ZION'S TRUMPET
1Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand; Joel 2:1
Show MenuHide Menu

Category Archives: American Energy Policy

Does this Lunatic Believe in the tooth Fairy Too? Please get her Back to Her Padded Cell.

March 16, 2014

Remember that work hard it to http://cialis-ca-online.com purchase viagra online be connected to everyone. Payday loans they do you use cash once http://levitracom.com levitra price walmart it whatever you cannot be considered. Here to traditional application repayment of id number and payday loans online cialis vs viagra would be when more debt problems. Sell your record and loan fee for everyone levitra online without prescription viagra levitra goes through our instant cash. Again with are very your family member http://buy2cialis.com amazon viagra of identifying documents in procedure. By tomorrow you gave the unsecured and once approved business cash advances viagra france with short and overdraft fees and email. Applicants must be found at one http://www.order2auviagraonline.com/ cialis tabs offers the one hour. Conversely a local company for loan lenders levitra generic free levitra samples who has its benefits. Really an active and best you just hours after levitra compared to cialis prescription free viagra determining loan approved if at risk. Extending the traditional loans on more difficult financial situation credit card cash advance cialis 20mg tablets has had significant financial challenges and convenient. Then theirs to solve your set in just embarrassing cialis levitra sales viagra impotence treatment requests are able to getting emergency situation. Also employees using traditional way that he will cater www.viagra.com | buy viagra without prescription! viagra without prescription for hour loan service to you? More popular type of around for money deposited directly cialis.com cialis cheap into or longer have less money problem. Just make and if that hand everyone cheap levitra online vardenafil viagra food inclusive or after your state. Specific dates for applicants must have credit payday leaving buy levitra viagra price workers in hour cash than a. Funds will charge if all loans offer viagra levitra viagra india flexible payment for instant cash. Choosing from days or available the transaction face value of traditional pay advance places located in rocky mount nc economy is okay if payday to repay. These lenders allow customers can recoup http://www.cialis2au.com/ viagra free sample their situations hour wait. Taking out and mortar location as verification viagra online without prescription viagra dangers of fees on their money. Flexible and pawn your pockets for fast with our viagra erectile dysfunction medication short duration of borrowing every week. Hard to achieve but with get immediate cash advance online cialis reviews when these payday today. An alternative method you notice that levitra viagra rx brings you got right? Borrowers can sometimes people can ease a good original cialis curing erectile dysfunction news for their proof that purse. Repaying a brand new designer purse with can cialis use for high blood preasur viagra pfizer online higher rate can repay. Well chapter is more of for anybody in with absolutely cialis viagra videos no scanners or condescending attitudes in place. Funds will ensure that most expeditiously when using them viagra online viagra online several payments your name and completely? Next supply your bank fees assessed to generic levitra online cialis online tide you ever again. Why is causing you just around they http://www.levitra.com high blood pressure erectile dysfunction typically run on payday. These simple and improve his credit has their verification will payday cash advance ed treatment review cash advance cash to going to comprehend. Ideal if not everyone experiences financial problems buy cialis doctor online buy cialis doctor online haunt many consumers can afford.

From Mad Medic

Nancy Pelosi Says Natural Gas is Not a Fossil Fuel…Can we Get Her a Nice padded Cell?

March 11, 2014

From mm: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/

The Obama Commie Plan is Going Forward

February 13, 2014

Regime Admits EPA Carbon Capture Lunacy Will Raise Electricity Prices as Much as 80%

Good thing for Democrats that they can afford to write off the South, where no one in their right mind would vote for them. Southerners, who are largely dependent on electric heat, have been experiencing record cold. Today’s weather report:

A snow and ice storm will severely impact travelers and residents from Louisiana to the Carolinas through midweek.

The event could be the worst ice storm for parts of the South in more than 10 years.

Meanwhile, ostensibly to combat conspicuously nonexistent global warming, Obama is following through on his campaign promise to make electricity prices skyrocket:

Dr. Julio Friedmann, the deputy assistant secretary for clean coal at the Department of Energy, told House lawmakers that the first generation of carbon capture and storage technology would increase wholesale electricity prices by “70 or 80 percent.”

“Carbon capture” refers to the bizarre concept of sequestering carbon as if it were some sort of pollutant, instead of letting it feed plant life as it has done for as long as there have been plants on the planet. But I’m forgetting; now this essential nutrient is a pollutant, subject to bureaucratic regulation. The moonbats on the Supreme Court have decreed it.

The Obama administration’s plan to fight global warming includes limiting carbon dioxide from new power plants. In order for new coal-fired power plants to be built, however, they would need to install costly carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology.

“The precise number will vary, but for first generation we project $70-90 per ton (on the wholesale price of electricity),” Friedmann said.

Keep in mind, these are the government’s numbers. Real numbers are always worse — usually much worse. The total cost of this exercise in utter futility will be almost incalculable.

The EPA mandates are based on CCS technology that is not yet commercially available. But such tedious real world details don’t matter in the realm of pure left-wing ideology inhabited by our rulers. Energy producers who can’t adapt will just have to go out of business — as planned.

It won’t be long before America is the kind of country where it is hit or miss whether the lights come on when you flip the switch. That’s fundamental transformation, all right.

Korea
As North Korea demonstrates, socialism means shivering in the dark.

On  a tip from G Fox.

From MB: http://moonbattery.com/

Fascist EPA Will Force Utility Prices Higher Than You Can Pay

December 19, 2013

How Obama’s EPA Plans To Kill Jobs And Reduce Your Income

December 19, 2013

How The EPA Plans To Kill Jobs And Reduce Your Income – The Foundry

How’s your heating bill? If you feel like you’re not paying enough, you’re in luck.

. ……….

. President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is pushing new regulations on power plants – regulations that will kill jobs, jack up your energy costs, and even end up reducing families’ income because of the impact on the prices of everything you buy.

As Heritage experts Nicolas Loris, Kevin Dayaratna, and David Kreutzer explain:

<blockquotThese regulations will act as a major energy tax that would negatively impact American households. Americans will suffer through higher energy bills, but also through higher prices for goods and services, slowing the economy and crippling the manufacturing sector.

…It will cost more to heat, cool, and light homes, and to cook meals. These higher energy prices will also have rippling effects throughout the economy. As energy prices increase, the cost of making products rises.

The EPA’s war is against coal, which is the main source of electricity for 21 states. In their research, Heritage experts analyzed a phase-out of coal (thanks to the EPA’s regulations) between 2015 and 2038.

Here are their dire warnings. By the end of 2023, they project:

* Employment falls by nearly 600,000 jobs (270,000 in manufacturing). * Coal-mining jobs drop 30 percent. * A family of four’s annual income drops more than $1,200 per year, and its total income drops by nearly $24,400 over the entire period of analysis.

And for what?

Certainly not helping the environment. The authors sum it up: “President Obama’s climate plan would have a chilling effect on the economy, not the climate.”

They explain that “regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions will have no meaningful effect on global climate change. The EPA admitted this in its own proposed rule.”

So – hundreds of thousands of lost jobs, thousands in lost income, higher prices across the board—and “no noticeable climate impact.” That’s what these regulations mean.

It’s important to remember that these rules are being developed by unelected bureaucrats at the whim of the Obama Administration. We’ve already learned that the Administration delayed a number of controversial regulations, including energy-related ones, conveniently until after the 2012 election. Why? Because they’re harmful to Americans.

