3 Harmful Consequences of Biden Killing the Keystone XL Pipeline

/in , , , , /by

From CO2 emissions to jobs to investment, the president’s move will have the opposite of its intended effect.

President Joe Biden wasted no time after Wednesday’s inaugural ceremonies before getting to work. He signed 17 executive orders and memorandums—by far the most in history on a president’s first day—one of which halted construction of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which would have carried crude oil from Canada through the US.

“Construction on the long disputed Keystone XL oil pipeline halted Wednesday as incoming U.S. President Joe Biden revoked its permit on his first day in office,” the Associated Press reports. “The 1,700-mile (2,735-kilometer) pipeline was planned to carry roughly 800,000 barrels of oil a day from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.”

This is just the latest—but likely final—development in a long fight over this project. The Keystone pipeline was first commissioned in 2010, but this part of it, the XL pipeline, was blocked by the Obama administration in 2015. Then, President Trump reversed course in 2017 and, after lengthy legal challenges, finally paved the way for it to proceed. But sadly, Biden’s latest decision is likely the end of this years-long fight.

“We will begin a safe and orderly shut-down of construction,” Keystone XL President Richard Prior said.

Biden’s rationale for shutting down the project is clear. He believes that carbon emissions and climate change pose a grave threat to the environment and the economy. Thus, the president hopes to block more use of fossil fuels and reduce carbon emissions by thwarting this project.

“The Keystone XL pipeline disserves the U.S. national interest,” Biden wrote in his executive order. “The United States and the world face a climate crisis. That crisis must be met with action on a scale and at a speed commensurate with the need to avoid setting the world on a dangerous, potentially catastrophic, climate trajectory.”

“Leaving the Keystone XL pipeline permit in place would not be consistent with my Administration’s economic and climate imperatives,” the president concluded.

Biden’s “solution” here is to use the power of the federal government to spike a massive economic project years in the making. His benign intentions will not ameliorate the lasting fallout from the many unintended consequences this intervention will surely bring.

Here are three key ways Biden’s move to block the Keystone pipeline will backfire.

Blocking the Keystone XL Pipeline May Actually Increase CO2 Emissions

Even those who share Biden’s goal of reducing CO2 emissions shouldn’t support his move to block the pipeline. Blocking its construction will, most likely, lead to higher emissions, not a reduction.

Why?

Well, Keystone had already promised to use green technology and eliminate all CO2 emissions from its operations by 2030. And it’s not as if blocking this pipeline will actually mean the oil doesn’t get transported. It will just have to be transported by more costly, less efficient measures like rail shipping.

“The Obama State Department found five separate times that the pipeline would have no material impact on greenhouse gas emissions since crude would still be extracted,” the Wall Street Journal editorial board explains. “Shipping bitumen by rail or tanker would result in 28% to 42% higher CO2 emissions and more leaks.”

Ironically, this unintended consequence will likely mean that more carbon gets emitted—the exact opposite of Biden’s goal.

Any time the government steps in and squashes economic investment, job losses are sure to follow. Biden’s blocking of the Keystone XL pipeline is no exception.

If allowed to go through, the pipeline project would have created 11,000 jobs and $1.6 billion in wages, according to Fox Business. These gains will all now be lost. Biden regularly says he wants his environmental policies to create good-paying, union jobs— but what the president just did will accomplish the opposite. This is why even left-wing elected officials like Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau oppose Biden’s decision.

Regulatory Uncertainty Will Discourage Future Business Investment

If there’s one thing that’s bad for investment, it’s uncertainty. And that’s exactly what Keystone has faced thanks to the federal government’s knee-jerk reversals and regulatory whiplash.

Yes, you can build it. Wait, no you can’t. Yes, actually you can. Wait, never mind, now it’s blocked again.

“It is impossible for American businesses to make big, long-term investments in a political environment in which every project is up for renegotiation — or summary economic execution — every time the White House changes hands,” the National Review editorial board wisely warns. “Surely, in a continental nation as vast as ours, with an economy as complex as ours, it shouldn’t be possible for one man serving a short term in a temporary elected office to undo years of work and billions of dollars in investment. This is pure foolishness, and it will cost us.”

Biden says he wants to promote economic growth and investment. But if this kind of whipsawing regulatory reversal pervades the new president’s tenure, businesses will—quite understandably—end up reducing their investments to account for such uncertainty.

The Big Picture: Big Unintended Consequences Will Always Plague Big Government

Even the smartest and most brilliant bureaucrats and elected officials will never be able to issue sweeping economic diktats from offices in Washington, D.C. without incurring massive unintended consequences. It’s simply impossible for any centralized authority to have enough knowledge of vast industries and complex situations across the continent to effectively account for all variable and potential outcomes.

“Every human action has both intended and unintended consequences,” economist Antony Davies and political scientist James Harrigan explain. “Human beings react to every rule, regulation, and order governments impose, and their reactions result in outcomes that can be quite different than the outcomes lawmakers intended.”

The Biden administration’s decision to block the Keystone XL pipeline will, no doubt, provide a poignant example of when big government goes wrong. But it would be a mistake to think these shortcomings are specific to President Biden, environmental policy, or oil pipelines.

Central planners will always end up missing the nail when they swing the hammer—because they’re working while blindfolded.

*****

This article was first published on January 21 2021 by the Foundation for Economic Education, FEE and is hereby reproduced with permission.

China Loves Coal Far More Than Wind

/in , /by

We have all heard about China building a lot of coal plants, but the central role coal plays in their booming economy is amazing. It is a big reason they are the world’s leading manufacturer. China generates almost twice as much electricity as the U.S. China generates more from cheap coal than we do from all sources. This makes them very competitive industrially.

China has some wind power but they are smart enough not to let it get in their way (unlike us). Renewables are driving our power costs through the roof, while China wisely wallows in cheap juice.

By way of scale, not too long ago the U.S. burned about a billion tons of coal a year to make electricity. We generated about 2,000-gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity from coal, roughly half of our total 4,000 GWh. The foolish war on coal has reduced that to around 600 million tons, with further reductions scheduled.

By a strange coincidence, just the time when coal use switched from growing to shrinking, about 12 years ago, America’s use of electric power also stopped growing. It has remained at about 4,000 GWh ever since. Perhaps new energy-intensive industrial developments were all switched from America to China in anticipation of the US juice price increases that followed.

China on the other hand now generates a whopping 7,500 GWh of electricity, or just under twice what America does. That’s right, they produce almost twice as much power as we do.

