Tag Archives: fossil fuels

The Impact Of President Trump’s Energy Policies

Posted on by

On Saturday, Stephen Moore posted an article at Hot Air discussing the impact of President Trump’s energy policies.

The article notes:

Well, so much for the vaunted renewable energy “transition” to save the planet. This was always a fable. We get 80% of our energy from fossil fuels, and with Donald Trump now in the White House, that ratio is rising, not falling.

A Reuters headline from recent days tells the real story: “US crude production to hit record 13.41 million (barrels per day) in 2025 before falling.”

The data from the International Energy Agency tells the same story about clean natural gas: We’re producing more of it than ever before. Why shouldn’t we? The U.S. has greater access to clean, cheap, reliable and made-in-America natural gas than any other nation. Natural gas is far cheaper and less land-intensive than ugly wind and solar farms that industrialize America’s natural landscape beauty.

All told, American energy in the ground is a $50 trillion treasure chest right under our feet. The commercial value of this abundance is — nearly enough to pay off our entire national debt. We would be lunatic to leave it in the ground.

The rapid revival of America as an energy superpower under Trump should come as no surprise. This is continuation of a 15-year trend thanks to the fracking and horizontal drilling revolution that has nearly tripled U.S. annual production.

The principle of supply and demand applies to fossil fuels.

The article notes:

Crude was over $100 in 2022 and generally ranged between $70 and $85 for the rest of Biden’s term. At $100 a barrel, drillers will search for oil in your backyard. If it were not for Biden’s environmental regulations and the cancellation of vital energy infrastructure, such as the Keystone XL pipeline, we would have produced far more oil under Biden. Gas wouldn’t have gone up to $5 a gallon.

What’s impressive about the Trump oil production spike is that it’s happened even as the global spot price of oil has fallen. In other words, we’re getting the best of both worlds: made-in-America energy AND low prices at the pump. The Energy Information Administration reports forecasts that gas prices will keep falling to below $3 a gallon by next year. That is, unless you live in California, where gas still costs above $5 a gallon.

Let’s not forget the national security benefits from this pro-drilling strategy. More U.S. drilling means less profits for Iran, Russia and other enemies of freedom. It weakens Vladimir Putin’s hand and drives him to the negotiating table since the Russian economy is dependent on natural gas exports for survival.

As I have previously stated, when the crude oil price comes down to $55 a barrel, the Ukraine war will end. It won’t have anything to do with anyone’s negotiating skills–it will be the result of the economic situation in Russia caused by falling oil and gas prices.

Are We Willing To Go Back To The Nineteenth Century?

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Hot Air posted an article about several decisions by various international courts. The combined affect of these decisions is to make fossil fuels illegal. Hang on to your gas stove!

The article reports:

It’s a piece in The New York Times–for him, it was the international version with a different headline–that argues that several decisions by various international courts amount to outlawing the extraction and use of fossil fuels.

It’s hard to argue with their conclusion because I am not an international lawyer, but let’s assume that the claim is true, as it appears to be on its face.

Rulings by the International Court of Justice, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea all suggest that the climate harms resulting from the burning of fossil fuels violate international law.

The New York Times article states:

The I.C.J.’s unanimous opinion reinforced these conclusions and broadened their reach, stating that countries must protect citizens from the “urgent and existential threat” of climate change. When a country fails to curb greenhouse gas emissions — whether by producing or consuming fossil fuels, approving new exploration to find them or subsidizing the industry — it may be held liable for “an internationally wrongful act,” the court’s 15 judges said.

This makes it much harder for any government or company to say that rules don’t apply to them or they don’t have to act. Read together, these three landmark legal rulings leave no doubt that continuing fossil fuel production and use, let alone expanding it, violates the law. It is a cease-and-desist notice to fossil fuel producers.

This isn’t the dumbest thing I have ever heard, but it’s close.

Never forget:

On March 30, 2016, I posted the following (here):

Have doubts? Then listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.

Whenever you see someone claiming global governance and talking about climate change, consider the above quote.

Meanwhile, follow the link above to read the entire article at Hot Air.

Standing Up to the Climate Hoax

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

It is becoming increasing apparent that not only is there no scientific evidence that manmade CO2 emissions are causing climate change, but that this hoax is being used by the Democrat Marxists to control us and limit our freedoms. It is also being used to enrich the elite at the expense the taxpayers and to raise energy bills dramatically higher.