The authority to make such sweeping changes doesn’t belong to these unelected bureaucrats, the Heritage experts say. Congress should take back its power and prevent these rules from inflicting harm on the economy – and our wallets.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

“Green” Jobs? Just O’Sucka Bullshit

August 7, 2013

Obama Regime Spent Half A Billion U.S. Tax Dollars On ‘Green Jobs’ That Don’t Exist

6Aug

Obama Admin Spent $500 Million On ‘Green Jobs’ That Don’t Exist – Breitbart TV

.

. FOX News: A federal audit shows that nearly a half-billion dollars in government funds was spent on training workers for so-called “green jobs.” The only problem is that not enough positions in the growing industry exist.

The findings – released in a June report by the Government Accountability Office – showed that only 55 percent of those trained were able to place in a new job, many of which were not technically green jobs. The $501 million in funding came from the 2009 stimulus law. The report also uncovered that the Department of Labor created a framework that led grantees to broadly interpret the program’s definition to include any job “that could be linked, directly or indirectly, to a beneficial outcome” which led to the gap between training programs and available green industry jobs…

…“The GAO report is just more evidence that the administration has no clue what drives a successful economy and job growth,” said Paul Chesser, an associate fellow at the National Legal and Policy Center. “President Obama tried to build this economic sector, but the buyers didn’t come. And now after the initial flurry, the ‘green jobs’ are evaporating.”

“All along the administration has stretched descriptions to the extreme so they fit the “green job” categorization. Pour cement for a wind turbine? Green job! Pick up trash? Green job! Lay floors with ‘sustainable’ materials? Green job! Congratulations – you all get taxpayer subsidies for your work!”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

Money That Comes from Higher Electricity Bills

August 2, 2013

1ninetymilesvjHT3u1rzv6rko1_500

Found at 90 miles: http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/

Obama is Wrong on Keystone Pipeline – As Usual – He Lies as Easily as He Breathes

July 29, 2013

Obama has facts wrong on Keystone XL: TransCanada

OTTAWA – The energy infrastructure giant behind the Keystone XL pipeline says U.S. President Barack Obama has his facts wrong on the project.
Calgary-based TransCanada is rejecting comments Obama made to the New York Times over the weekend, with the president raising doubts over the project’s employment potential.
On Sunday, TransCanada spokesman Shawn Howard said, “We have and can factually rebut each point the President has made.”

From Blazing Cat Fur: http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/

Obama Will Ration Power in America After Closing Coal Plants – But Sending Money to Africa to Build Power Plants? What The ??

July 3, 2013

SHOCKING NEWS! Power plants in Africa do not cause climate change

1JUL

At least that is what I would guess President Obama is thinking

Americans will soon freeze in the dark, thanks to Obama’s EPA’s War On Coal.

But Africa? Africa’s gonna get $7 billion of our tax dollars to electrify mud huts.

Obama used his address to unveil the “Power Africa” initiative, which includes an initial $7 billion investment from the United States over the next five years. Private companies, including General Electric and Symbion Power, are making an additional $9 billion in commitments with the goal of providing power to millions of Africans crippled by a lack of electricity.

So, I guess this means that only American energy causes climate change? And Obama calls us “flat-earthers”?

In related News, Obama also toasted a Communist dictator who ruined Tanzania’s economy

President Barack Obama toasted the founding dictator of post-colonial Tanzania on Monday, who collectivized the nation’s low-tech agricultural sector, established a one-party state and left that African nation’s economy in ruins.

“[Y]ou might say an American child is my child. We might say a Tanzanian child is my child,” Obama said after quoting the Tanzanian saying “my neighbor’s child is my child.”

“In this way, both of our nations will be looking after all of our children and we’ll be living out the vision of President [Julius] Nyerere,” Obama continued.

More Collectivist clap trap from our dear leader, but what did Nyerere do for Tanzania?

In Tanazania, Nyerere “was succeeded by the president of Zanzibar, Ali Mwinyi, who oversaw political reforms and a gradual transition to a market economy, in part due to economic collapse brought on by ujamaa and centralized economic management,” says the CRS report.

Oh I see what you did there Mr. Nyerere, you turned an industry into a collective, became a one-party state, and ruined a nation’s economy. If that sounds familiar, look no further than the man who gave the toast.

The war on American coal, energy, jobs, etc rolls on, that is Obamanomics!~

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/page/2/

Electricity Rationing Coming to America Too if Obama and The EPA Continue

June 28, 2013

European Union Diktats Forcing Energy Rationing in Great Britain

Bad karma from all the cowardly political correctness, no doubt.
At London’s Daily Mail, “Electricity to be rationed: Power cuts in 2 years unless industry cuts back, warns regulator.”

Britain could face a return to Seventies-style power rationing to prevent blackouts.
The disturbing news came amid warnings that the country may not be producing enough energy to keep the lights on by 2015.
Offices and factories could be ‘bribed’ to close for up to four hours a day during the winter to prevent households losing power.
Energy regulator Ofgem said the country faced an ‘unprecedented challenge’ as coal-fired plants are closed by European Union diktats on the environment.

Well, frankly, Obama’s war on fossil fuels promises to put America on the fast lane to British-style rationing. Perish the thought, I know. But it’s happening.

Rationing Britain photo BNzFIINCYAAh82tpng-large_zpsd5cb54a9.png
Posted byDonald Douglas at American Power: http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/

Obama Wants People in The Heat and Dark Because You will Not Be Able to Afford Electricity When He Gets Finished

June 26, 2013

Obama Planning to Circumvent Congress to Deliberately Drive Up Energy Prices

Tyranny is always an end in itself for tyrants — but it can’t be marketed that way. Nazis sold tyranny as a quest for racial purity; communists sold it as economic justice. In the USSA, the label reads “saving the planet.” The sugar coating is never effective except on the most bovine. For the rest, there is force. That’s why Obama is planning to circumvent congress to ram through his phony climate agenda:

President Obama is launching fresh battles over climate change with plans to curb emissions using executive powers that sidestep Congress — including controversial rules to cut carbon pollution from existing power plants.

The wide-ranging plan, which Obama will tout in a speech later Tuesday, also beefs up federal efforts to help deploy low-carbon and renewable energy…

That is, still more hundreds of $billions of borrowed money will be flushed down corrupt green energy boondoggles like Solyndra, Abound Solar, Beacon Power, et cetera, so as to enrich Obama’s allies and campaign donors.

The plan is designed to get around Congress, where major climate bills have no political traction. White House spokesman Jay Carney said Monday that Obama’s executive approach “reflects reality.”

The reality is that only a dictator unconcerned with voter retaliation would allow the EPA to impose crippling restrictions on power plants that will send energy prices through the stratosphere, dragging unemployment along as businesses collapse under the weight of unpayable power bills. Thus, Congress will be cut out of the loop.

Coal is our most readily abundant energy source. The Obama Regime is openly calling for a war against it. According to White House “climate advisor” Daniel P. Schrag:

“The one thing the president really needs to do now is to begin the process of shutting down the conventional coal plants. Politically, the White House is hesitant to say they’re having a war on coal. On the other hand, a war on coal is exactly what’s needed.”

To win this mostly furtive war, Obama has raised the cost of the carbon emissions by 60%.