Even worse, less than 25% of our electricity goes for industrial uses, while a reported 70% of China’s juice use is industrial. That is roughly 1,000 GWh in America versus 5,000 in China, or five times as much industrial use of electricity. Small wonder that China makes most of the products we use (and pay them for).

Moreover, most of China’s vast power generation is from coal. Of their 7,500 GWh just about 5,000 GWh, or fully two-thirds, is powered by cheap coal. By coincidence, they equal their entire industrial use. Or maybe it is not a coincidence; it may be how they remain so competitive in the global economy.

In any case, China is generating more electricity with coal than America is from all sources combined. That is a lot of coal juice. China’s booming economy basically runs on coal.

When it comes to wind power the story is very different. China does have some, in fact, they produce about 400 GWH from wind or around 5% of the total. This may be just a token amount, although it is growing, as are all forms of power generation.

What is most interesting is the reported “capacity factor” for wind power. The capacity factor (CF) is the ratio of how much power is produced in a year to how much could be produced if the generators ran full power all the time. The latter is called nameplate capacity, so CF equals power produced divided by nameplate, expressed as a percentage.

Because wind is intermittent its CF is pretty low, typically 30 to 35% in the U.S. But China reports a wind CF of less than 20%! The reason is an important part of China’s economic success. Unlike us, they wisely do not curtail coal fired power production just to make room for wind power when the wind happens to be blowing.

So China uses wind power if they need it, but not otherwise. We on the other hand actually throttle back our coal and gas-fired power plants, when wind power is there, which is really stupid.

China is generating almost twice as much electricity as America and two-thirds of that juice is coming from coal. The wind is a token generator at 5% and is not allowed to interfere with coal power. Anyone who thinks China is going to phase out coal for wind is simply green dreaming. Coal is central to China’s power.

This article was first published by CFACT.ORG on January 11, 2021 and is reproduced with permission.

LET THEM EAT CAKE: Buttigieg Says Tens of Thousands Of Keystone Workers Need to Get ‘Different’ Union Jobs

/in , , , , , /by


Terrible.
Every Democrat action is an attack on Americans. Every action is anti-American.

Buttigieg acknowledges Keystone workers may need to get ‘different’ union jobs

By Fox News, January 21, 2021
Transportation Secretary nominee Pete Buttigieg claimed Thursday that President Biden‘s decision to block the Keystone XL Pipeline is part of a broader plan that will end up being a net positive for employment, despite union outrage based on the loss of more than a thousand jobs.
Biden revoked a necessary cross-border permit for the pipeline in an executive order on Wednesday, one of more than a dozen actions he took during his first hours in office. Construction on the project had stopped earlier in the day in anticipation of the move.
“Environmental ideologues have now prevailed, and over a thousand union men and women have been terminated from employment on the project,” North America’s Building Trades Unions said in a statement following Biden’s action.
Asked about this at his confirmation hearing by Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, Buttigieg was optimistic that these losses will be offset by new positions created as the new administration shifts towards climate-conscious goals.
“I believe that the president’s climate vision will create more jobs on that,” the former mayor of South Bend, Ind. said. “And I think it’s going to be very important to work with him and work with Congress to make sure that we can deliver on that promise too. That on that, more good-paying union jobs will be created in the context of the climate and infrastructure work that we have before us than has been impacted by other decisions.”
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, pressed Buttigieg on what this actually means.
“So for those workers, the answer is somebody else will get a job?” Cruz asked.
“The answer is we are very eager to see those workers continue to be employed in good-paying union jobs, even if they might be different ones,” Buttigieg said.
The Keystone XL Pipeline project was initially proposed in 2008 and has volleyed back and forth as the fossil fuel and industry and climate activists battle over energy policies. President Barack Obama rejected the project in 2015, but President Donald Trump gave it the green light shortly into his tenure in the Oval Office.

RELATED TWEET:


RELATED ARTICLE: Report: Biden Killed 52K American Jobs On Day 1 In Office

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Beijing Biden to KILL Keystone XL Pipeline

/in , , , /by


America didn’t vote for this. Biden’s energy polices will cripple the U.S. energy sector.
The $9 billion project, which would move up to 830,000 barrels of crude oil daily from the province of Alberta to Nebraska, has been delayed by legal issues.
In a lengthy statement posted to Twitter, Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said he was “deeply concerned” by the report, arguing that the move would “kill jobs on both sides of the border, weaken the critically important Canada-U.S. relationship, and undermine U.S. national security by making the United States more dependent on OPEC oil imports in the future.”
He also warned that Alberta would work with TC Energy Corp. to use “all legal avenues available to protect its interest in the project.”

Biden to end Keystone XL pipeline early on: source

Posted January 17, 2021
U.S. President-elect Joe Biden is planning to cancel the permit for the $9 billion Keystone XL pipeline project as one of his first acts in office, and perhaps as soon as his first day, according to a source familiar with his thinking.

RELATED ARTICLE: Dangerous, Dumb, Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Proposes Funding to Deprogram “White Supremacists”
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

VIDEO: Bill Gates Carbon Hypocrisy

/1 Comment/in , , , , /by



Bill Gates wants you to pare down your over-the-top lifestyle.
How about we all agree to not let our “carbon footprints” exceed his.
CFACT’s Marc Morano exposed Gates’s hypocrisy on Fox and Friends:

“Bill Gates was listed in 2019 as the number one carbon footprint of all the celebrities. He beat Al Gore, Jennifer Lopez. He beat Bernie Sanders and a bunch of others [including] Harrison Ford. He came out number one, Bill Gates. He has a new book coming out about the climate crisis; what we can all do. He spoke to the World Economic Forum and claimed we have to change every aspect of our lives to fight global warming but Bill Gates is not willing to do it. The last estimate in 2010 he paid $30,000 a month in his electricity bill at his home. Since he…recently bought a 43 million-dollar oceanfront property, [he’s] not very worried about sea-level rise apparently.”
Marc reports that Gates and the rest of the climate elite want us to refrain from flying unless we can come up with a “morally justifiable” reason to do so.  Of course they expect their moral justification travel visas to be permanently stamped.
“Gates just said we need to continue lockdowns on bars, restaurants, small businesses. Meanwhile, the billionaire class is reaping benefits of lockdowns — his pals from Amazon, Walmart, all other big box stores. What is interesting [is that] climate activists are calling for flying only when it is ‘morally justifiable’ as the new normal post-pandemic. Bill Gates is in on that. He is saying, well business travel – he expects a 50% reduction. So now if you want to fly commercial, if you’re not Bill Gates or Leonardo DiCaprio or Al Gore, you need to come up with a ‘morally justifiable’ reason. This is what the climate activists are doing. Crushing the airline industry, by boosting private planes. They’re living one way for themselves and imposing…another set of austerity on the rest of us.”