A recent article in the Epoch Times revealed that the United Nation’s Convention on Climate Change deliberately altered their report so that any observed climate change would be falsely blamed on mankind’s burning of fossil fuels. Several scientists who objected to this unsubstantiated claim were ostracized and removed from the committee. World renowned physicist, Frederick Seitz, wrote in an article that he had never in his extensive career, including as President of the National Academy of Sciences, ever seen such corruption in the scientific review process and that no study to date has demonstrated that climate change is due to mankind’s use of fossil fuels. Recent reports by qualified experts have reported that rising CO2 levels are offset by increased plant growth and that CO2 levels do not increate warming, but rather the opposite. That is, rising climate temperature cycles caused by factors such as solar activity, produce an increase in CO2 and not the reverse.

So where does all this bring us? The only rational conclusion (in spite of what the environmental extremists and those making a huge profit from solar and wind farms) is that there is absolutely no need to restrict the use of fossil fuels. It is estimated that that the current effort to replace fossil fuels is costing the average American over $2,000 per year and rising. This will devastate our economy for absolutely no valid reason.

Here in North Carolina, we can fight back against this leftist agenda in at least two ways. First, repeal HB 951 passed into law in 2021 that requires electricity generating power plants to reduce their carbon emissions by 70% by 2030 and achieve carbon emission neutrality by 2050. Second, pass a law prohibiting the construction of offshore wind farms near Kitty Hawk and Bald Head Island that is being pushed by Governor Cooper. It should be noted, that solar and wind farm components are obtained from China while they continue to construct coal burning plants at an alarming rate.

The Republican controlled General Assembly needs to step up to the plate and stop this disastrous program before it is too late. Any candidate for office who does not recognize the danger posed by the Left’s extremist environmental program and is not willing to stand up against it does not deserve our support.

Congress Strikes Back

Posted on by

On January 26th, the Biden administration announced a temporary pause on pending approvals of liquefied natural gas exports, claiming that natural gas, as a fossil fuel, is partially responsible for climate change.

On January 27th, World Net Daily reminded us:

Natural gas is considered to be the cleanest variety of energy-dense fossil fuels, and and U.S. LNG is about 30% cleaner than Russian LNG, for example, according to ClearPath.

“Despite the White House’s claims to the contrary, it is profoundly absurd to claim this action will do anything to curb emissions. The natural gas to meet global demand will come from somewhere — either from the US, where it is produced more responsibly than anywhere else on earth, or from other nations with far fewer environmental regulations,” David Blackmon, a 40-year veteran of the oil and gas industry who now writes and consults on the energy sector, previously told the DCNF (Daily Caller News Foundation).

I am sure that Russia appreciated the pause.

Well, Congress has had enough.

On February 15th, The Daily Caller posted the following headline:

‘Easy Vote’: House Passes Bipartisan Rebuke Of Biden Admin’s ‘Radical’ Natural Gas Restriction

The article reports:

The House passed a bill Thursday that would effectively lift the Biden administration’s pause on new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals.

The lower chamber of the legislature passed the “Unlocking Our Domestic LNG Potential Act,” introduced by Republican Rep. August Pfluger of Texas, by a 224-200 bipartisan vote, with nine House Democrats crossing the aisle to join Republicans in voting in favor of the bill. The bill would remove the Department of Energy (DOE) from the process of approving LNG export terminals and give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) exclusive discretion over whether or not to green light LNG export hubs, according to its text.

All of the Republicans in the House who were present voted for the bill. Nine Democrats also voted for the bill.

The article at The Daily Caller also notes:

“President Biden was pretty clear when, as a candidate, he said, ‘I guarantee you. We’re going to end fossil fuel.’ He has used every weapon and every tool available to make it more difficult on this industry,” Pfluger told the DCNF. “This export ban is just the latest strike in his efforts to appease his radical climate interest groups who refuse to accept the reality that American energy is the cleanest, most secure option for the U.S. and our allies. If you care about energy, about the security of the country, and about what the energy industry has done to lower prices for American households and strengthen our allies and partners, then this is an easy vote.”

If the  American economy is going to survive the Biden administration, we need to be able to harness domestic energy.

 

 

Destructive Carbon Emission Mandates

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

The Marxist Left is out to destroy our country. Period. Anyone who does not recognize this is either blind or part of the problem. Karl Marx in his book, The Communist Manifesto, stresses the importance of finding an issue that allows the government to control the people. Well, the Democrat Marxists have found that issue: the manmade CO2 climate change hoax. Regrettably, we have some Republican legislators who have been going along with this non-scientific, unproven belief that threatens to destroy our country and our standard of living.