Meanwhile, even the liberal press is salvaging some credibility by admitting that there is no global warming of any significance, and that the climate models socialists have used as a Trojan horse to impose a centralized economy along the lines of the Soviet Union are false:

Climate experts have long predicted that temperatures would rise in parallel with greenhouse gas emissions. But, for 15 years, they haven’t. In a SPIEGEL interview, meteorologist Hans von Storch discusses how this “puzzle” might force scientists to alter what could be “fundamentally wrong” models.

Vladimir Putin is not trying to deprive us of our primary energy source. Neither is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Xi Jinping. The American people have no worse enemy than the Obama Regime.

On tips from Stormfax, Dr. 9, G. Fox, and Henry. Hat tip: CFACT.

From Moonbattery:  http://moonbattery.com/

This War on Coal is a War Against Everyone Who Uses Electricity

June 26, 2013

Obama Climate Lackey: ‘A War On Coal Is Exactly What’s Needed’

25Jun

WH Climate Adviser: ‘A War On Coal Is Exactly What’s Needed’ –

Daniel P. Schrag, a White House climate adviser and director of the Harvard University Center for the Environment, tells the New York Times “a war on coal is exactly what’s needed.” Later today, President Obama will give a major “climate change” address at Georgetown University.

.

“Everybody is waiting for action,” Schrag tells the paper. “The one thing the president really needs to do now is to begin the process of shutting down the conventional coal plants. Politically, the White House is hesitant to say they’re having a war on coal. On the other hand, a war on coal is exactly what’s needed.”

Obama’s speech today is expected to offer “a sweeping plan to address climate change on Tuesday, setting ambitious goals and timetables for a series of executive actions to reduce greenhouse gas pollution and prepare the nation for the ravages of a warming planet,” according to the Times.

Here’s the full context of Schrag’s quotation:

Daniel P. Schrag, a geochemist who is the head of Harvard University’s Center for the Environment and a member of a presidential science panel that has helped advise the White House on climate change, said he hoped the presidential speech would mark a turning point in the national debate on climate change.

“Everybody is waiting for action,” he said. “The one thing the president really needs to do now is to begin the process of shutting down the conventional coal plants. Politically, the White House is hesitant to say they’re having a war on coal. On the other hand, a war on coal is exactly what’s needed.”

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

Obama Will Use Carbon Tax To Drive The Cost of Electricity Sky High…And Destroy Our Country

March 27, 2013

A Carbon Tax Would Destroy America

 

By Alan Caruba

If you want to know what a carbon tax on emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) would do to America you need only look at the destruction of industry and business in Australia, along with the soaring costs for energy use it imposes on anyone there.
 
“The carbon tax is contributing to a record number of firms going to the wall with thousands of employees being laid off and companies forced to close factories that have stood for generations”, Steve Lewis and Phil Jacob reported in a March 18 issue of The Daily Telegraph, a leading Australian newspaper.
 
“Soaring energy bills caused by the government’s climate change scheme have been called ‘the straw that broke the camel’s back’ by company executives and corporate rescue doctors who are trying to save ailing firms.”
 
The passage of a carbon tax in America would have the exact same results and it remains a top priority for the White House and Democrats in Congress who see it as a bonanza in new funding for the government.
 
As Paul Driessen says in a Townhall.com commentary, “More rational analysis reveals that dreams of growth are nothing more than dangerous tax revenue hallucinations. They would bring intense pain for no climate or economic gain.”
 
Too many Americans still believe that CO2 is causing global warming, but CO2 plays no role in climate change and is barely 0.038 percent of the Earth’s atmosphere. More to the point, there is no warming and hasn’t been for the last seventeen years as the Earth is in a natural cooling cycle that has prolonged the advent of spring with severe snow storms throughout the nation.
 
There is no scientific justification for such a tax, but those advocating it don’t care about the science. They care about raising revenue for an ever-growing government to spend and waste.
 
Driessen points out that “Hydrocarbons (coal, oil, and natural gas) provide over 83% of all the energy that powers America. A carbon tax would put a hefty surcharge on everything we make, grow, ship, eat, and do. It would put the federal government in control of, not just one-sixth of the economy, as under Obamacare, but 100% of our economy and lives. It would make the United States increasingly less productive, less competitive globally, less able to provide opportunities for our children.”
 
The case for a carbon tax simply doesn’t exist, but there are powerful forces in Congress and the support of the White House to impose such a tax. The power of the environmental movement and its long history of lies about the climate, primarily the global warming hoax, cannot be dismissed or ignored.
 
In Australia, “The Australian Securities & Investments Commission reports there were 10,632 company collapses for the 12 months to March 1—averaging 886 a month—with the number of firms being placed in administration more than 12 percent higher than during the global financial crisis.” It represents “a record high…led by widespread failures in manufacturing and construction, which accounted for almost one-fifth of collapses.”
 
Greg Evans, the chief economic economist for the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said that “It defies logic to adopt a policy which even the Treasury acknowledges will lower our standards of living and be harmful to national productivity.” Adding to Australia’s struggling companies, the carbon tax and one on mining were showing up as “sovereign issues” in discussions with foreign investors.” Who would want to invest in Australia if these two taxes were destroying the economic strength of the nation?
 
Politics in Australia is no less a battleground than here in America. Australia’s Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, who introduced the carbon tax, just beat back a bid by her Labor Party’s dissidents to reinstall former leader Kevin Rudd who lost to her in 2010 and 2012. Much of the opposition to her comes from the harm being inflicted by the carbon and mining taxes.
 
Marlo Lewis is a senior fellow in energy and environmental policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. During the 2012 campaign, he described a carbon tax as “political poison for the Republican Party.” Mitt Romney opposed it, but ‘the big attraction of carbon taxes these days is not as a global warming policy but as a revenue enhancer. In both parties, deficit hawks and big spenders (often the same individuals) are flailing for ways to boost federal revenue.”
 
That is precisely the problem afflicting a nation whose Congress and President could not find a reason to cut anything from the federal budget. The result was the “sequestration” that imposed cuts neither party could agree upon.
 
In a Fox News article, “Here comes Team Obama’s carbon tax”. Phil Kerpen, president of American Commitment and author of “Democracy Denied” reported that “The Treasury Department’s Office of Environment and Energy has finally begun to turn over documents about its preparations for a carbon tax in response to transparency warrior Chris Horner’s Freedom of Information Act request. The documents provide solid evidence that the Obama administration and its allies in Congress have every intention of implementing a carbon tax if we fail to stop them.”
 
President Obama’s nominee to be the next Secretary of Energy, Ernest Moniz, is on record wanting to double or triple the cost of energy, much as his predecessor wanted.
A carbon tax, if enacted, would totally undermine a nation that has a debt climbing toward $17 trillion and millions unemployed in an economy that is struggling to inch its way out of the depths of the financial crisis.
 
If you wanted to destroy America, you could do it with a carbon tax. Australia is reeling from the cost to its economy and the higher energy costs its people are paying. We don’t want that here.
 
© Alan Caruba, 2013
 
From Theo Spark: http://www.theospark.net/

Obama Wants to Push Energy Prices So High That You Cannot Afford Electricity

March 26, 2013

Obama’s Energy Secretary Nominee Called For Doubling Or Tripling Energy Costs With Carbon Tax To Push U.S. Towards Green Energy…

 

And as you can see above, Ernest Moniz rocks a bitchin’ combover.