Maybe Bill Gates and the rest of the carbon elite will shock us all someday and lead by example.
Don’t hold your (CO2-laden) breath.
EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

CFACT “Green New Wheel” teaches facts at TPUSA conference

/in , , , , /by


America’s high school and college students are continually battered with misinformation from celebrities, “news” organizations, and social media.
Amid the COVID lockdowns and election controversies, this Left-wing indoctrination is at an all-time high.
That’s why CFACT cosponsored Turning Point USA’s Student Action Summit (SAS) in West Palm Beach, FL, this past week – to reach young people directly with facts, not hysteria.
CFACT debuted the “Green New Wheel” table game; an actual, spin-able wheel that CFACT developed to engage the public on the folly behind the Green New Deal.
It “spun up” quite the buzz among hundreds of students, the media, and even a celebrity or two, all while operating under the COVID restrictions put in place by county officials for the conference.
Kirk Cameron, the Christian actor and movie star, and Alex Clark, host of TPUSA’s “POPlitics” show, both took a spin. Unfortunately for Ms. Clark, she landed on Joe Biden and the Green New Deal, which meant she lost. Mr. Cameron, however, landed on free market energy, which gave him the chance at a prize.
Chandler Wysocki, a freshman at the Ohio State University, was very enthusiastic about CFACT’s message after spinning the Green New Wheel. “I love the message, and I am really looking forward to getting plugged in to the CFACT chapter on campus,” Chandler said. “There are tons of events I think we can do. A hike and litter clean up would be great to show that we as conservatives care about the environment, despite what the Left says about us.”
CFACT’s mission also attracted the attention of national media. Both CFACT’s Houser and Bob Knee, CFACT’s National Field Coordinator, were interviewed by America’s Voice TV about their mission on college campuses. Additionally, Bob sat down with Cindy Drukier, host of The Nation Speaks, a news program with NTD.com, to discuss the growing threat of China to freedom. Bob explained how China is using environmental issues as a political chess piece to gain influence and power on the world stage.
“With the Paris Climate Accord specifically, the Chinese Communist Party is using that agreement to gain a serious edge economically,” Knee explained. “In that deal the West has to slash emissions, but China gets to keep building as many coal plants as they want. It’s ridiculous.
In addition to CFACT’s presence, there were many big-name speakers who took the stage at the Summit, including Tucker Carlson, Governor Kristi Noem, Dinesh D’Souza, Jude Jeanine Pirro, and more.
“These students were fired up. They love freedom, and they understand that it is capitalism, not socialism that brings prosperity and helps the environment,” Houser said. “Look for big things from these new CFACT activists next semester and beyond.”
EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Capitalist Surrender

/in , , , , /by


American business is terrified of the Greens.
Green / climate pressure groups love to spread the myth that corporations spend vast sums to block their agenda.
The opposite is true.  When Greens attack, business surrenders… and hands over billions in payoffs.
Jeff Bezos built Amazon into a global powerhouse and became the world’s richest man.  Bezos wants Amazon’s astounding growth to go on unimpeded, so he’s trying to massively buy the Left off.  Senior policy analyst Bonner Cohen reports at CFACT.org:

Bezos, the founder and CEO of Amazon and owner of the Washington Post, has announced that he is giving $793 million to 16 environmental groups to fight climate change and undertake other activities to save the planet. The largess comes from Bezos’s Earth Fund and is, he says, “just the beginning of my $10 billion commitment to fund scientists, activists, NGOs, and others.”
More than half of the donations are going to established, already well-funded green groups, with $100 million grants each going to the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the Nature Conservancy (TNC), the World Resources Institute (WRI), and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

That’s right.  Bezos is paying billions to the most radical left-wing Greens to use to undo the very free market prosperity that made Amazon possible.
What a craven bargain Bezos has made.
As Winston Churchill said, “An appeaser Is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”
EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Putting His Left Foot Forward

/in , , /by


Joe Biden is assembling an army of radical bureaucrats and no one’s freedom is safe.
In the waning days of the Obama Administration, the 44th President’s legion of anti-capitalist, global warming, anti-energy zealots burrowed into our federal service and decamped for big salaries at left-wing nonprofits.
They’re baaack!
Gina McCarthy did massive economic damage as Obama’s EPA Administrator and John Kerry weakened American interests across the board as Secretary of State.  Biden just named McCarthy his national climate adviser and Kerry, his international climate envoy.
Peter Murphy details Biden’s growing list of radicals at CFACT.org:

Mr. Biden did announce this week cabinet appointments that will implement climate policy overseen by Ms. McCarthy. They include Jennifer Granholm for Secretary of Energy, who was Michigan Governor and champion of “renewable” solar and wind energy; and Michael Regan for the Environmental Protection Agency, an African American who is the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality and espouses “environmental justice” for communities of color. The president-elect is expected to name Congresswoman Deb Haaland of New Mexico for Secretary of the Interior, who is opposed to decades long energy development on federal lands.

Gabriella Hoffman focuses in on Biden’s pick for Interior, the radical Deb Haaland:

Haaland’s positions on critical conservation and environmental issues would alienate most Americans: Haaland is an original Green New Deal backer and is endorsed by the Sunrise Movement. She also supports restoring the size of the controversial Bears Ears National Monument in Utah, opposes Endangered Species Act reforms, and endorses the “30 by 30” plan via House Resolution 835.

Top level appointments are just the tip of the iceberg.  For every high profile radical who’s name you see in the news, there are thousands who’s names and faces remain largely unseen by the average American.  They are united in their belief that the problem with America is that we have far too much much of that pesky individual freedom.  They know better, and are prepared to substitute their judgment for ours through the bleak power of regulation.
America has at long last achieved energy independence.  Through the efficiency of free markets, we stand first in energy production, while simultaneously first in emissions reductions (if that’s your thing).  We have pushed back against anti-competitive mercantilism abroad and our manufacturers are rebounding and ready to compete.  We have returned Americans to space on American rockets.  We are defeating a global pandemic and creating better lives and opportunities for everyone.
Our assembling bureaucratic masters loathe all that and are prepared to stop it.
Joe Biden positioned himself for president by proclaiming he was a mainstream candidate who was not part of the radicalism possessing his party.
In the days ahead, judge Biden not by what he says, but by whom he appoints.
EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

China’s Big Fat Climate Lie

/in , , /by


One of our favorite headlines from the clever parody site The Onion reads, “China Vows To Begin Aggressively Falsifying Air Pollution Numbers.”