Recent declarations by respected climate scientists are increasingly showing that there is no evidence that CO2 emissions have any impact on climate conditions. In fact, they have argued that increasing CO2 levels enhance plant growth essential to man’s survival. The climate has changed dramatically over millions of years as a result of natural causes such as solar flares, earth orbit, tilt of the earth, ocean currents, and other changes having nothing to do with man’s actions. Climate change, whatever the causes, is not an existential threat to mankind. What is a threat are the extreme actions being taken to combat a non-existing problem. No modern civilization can exist without adequate, inexpensive energy from fossil fuels. We are committing social suicide by going along with the elimination of fossil fuels.

Let’s look at some things occurring in North Carolina that are heading us down the road to economic catastrophe. First, in 2021 the General Assembly passed and Governor Cooper signed HB 951 which established the requirement to cut carbon emissions from electric power plants 70% by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. This will require massive expenditures on solar and wind farms and the construction of massive battery centers to store electricity, since wind and solar are intermittent sources. Who makes the solar panels, the wind mills, and the battery components? You guessed it; our global enemy China. It is estimated that the average consumer’s electric bill will quadruple and there will be massive electricity shortages. Germany, which tried to rely on solar and wind, had to reactivate their coal fired plants to handle the demand for electricity this winter. The cost of electricity in Germany is three times higher than in the United States. Meanwhile, we have the technology to have the cleanest coal fired plants in the world and have a 200 year supply of coal; which we are now sending to China.

Second, the Cooper regime is proceeding with the construction of offshore wind farms. One off Kitty Hawk and the other of the southern coast near Bald Head Island. Again, these will be built by foreign countries and use Chinese components. Just think how vulnerable these wind mills will be to attack in the event of war.

I hope I have made my case that these actions are a real threat to the citizens of North Carolina; and all for no legitimate reason. Manmade Climate Change is a Marxist hoax! We need to pressure the General Assembly to (1) repeal HB 951 establishing CO2 emission mandates; (2) block the construction of wind farms off the coast; (3) remove all state tax incentives for solar and wind energy projects. Before you cast your vote this year, find our where each candidate stands on this issue. It is a looming crisis that must be stopped.

Is Increased Artic Ice A Sign Of Global Warming?

Posted on by

On Monday, PJ Media posted an article about global warming.

The article reports:

One of climate alarmists’ favorite predictions is that the Arctic is losing its ice due to global warming, something elites have claimed for decades. New data shows, however, that Arctic ice is actually increasing! 

Climate has always changed and will continue to do so until the real apocalypse (not the fake one climate alarmists have been predicting as imminent for decades). With more than 50 years of failed climate change predictions behind them and a track record of consistent and total untrustworthiness, you’d think that the doom prophets would have given up. Then again, climate change is a convenient way for the greedy to enrich themselves (like former Vice President Al Gore) and for power-hungry politicians to take away rights and liberties while claiming a moral and physical necessity.

The article concludes:

It is interesting that last year’s data showed eight years of a global cooling trend rather than warming. Right about this part of winter, I wouldn’t mind a little warming, but many of us in America are instead facing a harsh cold snap. Of course, it’s not encouraging that some entities (including our federal government) aim to engage in geoengineering to manipulate weather and supposedly save the planet from warming. These entities who want to reduce global temperatures ignore the fact that the world isn’t about to go up in flames and that the Arctic is not becoming ice-free.

The real threat isn’t climate apocalypse; it’s leftist ideologues who have the power to weaponize pseudo-scientific propaganda against us and our liberties.

Obviously, I am not in favor of pollution. However, I am in favor of balance and of a free market. India and China are largely exempt from the energy restrictions that recent climate ‘treaties’ have placed on America.

A December 2023 article at NBC News reported:

This year, the burning of fossil fuel and manufacturing of cement have added the equivalent of putting 2.57 million pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every second.

If China and India were excluded from the count, world carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and cement manufacturing would have dropped, Friedlingstein said.

In 2023 the world increased its annual emissions by 398 million metric tons, but it was in three places: China, India and the skies. China’s fossil fuel emissions went up 458 million metric tons from last year, India’s went up 233 million metric tons and aviation emissions increased 145 million metric tons.

There is also the fact that many scientists believe that a higher level of CO2 is good for the planet–good for agriculture and good for providing food for more people.

Embracing CO2

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D   

The environmental extremists would have us believe that CO2 is a destructive force for the earth and must be controlled if we are to survive. Recently, a group of scientists not only refuted this notion but stated that increasing levels of CO2 will actually be beneficial to mankind. How is it possible that completely opposite views can exist among climate scientists when the media is constantly telling us that manmade CO2 emissions as an existential threat is “settled science”? The actual truth of this debate would not be so critical if the Biden regime were not using it to completely transform our energy production into something that can never support our industrial society and will destroy our standard of living.   

