Tag Archives: Energy crisis

Solving Problems

Posted on by

Before you are able to solve a problem, it’s a good idea to find the source of the problem. If you are unable to acknowledge the source, chances are you won’t be able to solve the problem! That is the place some of the leaders of European countries find themselves in relation to supplying energy to their countries.

On Wednesday, The Conservative Treehouse reported:

They stopped their oil and gas exploration. They chose to chase ‘net zero’ academic pontifications. They closed their refining operations. They took apart their coal-fired electricity plants. They disassembled their nuclear power capabilities. Then, the absolute cherry on the proverbial cake, they voted to stop purchasing oil and gas from Russia.

The EU is now in the Find Out stage of their FAFO positioning.

Gasoline prices have skyrocketed. The last shipments of jet fuel have arrived. Major airline carriers are cancelling flights due to lack of fuel. Faster than the EU can organize meetings to discuss their position, EU destined LNG shipments have diverted to southeast Asia and India as the ASEAN nations bid higher purchase prices for the vessels literally on the water.

The article quotes EU Politico:

“Germany’s Friedrich Merz warns the economic fallout from the war in Iran is on track to rival that of the Covid pandemic or the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

[…] With the war in Iran threatening to choke off energy flows for the foreseeable future, Europe is facing a supply shock that promises to cripple manufacturing, ground airlines, hike up the price of food, spike borrowing costs and send inflation spiraling back to crisis levels.

As the last tankers carrying fossil fuels from the Persian Gulf pull into European ports, the scale of what is about to hit seems to be dawning on the continent’s leaders.

“I’m living with the reality of this war and its consequences 24 hours a day,” Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto told the La Repubblica newspaper. “I’m forced to know things that don’t let me sleep.” The conflict could last “years,” Christine Lagarde, the president of the European Central Bank, warned in an interview with the Economist last week. The long-term effects, she added, are “probably beyond what we can imagine at the moment.”

The war in Iran is not their problem–their own refusal to develop their own fossil fuel resources is their problem. Thank God for President Trump and his American energy independence agenda! We can help them out, but we can’t do everything for them.

A Review Of The Presidency Of Jimmy Carter

Posted on by

I will admit up front that I am not a fan of President Carter. His work with Habitat for Humanity was commendable, but his policies as President and meddling in foreign affairs after he left office were not.

On Sunday, The American Thinker posted an article about President Carter’s legacy.

The article reports:

I grew up in a Democrat household, and we all wanted to like Carter. Nevertheless, by the end of his term, my parents disliked him intensely. They were right to do so because some of his decisions were dreadful at the time, and some had terrible consequences for America:

He pardoned draft evaders, which my father, a veteran of two wars, found unforgivable.

He gave away the Panama Canal. Now that China has a foothold in Latin America, its very presence threatens our trade and our national security.

He created the Department of Education, which my father, a teacher, instantly realized was going to be a boondoggle and a disaster that wouldn’t raise up teachers but would bring down education. Dad was right.

He presided over inflation, stagflation, and the energy crisis. The latter was partly a result of his policies, but even if it hadn’t been, these economic crises happened on his watch, and he was stuck with them.

He was a dour, unpleasant person whose very presence was a drag on America. Americans disliked his moralizing from the White House. His very personality defined malaise.

The article concludes:

On the plus side, Carter did broker the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt, which have held up for a long time. However, my Dad (a really smart guy) recognized Carter’s nascent antisemitism, something that came into full flower after he left the White House. Even Jonathan Greenblatt, the leftist leader of the ADL, couldn’t tolerate Carter’s animus toward Israel, something that could only be driven by Jew hatred.

Also, after he left the White House, Carter never met a corrupt election he wasn’t willing to certify. Why? I have no idea. But I dislike him a great deal for that.

Ultimately, Carter was a guy who lived a life of personal rectitude (he had the same wife for almost 80 years, went to church, etc.), but he left the United States and the world in much worse shape than they were when he found them.

Creating An Energy Crisis In America

Posted on by

The last real energy crisis America experienced was in the 1970’s. It was then that the country discovered that there was a price to be paid for not being energy independent. We have forgotten that lesson.

On Friday, Red State reported:

In a Friday morning announcement, the White House and Department of Energy (DOE) revealed their next target — and it’s enormous.

The White House is halting the permitting process for several proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal projects over their potential impacts on climate change, an unprecedented move environmentalists have demanded in recent months.

[T]he pause [will] occur while federal officials conduct a rigorous environmental review assessing the projects’ carbon emissions, which could take more than a year to complete. Climate activists have loudly taken aim at LNG export projects in recent weeks, arguing they will lead to a large uptick in emissions and worsen global warming.

The article concludes:

Chatterjee (former Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chair Neil Chatterjee) was right— but here’s the thing. Facts, data, and science only matter to Democrats when they support the left’s narratives. We saw it with COVID-19. When facts don’t support the left’s narratives, they are to be dismissed, lied about, or outright ignored. (See: “Anthony Fauci.”)