Once again parody has a way of becoming reality.
Last Saturday the UN held an online “Climate Ambition Summit,” and China used the occasion to play the rest of the world for fools.
China has been using a provision in the Paris Climate Accord called “common but differentiated responsibilities” to demand that the United States and other nations slash emissions while China continues to build coal plants as fast as its economy will allow.  This is a surefire way to continue the massive shift of manufacturing from the free world to China.
Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping tried to cover China’s rapidly expanding emissions by offering vague promises far down the road.  He told the UN summit that China agreed merely to “aim” at capping their emissions by 2030, and will then try and be “carbon neutral” by 2060.  Any theoretical Chinese economic pain would occur long after Secretary Xi has departed this world, if ever.
Green pressure groups accept this ruse at face value.  They dare not criticize China for fear of jeopardizing their funding and ability to operate in China.
China accounts for over 28% of worldwide emissions and is growing rapidly.  The U.S. accounts for only 15% of world emissions and, thanks to the fracking revolution, has used natural gas to dramatically slash its own emissions (if that’s your thing). The Greens, however, persist in treating China as a saint and the U.S. as the sinner.
China should not be judged by its words, but only by its actions.
It is axiomatic that Socialists always lie.  Saying one thing while planning another is fundamental to the way China operates.
Under the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984, China promised to respect the individual freedom and democratic traditions of the people of Hong Kong.  China assured the British that Hong Kong could rely on a future under which there would be “one country, two systems.”  2020 has been a rough year for everyone, but particularly for the people of Hong Kong as China stripped them of their liberties and is now blatantly arresting those who dissent.
Watch out Taiwan.
For China, climate change is nothing more than a ruse de guerre they employ to throttle their competition, grow their economy and build their worldwide influence and might.
EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Geothermal Revolution

/in , , /by


So-called “renewable” energy is all the rage.  The problem is that wind and solar, the most popular renewables, are intermittent, inefficient energy sources that are far better at generating subsidies than electricity.
Then there’s geothermal, which just might be a zero emissions (if that’s your thing), renewable energy source that scales.
David Wojick explains the science at CFACT.org:

There is a revolution coming in geothermal energy. How big it will be and how fast it can grow remains to be seen, but the revolutionary technology is here now… The Earth’s crust we live on is just a thin film wrapped around an 8,000 mile diameter molten ball. In some places under the deep ocean this crust is estimated to be just 3 miles or so thick. It is somewhat thicker under the continents but the point remains; it gets hot fast as you drill down into the crust. That heat is geothermal energy.

Fracking enabled the U.S. to achieve the long-sought goal of energy independence.  Turns out fracking is a gift that keeps on giving.  Wojick explains that fracking has profound applications for geothermal, allowing energy producers to pinpoint underground heat sources with greater accuracy than ever before:
With hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) we can make these geothermal reservoirs where we want them, the size we want them, and where the heat is the temperature we want, especially very hot. This includes the so-called “supercritical” water at 400 degrees C, which is now used in the most advanced power-plants.
The anti-energy Left is champing at the bit, hoping Joe Biden will make their most destructive fantasies come true.
Up to this point, they’ve given a somewhat tacit approval to geothermal energy…but will that continue if it is linked to “fracking”? Guess we will have to wait and see!
EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Magical World of “Climate Change”

/in , , , /by


Hadley Arkes: “Climate change” gives the Left a “moral” code, a kind of pseudo religion, without the reasoning that animates true religion.

The state of our public discourse may not be at one of its heights, but it should be a telling sign that we haven’t heard anyone say that we have a remarkable “consensus” on the Pythagorean theorem.  There is no citation to credentialed people to assure us that it’s “accepted” among those who should know that the square of the hypotenuse in the right triangle is equal to the sum of the squares on the two adjacent sides.
When we are dealing with an axiomatic, or necessary truth, it would be a vulgar move to suggest that this is a matter that may hinge on the “opinions” or the consensus among eminent people.   And yet we persistently hear from the Left in our politics that there is an “overwhelming consensus” among scientists that we are facing a grave crisis over “climate change,” a crisis that will require stringent controls on the way we light and heat our houses, power our cars, and live our ordinary lives.
The passion that animates the partisans in this cause has approached a level of unblinking certitude that runs beyond the conviction of the religious. For the religious, anchored in the world, seeing as it as, may find good reasons for doubt, and rely on the confirmation of their faith.
The partisans in this cause have often rejected, with contempt, the possibility of knowing “moral truths.”  My own sense is that they cling to the orthodoxy of climate change precisely to take the place of those anchoring moral truths that firmed up conviction, and offered consolation, to an earlier generation.
The people sounding the alarm over climate change invoke “science” as their new religion, and yet they have been compelled to speak only of a “consensus” among the credentialed people who come together under this banner.  And yet, for people ostensibly tutored in the hard sciences and mathematics, they don’t seem to realize what they give away in their claims when they are forced to appeal, at most, to a “consensus” of “opinion” among people with academic degrees.
The appeal to “consensus” is a veiled admission that the “truths” they appeal to have fallen notably short of the truths that the Laws of nature can reveal to us.  The people who have denied them their “consensus,” and forced them to use that word, are people like the estimable Will Happer and the distinguished colleagues who have joined him in their dubieties about the theories and ideology of “climate change.”
Will Happer was born in India just before what people of my years call “the War.”  His father was a Scotch physician in the Indian army, his mother a medical missionary from North Carolina.  With that absorption in science and faith, he was drawn back to his mother’s country, where he did a Ph.D. in Physics at Princeton and returned there to teach.  He rose to become Cyrus Fogg Brackett Chair of Physics and the chair of the University Research Board, a committee to provide guidance and oversight in the grants sought in the sciences.
Along the way, he did stints in the Administrations of two Bushes and one Trump.  Under the first President Bush, he became the Director of Energy Research in the Department of Energy.  There he oversaw a budget in the billions covering research in high energy, nuclear physics, and environmental science.  He would go on to co-found a company dealing with “magnetic imaging technologies” – and secure a few patents of his own.
His criticism of the cause for “climate change” did not spring then from the musings of one merely “passionate about the environment.”  He would be joined by a small army of physicists and meteorologists who would add their own searing critiques.  And one of the striking points in the argument has been that, instead of being a danger, carbon dioxide actually helps plants to flourish.
The response of course of the partisans over climate change has mainly been to ignore the evidence and reasoning brought forth by these other, accomplished men of science.  It is far easier to preserve a new orthodoxy if one simply pretends that it draws no serious critique.
But I leave the science here to the scientists.  Let us assume that the heralds of climate change and doom are correct.  What would be the source of the moral conviction that there is an urgent problem here, that it would be morally wrong for anyone to deny the problem and resist the remedies?
I take it that the moral force comes from a concern for the human lives that may be destroyed as the oceans rise, and catastrophes unfold.  But then the obvious question arises in response:  How could one justify massive controls out of a speculative concern for the human lives that might be begotten and destroyed in the future – while attaching no concern at all for the 800,000+ killings performed every year in abortion of nascent babies, not at all speculative, but palpably with us and known to us?
Of course, there is nothing novel here, even with intellectuals in advanced societies, simply drawing a veil over a class of human beings who will not “count,” whose injuries will simply not matter.  They could be slaves in America, Jews in Nazi Germany, or Catholics – at various times – in all places.
The Left came to its position on abortion in the momentum of sexual liberation.  They would reject all moral truths as they would reject any ground of moral judgment on the way that people practice their sexual lives.  But the moral functions of commending and condemning are simply built into our nature.
The Left may reject moral truth, but they want something to feel righteous about, and they do want to ring condemnation for their adversaries.   “Climate change” has given them a “moral” world nicely detached from those vexing moral truths, and a kind of pseudo-religion, bereft of the weave of reasoning that runs through the religion we have come to know.
COLUMN BY