Recently, Patrick Moore, the chief scientist of Ecosense Environmental, stated that “There is actually no scientific evidence that CO2 is responsible for climate change”.  Just like the Left used fear to get us to use noneffective masks and shut down our economy, the socialist environmental extremists are blaming climate change and so-called disasters on burning of fossil fuels. The truth is that due to modern industrialization using fossil fuels, there have been dramatically fewer deaths from weather factors. For example, in 1925 there were 484,880 reported worldwide deaths from weather factors compared to 14,893  in 2020, in spite of a dramatic increase in the use of fossil fuels. While it is true that humans do not need CO2, the plants we rely on for food absolutely do. The plants use the CO2 for food and produce oxygen in return. Nice reciprocal arrangement, don’t you think? In fact, commercial greenhouses often pump CO2 into their atmosphere in order to dramatically increase plant growth. In past epochs, the CO2 level in the atmosphere was many times higher than today.   

While scientific debate is generally a good thing if it leads to truth, the problem is the Biden regime has decided what is true and anyone with an opposite view is called a “climate denier” and punished. Typical socialism where the government knows what is best for us and you better comply. The actions the Biden regime are taking (with the concurrence of some Republicans) will destroy our way of life and lower our standard of living. The inflation we are experiencing is a clear example. Like all socialist governments it is all about controlling the people. From eliminating gas stoves and pushing electric vehicles as well as taxpayer subsidized wind and solar energy our freedom to choose is being taken away. 

We must fight back against this attack on our freedom. How? First, we must elect candidates who recognize the hoax of manmade climate change, such as Donald Trump who pulled our country out of the damaging Paris Climate Accords. Second, we must get our elected officials to reverse green energy policies that subsidize wind and solar and electric vehicles. If you want an electric vehicle, no problem, just do not expect others to help pay for it. Third, state and federal environmental agencies must be stopped from issuing draconian regulations. Cummings Diesel company was recently required to pay a two billion dollar fine for not complying with an EPA regulation. Fourth, the NC General Assembly must repeal the mandate that requires a 70% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2030. 

The ultimate issue is freedom of choice versus government control. It is up to us. 

Irony

Posted on by

On Saturday, Just the News posted the following headline:

UN climate confab may have largest carbon footprint in event’s history, more than 400 jets

Aren’t those the people who want us to drive mini electric cars and eat bugs?

The article reports:

The upcoming United Nations (UN) climate conference in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), known as COP28, appears likely to have a larger carbon footprint than any previous UN climate change summit.

More than 70,000 people are expected to show up to COP28, about 25,000 more people than last year’s summit, COP27. The conference, which runs from Nov. 30 through Dec. 12, will focus on global strategies to reduce emissions and accelerate the shift away from fossil fuels in favor of green energy.

About 40,000 people attended COP26 in 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland,  while nearly 45,000 people attended the 2015 summit in Paris, France, where the Paris Climate Accords were signed.

Conference attendees have drawn scrutiny in previous years for traveling to and from the event in private jets while lecturing on the importance of reducing emissions. Notably, a luxury concierge service has been offering to arrange private jet charters ahead of this year’s conference.

In addition to flying in and out of the UAE, many attendees will also stay in high-end hotels and have access to “environmentally sustainable, socially responsible, delicious and nutritious food and beverage,” according to COP28’s website.

On October 16, 2021, Zero Hedge posted the following headline:

UN Climate Change Conference Reportedly Using Diesel Generators To Charge Teslas Being Used As Shuttles

Some highlights of that article are posted here.

The article also notes:

One of the key issues to be discussed at COP28 is the shape of a so-called “loss and damages” fund, a de facto international climate reparations program. Special presidential envoy for climate John Kerry recently suggested that the U.S. will pay “millions” into the fund, a number that many activists and representatives of poorer countries find to be inadequate. China is unlikely to have any significant obligations to the fund because it is classified as a developing country, despite its status as the world’s top emitter and second-largest economy.

If you have not yet figured out that the purpose of climate change is to take money away from the countries that have it and give it to China and other ‘developing’ countries, you have not been paying attention.

Was This Money Wisely Spent?

Posted on by

On October 25th, WattsUpWithThat posted an article about spending on green energy and the results of that spending.