Finally, House Speaker Mike Johnson released a statement following the White House announcement, warning that Biden is playing into Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hand.

This announcement by President Biden is as outrageous as it is subversive. Stalling LNG export terminals, like Calcasieu Pass 2 in Louisiana, not only prevents America’s economic growth, it empowers our adversaries like Vladimir Putin.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began, American petroleum producers have increased LNG shipments to our partners in Europe to prevent a catastrophic, continent-wide energy crisis and to provide an alternative to Russian energy exports.

It is outrageous that this administration is asking American taxpayers to spend billions to defeat Russia while knowingly forcing allies to rely on Russian energy, giving Putin an advantage. 

This policy change also flies in the face of the commitments made when the White House announced the joint US-EU Task Force less than two years ago to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russia and strengthen energy security.

Nailed it. The question is, whether Biden is capable of understanding the gravity of the Speaker’s statement. The answer is no doubt chilling.

The Bottom Line

If the environmental alarmist crowd came out today and announced it has changed its position on natural gas, Joe Biden would be singing its praises before he eats his pudding cup and goes nighty-night.

Pleas follow the link to read the entire article. We are committing economic suicide.

The Scam Of Green Energy

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Daniel Horowitz posted an article at Conservative Review pointing out what we should have learned from the Christmas energy crisis in America.

The article notes:

What’s the modus operandi of our dystopian government? Creating a needless deadly crisis, blocking the effective way for dealing with it thereafter, and foisting upon the world instead a dangerous and ineffective way of dealing with it. That might sound a lot like COVID, but it’s largely what officials have been planning for a long time with energy, and now that the population is primed for lockdowns, disruptions, and total authoritarian control as a result of COVID, that is what they plan to do with our energy grid. All for a lie.

This was the coldest Christmas in a half-century in much of the U.S., with many localities setting records, including those not accustomed to the cold like Tallahassee, Florida. Many of us are disgusted at those limiting our natural energy in favor of novel, ineffective energy, thereby causing a doubling or even tripling of home heating bills. But we must also realize that if they had their way, we’d have no heating in our homes at all.

Just like the supposed source of COVID and how to deal with it were lies, our energy crisis is wholly contrived and built upon the lie of global warming. Typically, you would have to make sure we are 100% correct about the “science” behind such irrevocable economic and societal changes before committing civilization suicide by destroying the only reliable sources of energy we have. But in a post-“Great Reset” world, this is par for the course. In fact, the science behind global warming is just as flimsy as the science behind lockdowns, masks, and mRNA shots.

The article notes how inaccurate past climate-change predictions have been:

During the Copenhagen climate summit in 2009, chief climate priest Al Gore asserted, “Some of the models suggest … that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.” Predictions like this upended our lives with more expensive and more decrepit vital products and services being produced for a generation under the false pretense of taming a crisis that never existed. It turns out that since 2012, the mass of Arctic sea ice is up 31% and Greenland is gaining, not losing, ice. Meanwhile, Antarctica, which was always gaining ice during the period when the Arctic was losing ice, subsequently lost ice last decade and is now regaining it. In other words, the science behind polar ice caps seems to be rooted in the same cherry-picked timing and data as the faux science behind global warming causing either fewer or more hurricanes.

Yet somehow, we are to believe the science is all figured out on how to tamper with global temperatures, just like it was with COVID. Rather than people being more primed to believe in government control after COVID, any thinking person should be even more suspect of official climate lies and the accompanying life-altering policy changes governments want to induce based on them. And boy, would these policy changes be life-altering.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is becoming even more apparent that the quest for green energy is not about the environment at all–it is about creating a society where a small group of people control the lives of everyone else.

American Energy 101

Posted on by

Hugh Hewitt has added a new feature to his radio show and his website. It is called “The 5-Minute Energy Blog.” It is a quick primer for those of us who are not scientific types to understand America’s energy problems and energy solutions. The feature is written by Tim Dunn, CEO of CrownQuest Operating, one of the top oil producers in Texas. Tim is also the vice-chair of the Texas Public Policy Institute.

In the first installment of The 5-Minute Energy Blog, Mr. Dunn states that the political choices we make as Americans in the next ten years will determine whether or not America has an energy crisis.

The article states:

If we decide as a country that policy experts in Washington DC should make decisions about energy, then I predict the bureaucracy economy in DC will be very fat and powerful, and the rest of the economy will get very thin and weak.  On the other hand, if we are able to retain our heritage of self-governance, and allow individual Americans to make their own choices in a free marketplace of ideas, businesses and consumer choices, then I think we will have a fit and prosperous economy for the indefinite future.  And, of course, the bureaucrat economy will have to go on a diet.

It’s one or the other.  We can’t have market choices and a centrally planned economy.

That is the choice we face in November. Mr. Dunn points out that whoever controls energy controls the economy. If control is taken away from the free market and given to the central government, energy innovation will come to a standstill. When there is no incentive to innovate, innovation ceases. A profit motive is a strong incentive, when it is removed, innovation stalls.

Enhanced by Zemanta