Hadley Arkes

Hadley Arkes is the Ney Professor of Jurisprudence Emeritus at Amherst College and the Founder/Director of the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights & the American Founding. His most recent book is Constitutional Illusions & Anchoring Truths: The Touchstone of the Natural Law. Volume II of his audio lectures from The Modern Scholar, First Principles and Natural Law is now available for download.
EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2020 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Recent Election Fraud, Covid, Energy and Environmental News

/in , , /by


Welcome to our latest Energy & Environmental Newsletter… (For all 2020 Newsletters, go here. To review the current issue, see below.)…
Note: a team of experts has volunteered their time to improve US voting integrity. A Michigan analysis is a sample of one of their reports.

LATEST BY CATEGORY

US National Elections

What If Biden Were Seeking Recounts?
The Constitutional Duty of States in a Contested Presidential Election
Sidney Powell was not ‘fired’ by Trump

US National Elections: Chicanery

National Voter Fraud Issue Report Form
2020 Voting Irregularities: Here is some evidence
Skeptical of Voter Fraud in 2020? Here’s Your Evidence
Anomalies in Vote Counts and Their Effects on Election 2020
5 More Ways Joe Biden Magically Outperformed Election Norms
Team Working to Expose Dominion Fraud
We Need Election Results Everyone Can Believe In: Here’s How

US National Elections: State Issues

Analysis: How Dems May Have Pulled Off Fraud in PA (Part 1; Part 2)
Biden TX campaign staffer not arrested for voter fraud
PA State Legislature Holds Public Hearing on 2020 Election
Election Fraud Expert Files Affidavit re ‘Impossibility’ of Michigan Results

Other US Politics and Related

Is America Doomed to Split Apart?
A Personal Statement from General Flynn to America
Polls, Polls, Everywhere Polls, Mostly Wrong As It Turns Out
UVA and the Dangerous Politicization of Our College Campuses

COVID-19: Therapies

21 HCQ positive studies of early treatment: 1 was negative
Study finds 84% fewer hospitalizations for patients treated with HCQ
Low Zinc Levels Linked to Increased Risk of Death in COVID-19
Experimental COVID Treatment Given to Trump Wins Approval

COVID-19: Misc.

Face Masks Are a Religion Now
Cleveland Clinic: Melatonin as COVID-19 Preventer and Treatment
Study: Cost of US COVID-19 Evictions

Greed Energy Economics

This green fantasy will bankrupt us
Renewable Energy is a Losing Proposition: End the Subsidies
Europe’s largest employer association questions EU climate policy cost

Wind Energy

Court Upholds Hog Verdict — direct application to wind energy!
Giant 750± foot Vestas wind turbine collapses
Wind Power Trap Threatens to Make the UK the New California
How NYS Will Force Renewable Energy Projects on Rural Towns
NYS Communities have little influence over wind, solar projects
NYS senator has concerns about renewable energy siting process
Fishermen vow to take action to prevent offshore wind facility

Solar Energy

Study: Solar Geoengineering May Not be a Solution for Climate Change
Economics of Utility-Scale Battery Systems (e.g. for solar)
Developer pulls application for utility-scale project in Virginia

Misc Energy

Hydrogen, WSJ Spin
Lithium Batteries Ain’t No Solution If You’re Worried About Pollution
Will Biden’s 100% clean energy plan work? Look to TVA
Uranium in 2020: A Guide to The Commodity’s Price, Value, and Uses
Europe’s Green Deal in limbo as Poland demands ‘further cost analysis

Manmade Global Warming

Archive: John Kerry Explains the Greenhouse Effect
Jeff Bezos announces first winners of $10 billion climate-change pledge
Nuclear physicist talks climate change
Energy-Related CO2 Emissions Decline Again: Thank Fracking

Religion Related

Supreme Court rules against Cuomo’s COVID-19 religious gathering limits
Short video: You Can’t Be Free Without Religious Liberty
Biblical Principles for Human Sexuality
Bishop Barron on the “McCarrick Report”
Note 1: It’s recommended to read the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone, as some documents (e.g. PDFs) are much easier to read on a large computer screen…  Common fonts, etc. have been used to minimize display issues.
Note 2: To accommodate numerous requests received about prior articles, we’ve put together detailed archives — where you can search by year, or over the ten+ years of the Newsletter. For a detailed background about the Newsletter, please read this.
Note 3: See this extensive list of reasonable books on climate change that complements the Newsletter. As a parallel effort, there is also a list of some good books related to industrial wind energy. Both topics are also extensively covered on our WiseEnergy.org website.
Note 4: If you’d like to join the 10,000+ worldwide readers and get your own free copy of this periodic Newsletter, simply send John an email saying that.
Note 5: John is not an attorney or a physician, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or the WiseEnergy.org website) should be construed as giving legal or medical advice. His recommendation has always been: consult a competent, licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues, and consult a competent physician regarding medical issues.
Copyright © 2020; Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (see WiseEnergy.org)