The article reports:

Economist Jeff Currie of Goldman Sachs (Global Head of Commodities Research in the Global Investment Research Division): “Here’s a stat for you, as of January of this year. At the end of last year, overall, fossil fuels represented 81 percent of overall energy consumption. Ten years ago, they were at 82. So though, all of that investment in renewables, you’re talking about 3.8 trillion, let me repeat that $3.8 trillion of investment in renewables moved fossil fuel consumption from 82 to 81 percent, of the overall energy consumption. But you know, given the recent events and what’s happened with the loss of gas and replacing it with coal, that number is likely above 82.” … The net of it is clearly we haven’t made any progress.”

The article includes the following graph:

The article also includes the following Tweet:

I think it is time to go back to the drawing board.

The Ongoing War On Fossil Fuels

Posted on by

Whoever is currently directing the energy policy for the Biden administration has little of no regard for the common man. Gasoline prices have more than doubled since President Biden took office, and heating costs for the average American are expected to go through the roof this winter. Meanwhile, the Biden administration continues its war on fossil fuel.

On Thursday, The American Thinker posted an article about the Biden administration’s energy policies and their consequences.

The article reports:

On October 19, in the heat of an election campaign, President Biden told the American people, “We need to increase oil production.”  He went on to say, “My administration has not stopped or slowed U.S. oil production.”  It was a disingenuous statement from a man whose sense of reality, fact, and fiction have become an undecipherable narrative.  Biden failed to mention the executive order he issued which stipulates, “the Secretary of the Interior shall pause new oil and natural gas leases on public lands or in offshore waters.”  This pause is ongoing.  Biden uses the same executive order as an instruction to the secretaries of State, Treasury, Energy, Defense, and Homeland Security, “to organize and deploy the full capacity of its agencies to combat the climate crisis.”

Millions of Americans are employed by businesses supporting the fossil-fuel industry.  Others choose to invest in fossil-fuel businesses.  All Americans rely on fossil fuels to power their businesses, transportation systems, and utilities.  Democrats will destroy these people’s jobs, capital, and imperil the U.S. economy.  The Biden administration decreed that, “we must combat the climate crisis with bold, progressive action that combines the full capacity of the Federal Government with efforts from every corner of our Nation, every level of government, and every sector of our economy.”  By executive order Biden has weaponized the federal bureaucracy to destroy the fossil-fuel industry. 

Please follow the link to read the entire article. The world’s economy depends on fossil fuel, and to destroy the fossil fuel industry is to take down that economy. One of the ways America could rebound from the rapidly increasing inflation would be to begin drilling our way back to energy independence. As soon as gasoline prices began to drop, the cost of goods would begin to drop and the domino effect would begin. I don’t know if there will be enough people in the newly elected Congress to bring back American energy, but that is the ultimate solution to a lot of America’s problems and would also have a positive impact on America foreign policy.

Things We All Need To Know

Posted on by

On Tuesday, PJ Media posted an article containing information about electric cars that somehow isn’t being mentioned in the new articles touting the new vehicles.

Here is the list (please follow the link to the article to read the details):

1. EVs are powered by fossil fuels.

2. The batteries of EVs rely on cobalt.

3. A study released earlier this year by an environmental group showed that nearly one-third of San Francisco’s electric charging stations were non-functioning.

4. Supporters of the California law admit there will be a 40% increase in demand for electricity, adding further strain to the grid and requiring increased costs for power and infrastructure.

5. According to one researcher, the strain of adding an EV is similar to adding “1 or 2 air conditioners” to your home, except an EV requires power year-round.

6. Today, 20 million American families, or one in six, have fallen behind on their electric bills, the highest amount ever.

7. Utility companies will need to add $5,800 in upgrades for every new EV for the next eight years in order to compensate for the demand for power.

8. The average price for an electric vehicle is currently $66,000, up more than 13% in just the last year, costing an average of $18,000 more than the average combustible engine.

9. A 2022 study found that the majority of EV charging occurs at home, leaving those who live in multi-family dwellings (apartments) at a real disadvantage for charging.

10. The same study also noted that many drivers charge their EVs overnight when solar power is less available on the grid.

On Tuesday, The Blaze reported the following:

A Florida man went viral after he posted a car dealership quote showing it would cost nearly $30,000 to replace the battery in his electric vehicle.

Rob O’Donnell posted the quote, obtained from Roger Dean Chevrolet in Cape Coral, on Twitter last week. The quote includes the cost of the battery (nearly $27,000), the cost of labor ($1,200), and taxes for the repair (more than $1,700).

In total, it would cost O’Donnell $29,842.15 to replace the battery in his 2012 Chevrolet Volt. The car itself is worth far less.

I think Americans need to consider all of the above before they rush out to buy an electric car.