At Energy Central, we believe the heart of our platform is you—the energy professionals who share insights, start conversations, and build connections across the industry. That’s why we’re thrilled to announce our second iteration in this series: Monthly Top Contributors!
Each month, we recognize three standout community members who helped spark conversation, contributed actively, or jumped in as new members with a bang. These top contributors will be in three categories: Grid Builder of the Month, Power User of the Month, and Rising Star of the Month.
Here are your July 2025 Top Contributors:
Grid Builder of the Month: Tom Raftery
For starting the conversation that generated the most engagement across the Energy Central platform.
Post: Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation: The Treaty That Could Save the Planet (24 total comments)
Notable Comments:
Jim-Elaine Stack: Of all the people I talk to most don't believe there are any subsidies to fossil fuel.thank you for publishing this.
Quote= Because fossil fuel markets are distorted beyond belief. The IMF estimates $7 trillion per year in fossil fuel subsidies, which is equivalent to 7.1% of global GDP, and that includes everything from direct production incentives to the staggering socialised costs of air pollution, healthcare, and disaster response.
Michael Keller: The fossil fuel markets contain legions of players, not just a few. That is the essence of competitive markets, where the mix of many and diverse interests naturally create checks-and-balances.
Claims of “vast market distortions” are simply not supported by reality, being just more propaganda manufactured by the green energy mafia.
Power User of the Month: Tony Paradiso
For driving community discussion with the most thoughtful and active commenting this month.
Total Comments: 14
Notable Comments:
On 'Emissions Propaganda?': "Agree that any forecast is nothing more than one's best guess. However, that wasn't the point of the post. The point is that climate advocates are guilty of the playing same game as their opponents: cherry-picking data, skewing analyses etc. It was convenient that they looked at the short term 5-year window and not a longer time horizon.
My beef with the climate advocates is that fight against climate change has become solar at any cost. That's foolish and won't achieve the goal. You are correct in pointing out that we need a portfolio of solutions and need to flesh out which one's offer the best long-term benefits.
Solar has its place - mostly on rooftops, but also as you point out, in Sun-rich environments. Just not everywhere, and it needs to be paired with storage. The best solutions offer baseload power that is weather and geography independent. Solar or wind meet neither of those criteria."
On 'Renewables Yin and Yang - Which will Dominate?': "I actually did a more in-depth look at the issue in Maine. The reality is that about 1% of prime land was being used. That was in contrast with other community development that was fostered by state and local governments which gobbled up much more farmland. But that didn't stop Maine from putting limitations on the use of agricultural lands. Although I'm not a fan of utility-scale solar, it's so foolish."
Rising Star of the Month: Jessica Wu
For jumping into the Energy Central community as a new member and making an immediate impact through valuable contributions.
Member since: July 2, 2025
Highlights: Jessica immediately took to Energy Central by sharing some top content, thought leadership, and links, including the following well-received articles:
Starting now, the winners will enjoy a special badge on their Energy Central profile for the next month recognizing their selection.
Maybe next month, you’ll be a top contributor! Need more motivation? We’re raffling off a special prize at the end of the year, and only top contributors will be entered to win.
So keep posting, commenting, and connecting!
Next recognition: September