Millions in Africa Being Sacrificed to Extreme Poverty, Premature Death on Altar of ‘Green Energy’

/in , , , /by


Obama-era policies that favor so-called green energy over coal-fired electricity are dooming millions of Africans to lives of extreme poverty, environmental degradation, and increased risk of early death, according to a new analysis by the CO2 Coalition.
The study by the Arlington, Virginia-based coalition of 60 climate scientists and energy engineers contends that inadequate access to electricity is one of the key reasons for Africa’s grinding poverty.
Economic growth in a competitive, global market requires reliable, universal electrification. Without sufficient electricity for heating and cooking, Africans are exposed to high levels of indoor pollution from dirty fuels, the world’s greatest environmental health risk, according to the World Health Organization.
Globally, the WHO estimates that 3 billion people still cook and heat and illuminate their homes with solid fuels—wood, charcoal, and dried animal dung.

The left is actively working to undermine the integrity of our elections. Read the plan to stop them now. Learn more now >>

The poisons and particulate matter from burning solid fuels kill almost 4 million people a year from pneumonia, heart disease, pulmonary disease, stroke, lung cancer, and a variety of impaired immunities. Half of pneumonia deaths in children under age 5 are from soot in the house.
UNICEF estimates that the African share of those 4 million untimely deaths is 400,000.
Dangerous levels of indoor air pollution are almost guaranteed for families without access to electricity.
They also report that 352 million African children live in homes with solid-fuel cooking. Millions of women and children continue to walk many miles a day to gather not just water, but also wood for indoor burning, adding to deforestation.
The illnesses, deaths, and misery that are the result of energy poverty in Africa are improving only slowly compared with the rest of the world.
In 1960, those living in China and sub-Saharan Africa had a nearly equal life expectancy, 44 years. Today, China is at 77, which is only slightly less than the U.S. figure of 79. Regrettably, the African average is 61, better than it was 60 years ago, but still lagging behind much of the rest of the world.
According to the new research, that means that the 1 billion sub-Saharan Africans have a combined loss of 16 billion years of life compared with the Chinese.
Extreme generational poverty in sub-Saharan Africa is endemic, with 41% of the population living in absolute poverty, defined by the World Bank as an income of less than $1.40 per day.
A lack of access to reliable electricity is one of the primary reasons for this lack of economic growth.
Even in electrified areas of Africa, access is not reliable, since the grid is often down, sometimes on a daily basis.
That has led to a “dieselization” of the continent in recent decades. Soot-spewing diesel-fueled backup generators are in place for homes of the wealthy, factories, and government buildings. The reliance on this dirty source of power is so great that it’s estimated that many African nations spend more on diesel generation than on the electricity grid itself.
Is the answer to this energy poverty a complete reliance on wind and solar power? Not at all, as the unreliability of renewables would mean even more blackouts and brownouts, leading to even more “dieselization.”
The solution for providing dependable, affordable electricity may lie beneath the Africans’ feet in the form of cheap, abundant coal reserves that could be developed using American clean coal technology.
South Africa controls nearly 70% of the continent’s reserves, but substantial coal deposits are also found in East Africa and in the Sahel of West Africa. More than 100 new coal-fired plants are on the drawing board in 11 African nations, and almost half of those are being financed and built by China.
In spite of Africa’s deadly health crisis, the World Bank now bars lending to maintain or build new coal-fired power plants. Instead, it is lending to countries to assist them in closing mines and replacing the existing power plants with renewables.
According to Akinwumi Adesina, the African Development Bank’s president, “Coal is the past, and renewable energy is the future.” He added: “There’s a reason God gave Africa sunlight.”
But that’s exactly the wrong formula.
No matter who sits in the Oval Office after Jan. 20, the president should consider rolling back the restrictions on African energy development to improve the lives of millions of our African brothers and sisters.
COMMENTARY BY

Gregory Wrightstone

Gregory Wrightstone, a member of the CO2 Coalition, is a geologist and the author of “Inconvenient Facts: The Science That Al Gore Doesn’t Want You to Know.”

RELATED ARTICLE: John Kerry Would Return as Climate Czar in Biden Administration

A Note for our Readers:

Election fraud is already a problem. Soon it could be a crisis. But election fraud is not the only threat to the integrity of our election system.

Progressives are pushing for nine “reforms” that could increase the opportunity for fraud and dissolve the integrity of constitutional elections. To counter these dangerous measures, our friends at The Heritage Foundation are proposing seven measures to protect your right to vote and ensure fair, constitutional elections.
They are offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free today.
Get the details now when you download your free copy of, “Mandate for Leadership: Ensuring the Integrity of Our Election System.”

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: John Stossel discusses film Climate Hustle 2

/in , , , , , /by


John Stossel posted a great video with extensive excerpts from CFACT’s feature move Climate Hustle 2: Rise of the Climate Monarchy.
Watch Stossel:

Stossel interviews CFACT’s Marc Morano and asks him about the climate campaign’s insatiable appetite for power.
Stossel: Your movie suggests this world government conspiracy, that they want to rule us. But I think they are genuinely concerned and they want to save us. 
Morano: Their vision of saving us is putting them in charge. 
Stossel: And if they’re in charge says the movie, they will destroy capitalism.
Guardian columnist George Monbiot: We’ve got to go straight to the heart of capitalism and overthrow it.
The opponents of free markets and free minds have long seized upon climate change to boost their radical agenda.  Climate Hustle 2 presents an ironclad case.
John Stossel did a great job on his video.  There’s much more, take a look.
Yesterday’s Washington Times called CFACT’s Climate Depot, the website Marc Morano manages, “an astute website which tracks climate, political and culture-related aberrations around the world.”
CFACT continually educates the public with news, commentary and analysis.  We’re proud to have created this latest feature film.
Have you watched Climate Hustle 2 yet?
©CFACT. All rights reserved.

The Arizona Corporation Commission “Regulates” Our Climate Thirty Years into the Future

/in , , , , , /by

On October 29, almost out of the public eye, the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) gave final approval to a dreadful regulation, mandating all energy in the state be produced with zero carbon emissions by 2050. Arizona has its own mini-Green New Deal!

