelerated SLR. Instead, the State will use historic, linear sea level measurements to create future projections (about 8 inches by 2100 instead of the 56 inches once being considered) and the provision of standard deviations which are basically fluctuations around the average projection at any given year. This is a huge win for NC 20 counties which always seem to lose in regulatory negotiations. It proves once again that unity is the key to advancing the cause of equity for NC 20 in matters such as regulation and economic development.”

John Droz demanded a retraction by WRAL, claiming that NC-20 had not been involved in the regulation despite the above memo. 

May 21–23, 2012

John Droz was a speaker at the Heartland Institute‘s Seventh International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC7). His speech, titled “Wind Energy: Based on Real Science?” can be viewed below.53Wind Energy: Based on Real Science?International Conferences on Climate Change. Archived December 14, 2017. URL:

DeSmogBlog researched the co-sponsors behind Heartland’s ICCC7 and found that they had collectively received over $67 million from ExxonMobil, the Koch Brothers and the conservative Scaife family foundations.

February 2012

Droz was a member of a group who critiqued  the 2010 “NC Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report” by the Coastal Resource Commission’s Science Panel that had stated sea levels in Carolina would rise one meter by 2100.54ATI Fellow, John Droz, Convinces State to Rethink Climate-Related Policy,” American Tradition Institute, March 1, 2012. Archived May 15, 2012. URL:

January 23, 2012

Droz was listed as an editor of a confidential memo obtained by The Guardian that described a PR campaign against wind energy.55Suzanne Goldenberg. “Conservative thinktanks step up attacks against Obama’s clean energy strategy,The Guardian, May 8, 2012. Archived January 31, 2023. Archive URL:

According to The Guardian, the American Tradition Institute (ATI), where Droz was a fellow, formally disavowed the project. ATI’s executive director Tom Tandon said Droz acted alone on the memo.56Suzanne Goldenberg. “Conservative thinktanks step up attacks against Obama’s clean energy strategy,The Guardian, May 8, 2012. Archived January 31, 2023. Archive URL:

The document suggested the “minimum national PR campaign goal” was “to constructively influence national and state wind energy policies.” One of the listed “goals of the PR Campaign” was to “Cause subversion  in message of industry so that it effectively becomes so bad no one wants to admit in public they are for it (much like wind has done to coal, by turning green to black and clean to dirty).”57Suzanne Goldenberg. “Conservative thinktanks step up attacks against Obama’s clean energy strategy,The Guardian, May 8, 2012. Archived January 31, 2023. Archive URL:

The proposal also listed some “optional” considerations, including plans to “[t]ake zoning boards to court to rezone as industrial land to create chilling effect on signing contracts,” as well as plans to “[s]ue states regarding [Renewable Portfolio Standards].”58Suzanne Goldenberg. “Conservative thinktanks step up attacks against Obama’s clean energy strategy,The Guardian, May 8, 2012. Archived January 31, 2023. Archive URL:

January 2012

Contributed a presentation opposing a proposed wind project in Beaufort County (NC).59Beaufort County Commissioners hear from citizens on separate issues,” Beaufort County Now, January 10, 2012.

An article in the local paper, Beaufort County Now, reported that “Self-proclaimed physicist, economist and environmentalist John Droz. Jr. witnessed to the Beaufort County Commissioners that not only should the the Pantego Wind Farm project not be constructed, but no wind turbine generating power should be erected anywhere.”

Droz summarized his belief that “Wind energy is not a technically sound solution to provide us power, or to meaningfully reduce global warming,” “wind energy is not an economically viable source of power on its own,” and “wind energy is not environmentally responsible.”60Does the Pantego Wind Project Make Sense?”, Power Point Presentation by John Droz, Jr., January 2012.

Droz is involved in setting up an activist network opposed to wind power and has developed a strategy to combat wind industry advocates by “communicate[ing] the Science message in the proper way to the public.”

His objectives include to “come up with an effective National PR Plan.”

Droz’s list of “Our Typical Opponents” includes the wind industry, utilities supporting wind power, labour unions, most environmental organizations, pro-wind media, and many academic institutions61.“Why I Think Science is Our Best Strategy,” Power point presentation by John Droz, Jr. February, 2012.

December 5, 2011

Was a presenter at a John Locke Foundation workshop titled “The Truth About Wind Power on the Coasts of North Carolina.”62Workshop – “The Truth About Wind Power on the Coasts of North Carolina,” Crystal Coast Tea Party, November 17, 2011. Archived November 11, 2013. URL:

According to the event description, “This workshop will present an alternative view of wind power and what it would mean to North Carolina’s coastal communities. Participants will learn about wind power in general, including its intermittency problems, high costs, limited value and its environmental and economic impact. Myths will be countered, including why wind power would not play any meaningful role in energy security.”

The other presenters included David W. Schnare and Daren Bakst.

November 25, 2011

Droz prepared a slideshow for NC legislators entitled “Our Sea Level Policy: from Science or Lobbyists?” where he alleged that the authors of the “NC Sea-Level Rise Assessment Report” by the Coastal Resource Commission’s Science Panel failed to “meet the fundamental standards of science.”63SLR Presentation NC Legislators,” SlideShare by user John Droz. Uploaded November 21, 2011. Archived at DeSmog.

December 3, 2010

Droz wrote a handout titled “What Not To Say” (PDF) that provided tips on how to deliver a message opposing wind projects.64“John Droz. “What Not To Say” (PDF), December 3, 2010. Retrieved from

“Consider the following two facts: 1) that you have little hope of success unless you get a sizable number of other citizens on your side, and 2) that these citizens [e.g. in the audience] are not a fresh slate, as they have already been propagandized by incessant messages as to why green is good, wind is free, etc.” he wrote. “Another way of phrasing it is that this is a Public Relations matter.”

“You should be secure in the knowledge that no pseudo-science pro-wind report to date (that I am aware of) is based on the Scientific Method,” he claimed.

“Here is what I am recommending that you stand up and say (and this should be
restated as often as needed, as opponents will try to move you away from this):
1 – We believe that we have environmental and energy issues, and
2 – We believe that these technical matters should be solved using real science.”

He concluded: “In the most intransigent cases, a lawsuit may be called for. If you do decide to go that way, make sure that you have an aggressive attorney who is willing to pull out all the stops.” (emphasis in original).65“John Droz. “What Not To Say” (PDF), December 3, 2010. Retrieved from


Other Affiliations

Social Media


According to a search of Google Scholar, John Droz does not appear to have published any articles in peer-reviewed journals on the subject of climate or any other topic.

Other Resources


Related Profiles

John Birch Society (JBS) Background The John Birch Society (JBS) was founded in December of 1958 by businessman Robert Welch.History,” The John Birch Society. Archived July 15, 2017. Archive...
John R. Christy Credentials  Ph.D. Atmospheric Science, University of Illinois (1987).“About John: Education,” University of Alabama in Huntsville. Archived April 10, 2023. Archiv...
John Locke Foundation (JLF) Background The John Locke Foundation was created in 1990 as an independent, nonprofit think tank working “for truth, for freedom, and for the future of North Caro...
Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED) Background The Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED) describes itself as “an informal, non-partisan, non-profit coalition of North American...