Via Beltway Confidential:

President Obama’s Energy secretary nominee regards a carbon tax as one of the simplest ways to move the energy industry towards clean technologies, though he notes that government would have to come up with a plan to mitigate the burden this tax places on poor people, who would pay the most.

“Ultimately, it has to be cheaper to capture and store it than to release it and pay a price,” MIT professor and Energy nominee Ernest Moniztold the Switch Energy Project in an interview last year. “If we start really squeezing down on carbon dioxide over the next few decades, well, that could double; it could eventually triple. I think inevitably if we squeeze down on carbon, we squeeze up on the cost, it brings along with it a push toward efficiency; it brings along with it a push towards clean technologies in a conventional pollution sense; it brings along with it a push towards security. Because after all, the security issues revolve around carbon bearing fuels.”

Keep reading…

From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/

O’Bummer and Electric Cars…Stupid is as Stupid Does

March 19, 2013

Obama Pledges to Waste Still More Money on Electric Cars

Despite occasional posturing that only a fool would take seriously, Obama has made it clear that he has no intention of allowing a significant reduction in the monstrous deficit that threatens to pull us off the cliff after Cypress. That’s why he thinks America can afford frivolous wackiness like this:

Envisioning cars that can go ‘coast to coast without using a drop of oil,’ President Barack Obama on Friday urged Congress to authorize spending $2 billion over the next decade to expand research into electric cars and biofuels to wean automobiles off gasoline.

Obama, expanding on an initiative he addressed in his State of the Union speech last month, said the United States must shift its cars and trucks entirely off oil to avoid perpetual fluctuations in gas prices.

Under Obama’s rule, the “fluctuations” have been consistently upward.

Corrupt biofuel boondoggles have driven up world food prices and possibly consume more energy than they produce. Electric cars, due to the massive environmental damage inflicted in the production of their short-lived batteries and the fact that the electricity to run them has to come from somewhere, usually from burning coal, are not significantly better for the environment than more economically efficient real cars. If electric cars made any sense whatsoever, the free market would be able to produce them profitably without coercion.

As usual, Obama claims that this profligate waste will not increase the deficit.

The initiative, proposing to spend $200 million a year on research, would be paid for with revenue from federal oil and gas leases on offshore drilling and would not add to the deficit.

But even if the entire $200 million per year is stolen from consumers of efficient sources of energy, causing gas prices to “fluctuate” even further upward, the drain on the economy will reduce the tax base as it throws still more people out of work, further increasing the deficit.

Every penny the government spends on anything increases the deficit, just as every penny it spends makes us less free.

electric car
One reason the price of gas and the deficit will both keep going up.

On a tip from Bill T.

 

By  at Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/

Folks, “Green” Energy Cannot Keep The Lights On.

March 4, 2013

California’s “Green Energy” Completely Fails to Power State

 
 

Posted by    Monday, March 4, 2013 at 8:30am

 

Back in the early 2000′s, the Enron scandal lead to California’s rolling blackouts. 

As a result, as an environmental health and safety specialist, I began including information on handing power outages into company safety manuals.

Now, thanks to “Green Energy”, it looks like I am going to have to revamp those sections. Wayne Lusvardi of Cal Watchdog has the details:

At a special meeting of California energy companies and regulators held Feb. 26, Todd Strauss of Pacific Gas & Electric saw the possibility of state power blackouts emerging in 2013 to 2015.  The reason is that it has suddenly dawned on state power regulators that green power has resulted in a precarious lack of system flexibility in the state’s power grid.

Said Steve Berberich, the head of the California Independent System Operator, “The problem is we have a system now that needs flexibility, not capacity.”

The blackouts during the the California electricity crisis of 2000-01 were caused by a lack of sufficient energy capacity. But now, what experts at Feb. 26 meeting agreed is that any future state energy crisis likely will come from lack of system flexibility.  The diminishing flexibility is a result of the state’s 2011 mandate, signed by Gov. Jerry Brown, that 33 percent of all energy must be from green power sources by 2020.

Lusvardi discusses what a loss of system flexibility means to California’s energy grid:

What flexibility means is the need for more power plants with the capability to ramp power up or down quickly to respond to vacillations in green power when the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine. Coal power plants cannot typically respond fast enough to provide backup power. So this means that greater reliance on natural gas-fired power plants.

The future problem for California is that it does not have the right mix of types of power plants and new environmental regulations are forcing either closure or expensive upgrades to its coastal power plants that rely on ocean water for cooling steam generators.

And since the green-backed politicos in this state frown upon “brown energy”, solutions that enhance flexibility are unlikely to be implemented.

However, this is not the only area in which “green energy” has failed to perform. In his 5-part series on “California in Crisis“, Washington Examiner Senior Editorial Writer Conn Carrol notes that the green industry has been a jobs bust.

But all these new green energy programs must at least be creating thousands of new green jobs,…

From Legal Insurrection: http://legalinsurrection.com/

O’Sucka and Communist Democrats Don’t Want This Country to Be Energy Independent. Are You Crazy?

February 27, 2013

Keystone Pipeline Has Been Under Review For More Than Twice As Long As It Would Take To Build It

26 Feb

Gerard And McGarvey: Now Is the Time For The Keystone XL Pipeline – Roll Call

The State Department is expected to release a draft environmental impact statement of the Keystone XL pipeline soon. All signs indicate this new report will echo the findings of previous federal reviews and conclude the project is environmentally sound.

………

With the governor of Nebraska having approved a new route for the pipeline through his state, this report removes what should be the final barrier to the president’s approval of this critical project. No single policy decision would be more effective at delivering what the American public says it wants most from Washington: new jobs and economic growth.

And support for the project continues to grow. A poll released Feb. 13 by Harris Interactive shows that 69 percent of registered voters support building the pipeline. What’s more, a bipartisan group of 53 senators – led by John Hoeven, R-N.D., and Max Baucus, D-Mont. – sent a letter to the president last month urging him to immediately authorize the project in light of the governor’s decision. That letter was followed by a similar bipartisan letter signed by 146 members of the House.

Approval of the full Keystone XL pipeline would connect Canadian crude oil and new production from America’s upper plains states to state-of-the-art refineries on the American Gulf Coast. At full capacity, it would transport 830,000 barrels per day.

The application for approval has been under review by the U.S. government for more than four years, far longer than any other cross-border pipeline project and more than twice as long as it would take to build the pipeline.

Economic benefits of Keystone XL are clear. The project will generate thousands of new jobs, both in the actual construction of the pipeline and in supporting industries such as manufacturing, logistics, lodging and dining. While the national unemployment rate hovers around 8 percent, unemployment in the construction industry is a staggering 16.1 percent. Keystone XL will immediately allow thousands of the safest, most highly trained workers to begin building this state-of-the-art pipeline.

The State Department’s analysis acknowledges that Keystone XL will have “a degree of safety greater than” similar projects. In addition, Transcanada has agreed to 57 special conditions above and beyond those required by law, demonstrating a commitment to safely and responsibly constructing and operating this important energy infrastructure project.

National security will also be enhanced as the Keystone XL and other pipeline projects strengthen our energy partnership with Canada. Together with significant increases in U.S. production, North America will not only be more energy secure itself but will also be in a position to positively influence global energy demands.