The consequences will be devastating to Arizona’s economic competitiveness. A mere 15% mandate imposed in 2007 had a $1 billion impact on ratepayers and that was low-hanging fruit. Voters in 2018 soundly defeated a ballot proposition similar to the Commission’s.

The absurdity of legislating (by regulation) 30 years into the future was apparently lost on the three commissioners (two Republicans) who voted for the measure. Policymakers in 2050 will be elected to enact their own current priorities, not ones from 30 years ago. Attempts to gain credit for future emissions reductions without bearing the economic consequences are mere virtue signals on the cheap.

To be slightly fair, Commissioners are relentlessly targeted by environmental activists, known for their cult-like hysteria. Wildly impractical, poverty-inducing and ineffective solutions are common in today’s climate politics.

Hysteria production was the obvious goal of Greta Thunberg, the Swedish teenager who wowed the UN and the Davos Economic Forum, sternly warning that we have only 12 years to avoid turning our planet into an uninhabitable hellhole.

Several prominent scientists and no less an expert than AOC herself confirmed her claim. Al Gore and others have made a handsome living proclaiming alarmist deadlines, most of which have already passed.

Fear of the End of Days isn’t the only driver of environmental radicalism. It’s also another social justice movement. Global Climate Strike, known for organizing massive demonstrations worldwide, demands that we “ensure a rapid energy revolution with equity, reparations and climate justice at its heart”.

These self-appointed experts aren’t searching for the most feasible ways to limit carbon emissions. They demand instead “non-corporate solutions that recognize the traditional knowledge, practices and resilience of indigenous people”.

Climate change thus conceived incorporates rejecting capitalism and technological innovation while implementing a wish list including, among other items, minimum wages, forgiveness of international debts and “access to nature for all”.

But the mother of all proposals to zero out carbon emissions is the federal Green New Deal. As outlined in a report produced by congressional Democrats, it would “mobilize every aspect of American society on a scale not seen since World War II.“

Every building in America would be upgraded or replaced for “state of the art energy efficiency”. High speed rail would replace air travel. The report proclaims nothing less than “a massive mobilization of all our resources into renewable energies.”

The GND would completely transform how we produce and consume energy, harvest crops, drive cars and manufacture goods. But all this coercive transforming would not come cheap.

The net cost of the GND is difficult to pinpoint, but credible estimates are in the 50 to 90 trillion range, an unimaginable sum many times our total GDP. But don’t worry. According to the report, “the investments will be paid for with public money appropriated by Congress”. Isn’t that nice?

But here’s the clincher. Even a fully implemented GND would have only a negligible effect on the earth’s climate. Using the methodology developed by the UN Climate Panel, eliminating all U.S. carbon emissions would make the globe only 0.138°C cooler by 2100. If the entire developed world also went to zero, the effect would only be 0.278°C by 2100. For this we would devastate our way of life?

Even some prominent left-wing intellectuals realize that this is laughingstock material. As Peter Franzén put it in the New Yorker, “to prepare for the coming climate apocalypse, we need to admit that we can’t prevent it “.

Each dollar we waste on pipe dreams is one less dollar we have to spend on what humans always do in the face of threatening change: adapt accordingly. Climate change is a problem and anthropogenic warming is real but the wisdom of the crowd is also correct: we have other equally vexing, expensive problems to deal with.

We can get through this if we use human intelligence to stay calm and thoughtful – not like the Arizona Corporation Commission.

 

Thomas C. Patterson, MD is a retired Emergency Medicine physician, Arizona state Senator and Arizona Senate Majority Leader in the ’90s. He is a former Chairman, Goldwater Institute.

 

ALERT: Fascist Anarchists’ group ‘Shut Down D.C.’ targets American Patriots

/in , , , , , /by


Fascism

“a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control”

Never in my lifetime have I seen the kinds of hate and violence in American cities that I see today. These even outdo the violent anti-Vietnam War protests that swept our nation in in 1960s.
Groups like BLM, Antifa and now Shut Down D.C. are openly revolting in an attempt to overthrown our governments at every level. We are seeing, in primarily Democrat controlled enclaves such as Portland, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City, Atlanta, Detroit, Baltimore and many others, violence and destruction the likes of which I have never seen before.
Now this hate and destruction is coming to the “Deep State” located in our nation’s capital.


The ShutDownDC website states:

ShutDownDC uses strategic direct action [riots and violence] to advance [social] justice and hold [Republican] officials accountable. We’re a growing movement and we’re getting ready for an uprising [revolution]. Now’s the time to get involved so we’re ready to hit the streets [riot and destroy]. [Emphasis added]

ShutDownDC is specifically targeting Republican members of Congress:


ShutDownDC is part of the Green New Deal movement. They are the Green Shirts of the Democrat power grab to control American industry via climate regulation and intimidation.
In a 2019 Washington Post column Hannah Natanson titled ‘Shut Down D.C.’: What you need to know about the protests that are creating gridlock in Washington wrote:

A broad coalition of climate activists called “Shut Down D.C.” is blocking streets throughout the nation’s capital during the Monday morning commute to draw attention to climate change.

The protest is timed to coincide with the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York, at which climate activists and leaders, including 16-year-old Greta Thunberg, are slated to speak. It follows a strike across six continents Friday and a youth conference at the United Nations on Saturday.

The traffic shutdown is meant to send a particular message to D.C.’s powerful political elite, according to Liz Butler, an organizer for Shut Down D.C. and vice president of organizing and strategic allegiances for Friends of the Earth Action.

Read more.


©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.
RELATED ARTICLE: Meet the Climate Scientists That Social Media Censors Don’t Want You to Know About
RELATED TWEET: True American patriots.

The Green New Deal means monumental disruption: Not just for energy, but for every aspect of our lives, living standards, culture and freedoms

/in , /by

By David Wojick and Paul Diessen

Kamala Harris co-sponsored the Senate resolution to support the Green New Deal. Now Joe Biden has endorsed the plan. Naturally, people want to know what the GND will cost – usually meaning in state and federal government spending. But that is the wrong question.

The real question is, how much do Green New Dealers expect to get out of it, at what total cost? Mr. Biden says he wants the feds to spend nearly $7 trillion over the next decade on healthcare, energy and housing transformation, climate change and other GND agenda items. But that is only part of the picture.

