What happens to a society when there are more takers than makers? White House (3/15/13) reports: “The President’s plan builds on an idea that has bipartisan support from experts including retired admirals and generals and leading CEOs, and it focuses on one goal: shifting America’s cars and trucks off oil entirely.”
I bet oil production would come to a screeching halt if President Obama’s teleprompter were turned off. Praise His Majesty, from whom all blessings flow. Washington Examiner (3/16/2013) reports: “‘We produce more oil than we have in 15 years. We import less oil than we have in 20 years,’ he said. ‘We’re producing more natural gas than we ever have before — with hundreds of thousands of good jobs to show for it.’… Those numbers are true. Between fiscal years 2010 and 2012, total U.S. oil production rose by about 1.1 million barrels per day over fiscal year 2007, and natural gas production rose 20 percent from 2007 to 2012… What the president failed to mention is that the growth he is so proud of has taken place in spite of his administration’s energy policy, not because of it.”
“Congress set out to create an ethanol industry . . .” With a start like that, who could have guessed that economic, environmental, and energy catastrophe awaited? Pretty much everyone. NYTimes (3/16/13) reports: “Five years ago, rural America was giddy for ethanol. Backed by government subsidies and mandates, hundreds of ethanol plants rose among the golden fields of the Corn Belt, bringing jobs and business to small towns, providing farmers with a new market for their crops and generating billions of dollars in revenue for the producers of this corn-based fuel blend… Those days of promise and prosperity are vanishing.”
And yet, some folks in the sector appear to be OK with a carbon tax. Apparently, that is affordable. EnergyTomorrow (3/11/13) video reports: “Billions of new oil and natural gas taxes? Washington isn’t closing loopholes it’s raising taxes. Say no to Washington’s new energy taxes.”
The Obama Administration is starting to get lazy. Now they are letting their newsletter dump bad news on Friday. Washington Post (3/15/13) reports: “The Obama administration is leaning toward revising its landmark proposal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new power plants, according to several individuals briefed on the matter, a move that would delay tougher restrictions and could anger many environmentalists… The discussions center on the first-ever greenhouse gas regulations for power plants, which were proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency nearly a year ago. Rewriting the proposal would significantly delay any action, and might allow the agency to set a separate standard for coal-fired power plants, which are roughly twice as polluting as those fueled by natural gas.”
We don’t feel that bad for Kelsey; we’re losing money on wind ‘investments’ everyday too. Washington Times (3/14/13) reports: “Former Frasier star Kelsey Grammer told TMZ on Tuesday that wind technology was the worst investment he’s ever made… Grammer told the tabloid that though his finances are good, he lost hundreds of thousands of dollars on a small wind investment… ‘I’m OK, but I didn’t make up for it. It’s just one of those things that’s just a straight loss,’ he said. ‘You’d think it would be lucrative, but it’s not really a friendly environment for new technology, it really isn’t.’”
It’s like environmentalists are a band of firefighters who stay in business by going around lighting peoples’ houses on fire. Slate(3/17/13) reports: “At the same time, another 1 billion people will participate in ‘Earth Hour’ by turning off their lights from 8:30-9:30. The organizers say that they are providing a way to demonstrate one’s desire to ‘do something’ about global warming. But the reality is that Earth Hour teaches all the wrong lessens, and it actually increases CO2 emissions. Its vain symbolism reveals exactly what is wrong with today’s feel-good environmentalism.”