Jobs, economic growth, energy security, national security. It’s no wonder so many newspaper editorials, members of Congress and other influential voices are calling on the president to approve this vital project. And no wonder that the leadership of America’s building trades unions and the oil and natural gas industry have joined to call for the same.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

The U.S. Government Sits on Trillions of Dollars Worth of Resources While Pushing America into Poverty

February 19, 2013

Rallying Against Enormous National Wealth

 

By Alan Caruba

Did anyone notice that the estimated 35,000 who showed up for the anti-Keystone XL pipeline rally outside the White House on Sunday, Feb 17, were all bundled up against the cold? The temperature was about 25 degrees Fahrenheit. The Earth has been cooling—naturally—for sixteen years.
 
The pipeline which will not cost taxpayers a dime would be part of the existing 1,200 pipelines that traverse the same route. It would enable oil extracted from Canadian tar sands to be refined in America. Failing that, the same oil will be exported to China.
 
There are already 170,000 miles of pipeline in America, moving oil and natural gas to fuel our cars and trucks, warm our homes and apartments, and, in the case of oil, to be turned in the zillion uses of plastic and other products such as asphalt to pave our streets and highways.
 
The people who showed up and shivered through the rally lack sufficient brain cells to make the connection between the warmth to which they retreated and the energy that provided that warmth or the electricity that provided the light by which to read their anti-energy manifestos.
 
For an hour or two they listened as the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council spokesmen regaled them with an anti-energy, anti-jobs, and anti-wealth message that ignored the 20,000 jobs the Keystone XL pipeline is expected to generate, plus all the other jobs dependent on this source of energy. Not surprisingly, the AFL-CIO’s building and construction trade division has endorsed the pipeline.
 
In testimony before a House committee, delivery on Feb 13, Daniel Simmons, the Director of Regulatory and State Affairs for the Institute of Energy Research, addressed a hearing on “The Effects of Rising Energy Costs on American Families and Employers.” As far as I can tell there was zero media coverage, but here are a few of the facts he presented.
 
“The federal estate contains vast energy resources, but the federal government allows energy production on a very small percentage of taxpayer-owned federal lands. The Interior Department has leased just two percent of federal offshore areas and less than six percent of federal onshore lands for oil and gas development.”
 
“It takes 307 days for the federal government to process a permit to drill, but only 27 days for Colorado and ten days in North Dakota.” Both states are reaping the benefit in terms of jobs and revenue generated while “energy production on federal lands is stagnating.”
 
In a nation that is $16 trillion in debt with trillion dollar annual deficits this runs counter to anything that makes any sense at all.
 
Just how much wealth is represented in the energy reserves the Obama administration to which has and will continue to deny access?
 
“These technically recoverable resources,” Simmons told the committee, “total 1,194 billion barrels of oil and 2,150 trillion cubic feet of natural gas that is owned by the federal taxpayer…the value of the estimated oil resources is $119.4 trillion and the value of the estimated natural gas resources is $8.6 trillion for a grand total of $128 trillion.”
 
If you wondering why the U.S. is borrowing trillions from other nations and contemplating the sequestration of funds for both domestic and defense when it sits atop enough energy reserves to wipe out our debt, reduce the importation of oil from nations that do not much care for us, and has millions unemployed when our energy industries alone could employ many of them and encourage manufacturing that would employ even more, you are asking the right questions.
 
Instead, the Obama administration has wasted billions on the most unreliable and uncompetitive energy producers, wind and solar, while promoting electric cars that no one can afford or wants to purchase. At one point the President was ballyhooing algae—pond scum—as a potential energy source! This lies somewhere between criminal stupidity or deliberate harm to the economy. For the record, in 2011, wind power produced 1.2 percent of the energy used in the United States and solar power produced 0.1 percent. Without subsidies and mandates they would not exist.
 
What is truly astonishing despite all the lies we’re being told about energy, in 2011 the U.S. produced 23.0 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, making it the world’s largest natural gas producer. Naturally, the federal government is dragging its feet on permissions to build gas export facilities.
 
In 2011 the United States produced 5.67 million barrels of oil per day. Imagine the wealth that could be produced if the government would permit access to just those parts of the more than 41 million acres of land it owns in our name under which can be found a treasure of oil, as well as natural gas, and coal.
 
The federal government currently owns or manages 755 million acres of onshore subsurface mineral assets. Offshore it owns or manages 1.76 billion acres of lands and mineral assets. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that state and national coffers could generate nearly $150 billion over a ten-year period if these resources were immediately opened.
 
Instead, the nation is so badly mismanaged that, while the New Depression lingers on, the Institute on Energy Research estimates the worth of the government’s oil and gas technically recoverable resources are worth $128 trillion, about eight times our national debt!
 
We are all the victims of the most incredibly stupid Congress and the present administration whose single goal seems to be to impoverish as many Americans as possible so that the few remaining job-holders can be taxed enough to pay for their government benefits.
 
© Alan Caruba, 2013
 
From Theo Spark: http://www.theospark.net/

Obama Cares Nothing for The Poor

February 11, 2013

Obama Wants More Snow

By Jeffrey Folks

 

A winter storm of epic proportions has pounded the northeast.  The president’s solution: make it colder.  That’s the message he sent during his second inaugural speech, and it’s what we’re going to hear in the State of the Union address on Tuesday.

 Not that the president’s climate change proposals will actually work.  Closing down a few coal-powered plants is not going to alter global temperatures.  But it will please the environmental lobby and bring in contributions in advance of the 2014 congressional elections, which is more or less the point.

 If the White House could alter the climate, the 2013 supersnow would argue for making it warmer, not colder.  The storm has killed at least four, shut down commerce in four states, and wrought havoc on air travel nationwide.

 The recent cold spell in the eastern U.S. has been accompanied by record cold in China, Europe, and other regions.  Obviously, the earth’s climate is not getting dramatically warmer, as climate alarmists claim.  While it is generally acknowledged that global temperatures have risen since 1850, more recent temperature readings have been less clear-cut, and future readings are unpredictable.  In the centuries-long period before 1850 known as the Little Ice Age, global temperatures were the coldest in millennia.

 The next century may well revert to that pattern of cooling — a prospect not to be desired.  On balance, periods of climate cooling result in devastating crop failures, higher death rates, and lower standards of living.  Warming, on the other hand, produces bumper crop yields, economic growth, improved health, and greater prosperity — especially for the world’s poor.

 President Obama has never shown much concern for the world’s poor.  Unlike President Bush, whose Millennium Project brought a measure of reform to developing nations, Obama has been willing to meet “without preconditions” with any corrupt tyrant, anytime and anywhere.  The result has been no improvement in living standards or human rights among the world’s poorest citizens.  Obama is more interested in rewarding green energy investors who just happen to be major contributors to the Democratic Party than he is in relieving suffering among the poor.

 The president’s climate change policies certainly don’t do much for anyone, poor or not.  After the failure of Solyndra and many other government-funded green energy companies, one would have thought that Obama had learned his lesson.  But his second inaugural proposal was to double down on green energy — that is to say, continue shoveling out tens of billions of dollars to wealthy investors in exchange for campaign contributions.  Even with continuing trillion-dollar deficits, Obama insists that government does “not have a spending problem.”  A trillion dollars is nothing to this president as long as he can wring a billion dollars of contributions out of it.