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (who has a degree in some socialist version of economics) and the folks who helped her write Biden’s so-called Climate Plan have a clear idea of how much money they want, and pretty much know where they expect the money to come from. Here it is in its clearest form, as stated by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s then chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti:

“The resolution describes the 10-year plan to transform every sector of our economy to remove GHG [greenhouse gases] and pollution. It says it does this through huge investments in renewables, at WW2 scales (which was 40-60% of America’s GDP).” [emphasis added]

World War II was a time of great sacrifice and hardship, as part of a dramatic and historic mobilization to win a horrific global war. However, that hard reality doesn’t matter to these folks. They say we are now waging a war to stop catastrophic climate change. So money, sacrifice and disruption are irrelevant.

Our nation’s GDP is around $20 trillion a year, or $200 trillion in ten years. 40-60% of that is $80-120 trillion. For simplicity, let’s call it an even $100 trillion to finance the Green New Deal utopian dream.

$100 trillion! The ways and means of raising this stupendous sum are also clear in their minds. It will be done the same way WW2 was financed, however that was. To them, it’s obvious that we can simply do this, because we did it before. The specifics don’t matter. Government elites will figure them out.

But even this arrogant, cavalier attitude is only part of the picture.

If you read what Green New Dealers say, confusion arises because people think the GND is an ordinary policy proposal: “Here’s what we want done, and this what it should cost.” It is nothing like that. The Green New Deal is more along the lines of, “Here’s the level of effort we require to transform our entire economy, and this is what we should be able to do with that much money.”

People tend to interpret Green New Dealer talk of a WW2-like mobilization as a simple metaphor. But these folks mean it as an actual measure of what they are determined to do. So far they have glossed over and ignored the extreme hardships of mobilization. Here’s just one example – not from front lines mayhem, but from the United States home front during World War II.

Gasoline, meat and clothing were tightly rationed. Most families were allocated three US gallons of gasoline a week, which sharply curtailed driving for any purpose. Production of most durable goods, like cars, new housing, vacuum cleaners and kitchen appliances, was banned until the war ended. In industrial areas housing was in short supply as people doubled up and lived in cramped quarters. Prices and wages were controlled. [Harold Vatter, The US Economy in World War II]

No doubt the Green New Deal mobilization would impose different hardships. But all mobilizations are oppressive. You can’t commandeer half of the GDP without inflicting severe disruption on people’s lives.

The argument is sound in its way, provided there is a need for all-out war – which there is not. The minor to modest temperature, climate and extreme weather changes we’ve been seeing (in the real world  outside computer models) explain why most Americans see no need for a painful war. So does the fact that China, India and other emerging economies are not about to give up fossil fuels anytime soon.

In fact, polls show that roughly half of Americans do not even believe in the idea of human caused global warming, much less that it is an “existential threat,” as Senator Harris claims it is. The latest Gallup poll found that only 1% of US adults consider “climate change/environment/pollution” to be “the most important problem facing this country today.” That’s down from a meager 2% in the May 28-June 4 poll.

Even more revealing, a 2019 AP-NORC poll found that 68% of adult Americans were unwilling to pay even an extra $10 on their monthly electricity bill to combat global warming. Indeed, 57% of them would not be willing to pay more than $1.00 in added electricity charges to fight climate change!

Just wait until they see what the Biden-Harris-AOC-Democrat Green New Deal would cost them.

And it’s not just that their costs would likely skyrocket from an average US 13.2¢ per kilowatt hour (11.4¢ or less in ten states) to well beyond the nearly 20¢ per kWh that families are already paying in California and New York, or the 30¢ that families are now paying in ultra-green Germany. Or that factories, businesses, hospitals, schools and everyone else would also see their costs escalate – with blue collar families, the sick and elderly, poor and minority communities hammered hardest.

It’s that the GND would force every American to replace their gasoline and diesel cars and trucks with expensive short-haul electric vehicles; their gas furnaces and stoves with electric systems; their home, local and state electrical and transmission systems with expensive upgrades that can handle a totally electric economy. They’ll see their landscapes, coastlines and wildlife habitats blanketed with wind turbines, solar panels, transmission lines and warehouses filled with thousands of half-ton batteries. Virtually every component of this GND nation would be manufactured in China and other faraway places.

The cost of this massive, total transformation of our energy and economic system would easily reach $10 trillion: $30,000 per person or $120,000 per family – on top of those skyrocketing electricity prices. And that’s just the intermittent, unreliable energy component of this all-encompassing Green New Deal.

These are stupendous, outrageous costs and personal sacrifices. Every American, at every campaign event and town meeting, should ask Green New Deal supporters if they think America needs to – or can afford to – cough up $10 trillion or $100 trillion over the next ten years. And not let them get away with glib, evasive answers, or attempts to laugh these questions off as meritless or irrelevant.

The American people are not about to be mobilized into an all-out war against dubious climate change, with price tags like these coupled with repeated blackouts, huge personal sacrifices, and massive joblessness in every sector of the economy – except among enlightened government ruling classes.

They’ve already seen news stories about the latest rolling blackouts in California (here, here, here and here) – resulting from one-third of that state’s electricity coming from “renewable” sources, and with another third of the state’s electricity imported from other states that also get heat waves. They should ponder what their lives, livelihoods and living standards would be under 100% wind and solar power.

And yet, once again, even all this insanity is only a small part of the picture.

Remember, the Green New Deal is also about government run healthcare – and an economy and nation where “progressive” “woke” legislators, regulators, judges and activists tell companies what they can manufacture and sell … and tell us what we can buy, eat and drink; how and how much we can heat and cool our homes; and what we can read, hear, think and say, as they “transform” our culture and traditions.

The GND is being promoted by politicians, news and social media, “educators” and “reformers” who also want to eliminate free enterprise capitalism; have totally open borders, even for criminals and people who might have Covid and other diseases; and want to defund the police, put anarchists, looters and arsonists back on our streets, and take away our right and ability to defend ourselves, our homes and our families.

The time to think long and hard about all of this is NOW. Not sometime after the November 3 elections.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of books and articles on energy, environment, climate and human rights issues. David Wojick is an independent analyst specializing in science, logic and human rights in public policy, and author of numerous articles on these topics.

********************

This column from The Heartland Institute https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/the-green-new-deal-means-monumental-disruption is republished with permission. Copyright © The Heartland Institute. All rights reserved. The opinions expressed may not necessarily reflect the views of The Prickly Pear or of our sponsors.

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.