“Energy,” said the poet William Blake, “is eternal delight.” Barack Obama disagrees.
Quick test: When it comes to energy, what is America’s number one priority?
If you said “a cheap and abundant supply of the stuff,” go to the head of the class.
If you uttered the phrase “environmentally sustainable” or some such other piece of politically correct nonsense, you should turn off all the lights in your house, sell your car, and apply to the Obama administration or one of its enablers for a job.
As Glenn Reynolds has frequently pointed out, the one campaign promise Barack Obama has indisputably kept is to make energy more expensive. He has done this chiefly through regulatory intimidation. And he has had powerful allies in the media. The New York Times, for example, never saw an oil or natural gas well it really liked. In fact, the former paper of record has devoted an entire series to fan the environmental hysteria over producing natural gas.
* “Learning Too Late of Perils in Gas Well Leases”
* “Behind Veneer, Doubt on Future of Natural Gas”
* “Insiders Sound an Alarm Amid a Natural Gas Rush”
* “Chemicals and Toxic Materials That Come With Hydrofracking”
* “Natural Gas and Polluted Air”
And on and on. The Times has thoughtfully assembled the whole series for you under the rubric “Drilling Down.”
It’s a pretty nauseating series, just as the Obama administration’s efforts to impoverish America are alarming. It is heartening, then, to discover signs of rebellion, for example this bracing sign which a friend sent me:
“Clearly,” he noted, “the people of North East Fairfield Ohio either don’t read The New York Times or don’t care much for what it says about drilling for oil and gas.”
God bless ’em!
The federal government’s Energy Information Agency has a $110,000,000 budget to collect energy production data and make projections. Check its reports for 2008 and 2011 and you read that hydrocarbons, led by coal, will still account for most of our energy generation down to 2035. Coal is projected to remain the largest source (40%+). Renewable energy sources are expected to rise, perhaps to as much a 5%. The largest percentage increase is projected to come from natural gas—a sudden jump in projections between the two dates.
Considering how little weight the EIA’s information has on the debate, it becomes clear that one simple way to reduce our mounting national debt is to abolish the EIA, for a savings of over 2,500,000,000 by 2035.
Roger you could certainly track down the source of how the abstraction of an idea became more important than its implementation, but how the heck did such destructive behavior become part of national policy, and draw so many defenders?
‘…“environmentally sustainable” or some such other piece of politically correct nonsense….’
Just when you’re stopped laughing at the GOP’s latest howler – “Freddie hired me as a historian!” – you can always count on the right to supply another.
Hopefully the rest of the country will follow suit and these signs will crop up everywhere energy development opportunities are being squashed.
The signs should emphasize that Obama and the Obots are blocking the creation of 300,000+/- jobs, between the Ohio energy effort and the XL pipeline.
As long as Obama has his job, many Americans will have to do without one.
We wouldn’t need so much energy if the gov’t would stop importing legals and illegals like there’s a people shortage.
The national TV so-called journalists are a hoot. Last year there was an abundance of snow due to global warming. This year there is a dearth of snow due to global warming.
So, because the weather is unpredictable from year to year, we’d better not drill for oil or gas.
A musical version of the sign!