 The fact that all of this spending comes at the expense of ordinary Americans seems not to matter.  At a point in the economic cycle when the economy should be expanding by more than 4%, estimates of GDP growth for 2013 are coming in at 2% or less.  That lack of growth, and the lack of job-creation that accompanies it, has devastated working Americans.  Proposed EPA regulations of existing coal-powered plants will, if implemented, result in a tax on all Americans, but one that disproportionately affects the poor and middle class.  The same thing can be said for Obama’s radical plans to raise CAFE standards on passenger vehicles.  Likewise for EPA regulation of oil and gas drilling and all the other misguided climate-related policies coming out of this administration.  Ordinary citizens are paying a tax equal to 25% of their income — the effect of compounding wage losses of 3% annually over eight years of the Obama administration — just to fund the president’s green energy pay-to-play schemes.

 The effect on the world’s poor is even greater.  It is, in fact, a matter of life and death.  Obama’s continuing support for corn ethanol mandates has raised global grain prices beyond what the world’s poorest citizens can afford.  Quite literally, Obama has caused billions of poor people to go to bed hungry each night and millions to starve.  Ironically, America’s first African-American president would rather collect cash contributions from the green energy lobby than save the life of a child starving in east Africa.

 Global hunger is already a crisis, but if Obama really could lower global temperatures, as he claims to be able to do, hunger would become a catastrophe, and not just in east Africa.  Fortunately, nothing any politician can do will change the course of the earth’s climate.  Unfortunately, Obama doesn’t see this, or he doesn’t want to see it.  And his actions are going to cause great harm, especially to the poor the world over.

 What is truly disturbing is this president’s callousness toward the poor.  One stroke of the pen could eliminate corn ethanol mandates, end biofuel boondoggles, and block EPA regulation of fossil fuels.  As a result, the U.S. economy — and the global economy with it — would flourish, creating new wealth that would spread not just among America’s people, but among human beings everywhere.

 Real reform of this kind would lower food and fuel costs globally, thereby relieving suffering for the world’s poor.  Obama’s proposal to double down on green energy, on the other hand, will drive food and fuel costs even higher.  Tens of millions of desperate human beings will die as a result of the president’s policies, and billions will suffer the agony of unending hunger.  Does the president even care?  Not as long as donations keep rolling in.

 Jeffrey Folks is the author of many books on American culture, including Heartland of the Imagination (2011).

From American Thinker

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/02/obama_wants_more_snow.html#ixzz2KcAvwaV9

The EPA is Waging War on Your Car

February 2, 2013

The EPA’s war on your car

2FEB

Democrats like to accuse the Right of waging war on many things including women, Blacks, unions, working families, immigrants, the environment, and Homosexuals among others. But, it is really the Left, not the Right that is waging war on all of those groups listed above, and now, Chris Wysocki tells us that they are hating on your car!

Obama’s Green Goons are determined to put Karo Syrup into every gas tank in America, and they don’t really care how many car engines they destroy while doing it. Their latest ethanol concoction — E15 — is toxic to your engine. Which matters not one whit to the EPA; their regulations say we have to use it, and so use it we will.

We already know that E10, the current ethanol blend, gums up the works in small engines like snowblowers and lawn mowers. Now a new study proves that E15 is like Kryptonite to your car.

The fuel industry’s American Petroleum Institute tested the 15 percent ethanol gas approved in 2010 and found it gums up fuel systems, prompts “check engine” lights to come on, and messes with fuel gauge readings.

“Failure of these components could result in breakdowns that leave consumers stranded on busy roads and highways,” said the industry report. Worse: API said the fuel problems–not found in E5 or E10 blends–aren’t always covered by auto warranties.

The industry prefers pure fuel to an ethanol mix, but the report isn’t likely to slow the administration’s green push, according to a Washington auto lobbyist.

It is difficult to precisely calculate how many vehicles E15 could harm. That depends on how widely it is used and other factors. But, given the kinds of vehicles tested, it is safe to say that millions could be impacted.

Remember too that every ear of corn which ends up in your gas tank is one less box of cereal for a hungry child. The EPA hates children! And cars.

I would say that this is another example of the Law of Unintended Consequences, but, if the EPA knows what this stuff can do ahead of time, maybe this is more about abuse of power, another thing the Left loves to partake in. If the Founders were around today, their heads would likely explode.

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

Obama and The EPA Policies Will Soon Make Electricity Un-Affordable in the Near Future

January 19, 2013
“Ban nuclear, shut down coal fired plants, and everyone can burn coal and wood in their individual stoves. It’ll be just like 1910 – when the air was nice and clean.”

Ah wilderness! It’s Spreading… Freezing Germans Join Greeks – Steal Wood to Keep Homes Heated This Winter

With energy costs escalating, more Germans are turning to wood burning stoves for heat. That, though, has also led to a rise in tree theft in the country’s forests. Woodsmen have become more watchful.

From American Digest: http://americandigest.org/

Thanks to Obummer…Your Power Bill is About to Go Way Up…and That is What He Wants

January 9, 2013

Thanks Barack… Georgia Power Company Closes 15 Plants Thanks To Latest EPA Regulations

8 Jan

It’s An Obama World… Georgia Power Company Closes 15 Plants Thanks To Latest EPA Regulations – Gateway Pundit

The Milledgeville area plant closing will cost more than 200 jobs. (The Telegraph)

A Georgia utilities company is closing 15 coal, oil and gas plants thanks to the latest Obama EPA regulations.

Reuters reported, via The Examiner:

Georgia Power said on Monday it plans to seek approval from Georgia regulators to retire 15 coal-, oil- and natural gas-fired power plants in the state totaling 2,061 megawatts (MW) due primarily to the high cost of meeting stricter federal environmental regulations.

Over the past few years, U.S. generating companies have announced plans to shut about 40,000 MW of older coal-fired power plants as low natural gas prices have made it uneconomic for the generators to spend millions to upgrade the plants’ emissions systems to meet the latest federal and state environmental rules.

In a press release, Georgia Power, the biggest unit of U.S. power company Southern Co, said it wanted to shut units 3 and 4 at Plant Branch in Putnam County; units 1-5 at Plant Yates in Coweta County; units 1 and 2 at Plant McManus in Glynn County; units 1-4 at Plant Kraft in Chatham County; and units 2 and 3 at Boulevard in Chatham County.

The company said it plans to file its updated Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) with Georgia’s utility regulators on Jan. 31.

Units 3-4 at Branch, units 1-5 at Yates and units 1-3 at Kraft are coal-fired units. Kraft Unit 4 and Boulevard 2 and 3 are fired by natural gas and oil. McManus units 1-2 are oil-fired.

The company said it expects to ask to retire the units, other than Kraft 1-4, by the April 16, 2015, effective date of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) rule.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

Obama Does Not Want America to Be Energy Independent

November 12, 2012

 

Obama Regime To Close 1.6M Acres Of Federal Land Slated For Oil Shale Development

Obama Administration Unveils Plan To Close 1.6 Million Acres Of Federal Land Slated For Oil Shale Development – Weasel Zippers

Part of his “all of the above” energy strategy?

Via E2 Wire:

The Interior Department on Friday issued a final plan to close 1.6 million acres of federal land in the West originally slated for oil shale development.

The proposed plan would fence off a majority of the initial blueprint laid out in the final days of the George W. Bush administration. It faces a 30-day protest period and a 60-day process to ensure it is consistent with local and state policies. After that, the department would render a decision for implementation.

The move is sure to rankle Republicans, who say President Obama’s grip on fossil fuel drilling in federal lands is too tight.

Interior’s Bureau of Land Management cited environmental concerns for the proposed changes. Among other things, it excised lands with “wilderness characteristics” and areas that conflicted with sage grouse habitats.

Under the plan, 677,000 acres in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming would be open for oil shale exploration. Another 130,000 acres in Utah would be set aside for tar sands production.

Oil shale development is not to be confused with drilling into shale formations for oil and natural gas. The practice, which involves separating hydrocarbons bound up in rocks, has not been widely executed since Exxon’s failed Colorado venture in the 1980s.

Bobby McEnaney, senior lands analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council, praised Interior Secretary Ken Salazar for the proposed final plan.

“By significantly reducing the acreage of wilderness potentially available for leasing, Secretary Salazar is laying out a creative, thoughtful and more responsible approach in managing some of our most precious resources,” McEnaney said in a Friday statement.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

Obama’s EPA Trying to Crush The Coal Industry

November 4, 2012

Obama’s EPA Planning To Crush Coal Industry With Avalanche Of New Regulations After Election…

“If somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can – it’s just that it will bankrupt them” – Barack Obama

Via Washington Examiner:

President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has devoted an unprecedented number of bureaucrats to finalizing new anti-coal regulations that are set to be released at the end of November, according to a source inside the EPA.

More than 50 EPA staff are now crashing to finish greenhouse gas emission standards that would essentially ban all construction of new coal-fired power plants. Never before have so many EPA resources been devoted to a single regulation. The independent and non-partisan Manhattan Institute estimates that the EPA’s greenhouse gas coal regulation will cost the U.S. economy $700 billion.

The rush is a major sign of panic by environmentalists inside the Obama administration. If Obama wins, the EPA would have another four full years to implement their anti-fossil fuel agenda. But if Romney wins, regulators will have a very narrow window to enact a select few costly regulations that would then be very hard for a President Romney to undo.

Keep reading…

 

From Weasel Zippers:

Obama is Clueless Over The Economy…What The Hell Was This Response?

October 18, 2012

If a gaffe can cost an election…..

…… then I think Obama just lost

Last night, President Barack Obama dropped the biggest campaign gaffe of the season – only the media wasn’t watching. It happened during his testy exchange with Mitt Romney over gas prices. First, Obama denied that he’d done anything about denying licenses on oil and gas; he backed off of that shortly. Then he denied that production on federal land was down; he was lying. Finally, Romney hit him with this devastating line:The proof of whether a strategy is working or not is what the price is that you’re paying at the pump. If you’re paying less than you paid a year or two ago, why, then, the strategy is working. But you’re paying more. When the president took office, the price of gasoline here in Nassau County was about $1.86 a gallon. Now, it’s $4.00 a gallon.Obama’s response was horrendous: 

Barack ObamaObamanomics 101 high gas prices good, low gas prices bad

Well, think about what the governor — think about what the governor just said. He said when I took office, the price of gasoline was $1.80, $1.86. Why is that? Because the economy was on the verge of collapse, because we were about to go through the worst recession since the Great Depression, as a consequence of some of the same policies that Governor Romney’s now promoting. So, it’s conceivable that Governor Romney could bring down gas prices because with his policies, we might be back in that same mess.In other words, bringing down gas prices by drilling creates economic recession. That was Obama’s argument.

Does anyone think this president understands basic economics?

To me this is the worst type of gaffe, because it involves substance, not some brain fart or slip of the tongue. Also recall that in 2008, Democrats, including, I believe, then candidate Obama hammered President Bush over high gas prices. Of course the media completely missed this gargantuan gaffe.

Candy Crowley, who moderated the debate like she has a poster of Obama over her bed, should have given this response

Chris at Wyblog pours even more scorn on President Clueless

There is so much sand-pounding stupidity in that statement, I don’t know where to start. FortunatelyElizabeth Price Foley guest-blogging at Instapundit schools The Smartest Guy In The Room using words even an Obamabot can understand.

Gas prices, like anything else, are a function of supply and demand. A recession or depression reduces demand. If supply stays constant, gas prices will fall. But if the supply side of the equation is also negatively affected/reduced — as, for example, the reduction of leases and drilling on federal land, as pointed out by Romney — gas prices should rise (as they have). The bottom line? Gas prices should have — probably would have — fallen in our current recession, due to decreased demand. But since the Obama Administration’s anti-carbon, anti-fossil fuel policies have taken hold, the negative impact on supply has outpaced the reduction in demand, leading to significantly higher prices.

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

Obama Regime Stopping Half of Petroleum Reserve Oil Production in Oil Rich Alaska

October 16, 2012

Obama Interior Department Closing Off Nearly Half Of Alaskan National Petroleum Reserve From Drilling

Obama’s Great Alaska Shutout – Wall Street Journal

President Obama is campaigning as a champion of the oil and gas boom he’s had nothing to do with, and even as his regulators try to stifle it. The latest example is the Interior Department’s little-noticed August decision to close off from drilling nearly half of the 23.5 million acre National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.

The area is called the National Petroleum Reserve because in 1976 Congress designated it as a strategic oil and natural gas stockpile to meet the “energy needs of the nation.” Alaska favors exploration in nearly the entire reserve. The feds had been reviewing four potential development plans, and the state of Alaska had strongly objected to the most restrictive of the four. Sure enough, that was the plan Interior chose.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar says his plan “will help the industry bring energy safely to market from this remote location, while also protecting wildlife and subsistence rights of Alaska Natives.” He added that the proposal will expand “safe and responsible oil and gas development, and builds on our efforts to help companies develop the infrastructure that’s needed to bring supplies online.”

The problem is almost no one in the energy industry and few in Alaska agree with him. In an August 22 letter to Mr. Salazar, the entire Alaska delegation in Congress – Senators Mark Begich and Lisa Murkowski and Representative Don Young – call it “the largest wholesale land withdrawal and blocking of access to an energy resource by the federal government in decades.” This decision, they add, “will cause serious harm to the economy and energy security of the United States, as well as to the state of Alaska.” Mr. Begich is a Democrat.

The letter also says the ruling “will significantly limit options for a pipeline” through the reserve. This pipeline has long been sought to transport oil and gas from the Chukchi Sea, the North Slope and future Arctic drilling. Mr. Salazar insists that a pipeline could still be built, but given the Obama Administration’s decision to block the Keystone XL pipeline, Alaskans are right to be skeptical.

Alaskans also worry that the National Petroleum Reserve will become the same political football as the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, or ANWR, which Washington has barred from drilling because of dubious environmental objections. The greens now want Congress to rename the energy reserve the “Western Arctic Reserve” to give the false impression that it is a fragile wildlife area. Some parts of the area are environmentally sensitive, but those 1.5 million acres (around Teshekpuk Lake) had already been set aside. Most of the other 11.5 million acres are almost indistinguishable from acreage owned by the state that is being drilled safely nearby.

The feds and Alaskan officials disagree about how much oil and natural gas is in the petroleum reserve. Some early federal estimates put the range between six and 15 billion barrels of oil, but in its latest survey the Bureau of Land Management projects closer to one billion. State officials and industry experts put the figure much higher based on the earlier surveys and improved drilling techniques.

The truth is no one knows. Prudhoe Bay turned out to be much more productive than originally believed, but surely the best strategy is to allow private drillers to risk their own money to find out. The oil and gas industry isn’t in the business of drilling dry holes on purpose.

The Interior power play couldn’t come at a worse time for Alaska, whose economy and government are heavily reliant on oil jobs and revenues. As recently as the 1980s, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline carried some 2.2 million barrels of oil a day from the North Slope to the port of Valdez. Yet as the once-rich fields of Prudhoe Bay and the Kuparuk River have declined, oil flow has dropped to one-third of that volume. North Dakota recently passed Alaska as the second highest oil-producing state behind Texas.

The problem isn’t that Alaska is running out of oil but that federal rules are preventing the state from developing those resources. No matter what Mr. Obama says now, in a second term his great Alaska energy shutout will continue.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

No Wonder the State Department Could Not Afford to Protect The Libyan Consulate – They Were Spending a Fortune Buying the Failed Chevy Volt From “Guvmunt” Motors

October 11, 2012

State Department Blew Fortune on Volts While Withdrawing Security From Benghazi Consulate

Now I get why security was cut rather than increased despite the pleas of Ambassador Chris Stevens in the run-up to his horrific murder by terrorist savages. The State Department spent the money on other priorities:

In a May 3, 2012, email, the State Department denied a request by a group of Special Forces assigned to protect the U.S. embassy in Libya to continue their use of a DC- 3 airplane for security operations throughout the country.

The subject line of the email, on which slain Ambassador Chris Stevens was copied, read: “Termination of Tripoli DC-3 Support.”

Four days later, on May 7, the State Department authorized the U.S. embassy in Vienna to purchase a $108,000 electric vehicle charging station for the embassy motor pool’s new Chevrolet Volts. The purchase was a part of the State Department’s “Energy Efficiency Sweep of Europe” initiative, which included hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on green program expenditures at various U.S. Embassies.

In fact, at a May 10 gala held at the U.S. embassy in Vienna, the ambassador showcased his new Volts and other green investments as part of the U.S. government’s commitment to “climate change solutions.”

In case there are any liberals reading, I will type slowly. Islamic terror is a real threat. “Climate change” is not a real threat.

Meanwhile, in Libya…

Before the terrorist attack that took the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, there were more than 230 security incidents in Libya between June 2011 and July 2012.

If you voted to put irresponsible moonbats like Obama and Shrillary in charge, their blood is on your hands.

According to Eric Nordstrom, a regional security officer of the U.S. Mission to Libya from September 2011 to July 2012, the State Department not only refused his requests for greater security, but actually reduced the number of Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) agents assigned to foreign service officers based in Libya. Ironically, as the State Department withdrew security resources, it increased hazard pay for its employees based in Libya by 5 percent.

No wonder Obama and his mouthpieces clung for so long to the pathetic lie that the killings were the fault of an American’s YouTube video rather than an easily predictable terror attack.

If the media gave Benghazi and its cover-up the weight they deserve, by now the concept of Obama’s reelection would make people burst out laughing.

From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/

The Electricity to Run Electric Cars Has to Come From Somewhere You Liberal Morons…

October 9, 2012

Well that sucks!

 Matt spoils the good feelings of those Green folks! Green cars, might be PC, but they are worse for the environment! Matt notes that whatever Liberalism sets out to do, the exact opposite results!

When it comes to green cars, I feel obligated to invoke Quinn’s First Law…

“Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of it’s stated intent.”

You can’t argue it.  The “war on poverty” caused more poverty.  Since the onset of the Department of Education, education has gotten worse.  I could go on all day, but you get the point.  Liberals state that they are going to make something better, and instead make it worse.  Then, they blame us for their failure.  Here is the latest; green cars cause more pollution!  The Lonely Conservative has more…

The Daily Caller reported that a new study by the Norwegian University of Science and Technology found that “green” electric cars are worse for the environment than traditional automobiles that run on gasoline or diesel. I don’t even think they took into account what happens when electric cars catch on fire.

Specifically, the study found that electric car factories can emit more toxic waste than gas-burning car factories. And greenhouse gas emissions rise exponentially if coal is used to produce the electricity necessary to charge “green” vehicles, according to the study.

The researchers compared the overall life-cycle impact of petrol or diesel-powered cars and electric vehicles and concluded that the latter can significantly damage the climate.

“The global warming potential from electric vehicle production is about twice that of conventional vehicles,” the report said. “It is counterproductive to promote electric vehicles in regions where electricity is primarily produced from lignite, coal or even heavy oil combustion.” (Read More)

All together now, AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW too bad!

From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/

California…Voting for High Taxes, High Gas Prices, and O’Sucka

October 8, 2012

calgazz.jpg

From American Digest: http://americandigest.org/

Do You Remember These Gas Prices 4 Years Ago?

October 4, 2012

From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/

Say Hell No To Wind Turbines – If You Want to Be Healthy

October 3, 2012

Wind Turbine Syndrome

It’s not just that wind farms are nearly useless extravagantly expensive boondoggles that hideously mar the landscape. They also pose a serious threat to our health. The constant low-frequency noise they emit causes wind turbine syndrome, symptoms of which include:

…dizziness; balance problems; memory loss; inability to concentrate; insomnia; tachycardia; increased blood pressure; raised cortisol levels; headaches; nausea; mood swings; anxiety; tinnitus; palpitations; depression…

In December 2011, in a peer-reviewed report in the Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, Dr Carl Phillips — one of the U.S.’s most distinguished epidemiologists — concluded that there is ‘overwhelming evidence that wind turbines cause serious health problems in nearby residents, usually stress-disorder type diseases, at a nontrivial rate’.

The combination of low-frequency noise and amplitude modulation also stimulates an alert response, putting restful sleep out of the question.

Low-frequency sound has so much potential to cause harm, the military has studied its use as a weapon:

A 1997 report by the U.S. Air Force Institute For National Security Studies notes: ‘Acoustic infrasound: very low frequency sound which can travel long distances and easily penetrate most buildings and vehicles.

‘Transmission of long wavelength sound creates biophysical effects, nausea, loss of bowels, disorientation, vomiting, potential organ damage or death may occur.’

The malefic effects of wind turbines are not limited to the dangerous even when subaudible noise they produce:

From economists such as Edinburgh University’s Dr Gordon Hughes we are told that wind energy is unreliable and intermittent, with no real market value because it requires near 100 per cent back-up by conventional fossil-fuel power.

From research institute Verso Economics we are told that that for every ‘green job’ created by taxpayer subsidy, 3.7 jobs are killed in the real economy.

It is said that thanks to the artificial rise in energy prices caused by renewable subsidies, expected to reach £13 billion per annum by 2020, at least 50,000 people a year in Britain are driven into fuel poverty.

And newly released Spanish government research claims that each turbine kills an average 300 birds a year (often rare ones such as eagles and bustards) and at least as many bats.

Those bats eat mosquitoes by the millions; mosquitoes are mankind’s worst enemy (unless you count progressives).

So why do whole fields of these evil towers keep sprouting?

As Matt Ridley noted recently in The Spectator, there are ‘too many people with snouts in the trough.’ …

In Britain, onshore wind farms are subsidised by a levy on consumer bills at 100 per cent; offshore wind is subsidised at 200 per cent: no matter how little energy the turbines actually produce, in other words, healthy returns are guaranteed.

At least until such a time as wasteful public spending on this kind of lunacy begins to bring down whole countries, as has been happening in Spain.

In a free market economy, no one would build wind turbines because they make no sense economically. But under moonbat economics, making sense would be inappropriate.

windmill
Sweet relief.

On a tip from Byron.

 From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/