Saturday, November 10, 2012

The Environmental Extremism of Democrats

Living the Environmentally Friendly Life
Moonbattery has a profile of an environmental extremist named Bill McKibben.  McKibben is credited with stopping the Keystone Pipeline that would have brought oil from Canada to the United States, but which will now be going to China instead.

McKibben is doing everything he can to stop the use of fossil fuels for energy and is typical of the extremists who comprise the Democratic Party.  This is why gasoline prices are through the roof, and why they will go higher.  It is not an exaggeration to say that the Democratic Party wants you to suffer.  The reason is that they have an extreme view on the environment and want to force Americans to use far less energy.  In  order to do this we must car pool more, ride trains or buses or use bicycles for transportation (or walk).  We must live in smaller houses.  We must consume less, i.e. to live at a lower standard of living than we do now.  We must produce fewer children and dramatically shrink the population (hence the fanatical support of any and all abortion).

The Democrats' anti-energy policies are designed to force you into a simpler lifestyle that they have selected for you, and even high unemployment helps to achieve their goals.  Economic activity consumes energy, enriches and empowers people to have families and to consume more, all of which runs counter to the goals of the environmental extremists in the Democratic Party.

The biggest problem with this agenda is that it is largely hidden.  The Democrats don't openly espouse these goals, lest the populace wake up and throw them out en mass.  This is unfortunate, since we cannot know what Dems are thinking and why, what data (if any) that they rely on, what future they envision, or what their arguments are.  Without debate on these extreme policies, we cannot refute them.

Welcome to the grim future, fellow peasants.


Adobe_Walls said...

Their goal is for my grandchildren (if I get any) to be squeezed into cities with no private transportation. Forced to work and live where their freedom of movement can be controlled and directed. Those without cars can only go where subways or buses will take them. In this endeavor they will fail also. The money for their whole agenda is already spent and some form of catastrophic collapse is inevitable, this will likely lead to my grandchildren using broken bits of bathroom porcelain to scrape hides for clothing and shelter. Perhaps that at least will be a form of freedom.

Stogie Chomper said...

Adobe, yes, the lives of our children and grandchildren will be less prosperous and less free than ours have been. The political tides are against us and I see no way to save our progeny. All we can do is to resist as best we can in every way we can: passive aggression, perhaps -- don't recycle; increase your carbon footprint if you can, and screw the goddam environment.

Adobe_Walls said...

Actually there is irony in this. The closer I get to living hand to mouth the larger my carbon footprint.

Chrysichthys said...

The actual idea is to ship the oil down to the Gulf of Mexico via the Keystone pipeline, and send it off to China from there (around Cape Horn), rather than building a pipeline over or through the Rocky Mountains and the Coast Range to the Canadian Pacific coast--which would take many years and cost a vast amount of money. Canada is only partly to blame for this plan, because many multinational companies are involved, including Canadian ones, Chinese ones, European ones, and American ones who are not operating with American interests in mind. You/ll be suckers if you agree to it--you certainly won't get cheaper gasoline--but that's okay by me, because you've asked for it.

pjm said...

I think Keystone is going to go through. There will be an environmental fight, but Obama will give it the green light. It would not have been prudent to do it pre-election, but he'll okay it now. That being said, it will be a fight.

The latest news is that US Oil Production will overtake Saudi Arabia in 8 years, because of new technologies etc Our crude imports have dropped by 11% this year. We are producing up to 7M barrels a day; but using 20M barrels a day. The projection is to be producing close to 15M by 2020, and with new fuel standards our usage will drop.. But by no means does this mean cheaper fuel prices. China etc are demanding more and more oil, which will keep the global price level at high prices. Oil is a Global Commodity, and the price is set on a Global Stage. . Yes more oil globally produced will lower prices, if demand stays static. But the projections is for the new industrialized nations to increase usage.... don't look for prices to lower anytime. The US consumer has accepted $4 a gallon gas... and these guys realize that. They'll figure out how to keep getting it.

When Romney talked about Gas Prices shooting up when Obama took over I had to laugh. The price in Summer of 2008 was the same levels as it is now.... but when the crash happened prices at the pump fell to $1.50. In 2009 Prices rose to the pre-crash equilibrium, much of that had to do with the change of valuation in the dollar. I am a free market guy... but the new technology (fracking) is an example of the US Gov't getting involved and subsidizing technology that most within the industry didn't believe in. In 1975 the Dept of Energy began researching fracking and horizontal drilling... it took 20 years for it to perfect the process. Mitchell Energy was the company that perfected it, and they were supported by the US Gov't during many rough years. Interestingly, Mitchelll Energy founder George Mitchell is calling for stronger regulation of fracking by the US Gov't. Mainly that it can be dangerous if not done properly, and too many independent drillers are cutting corners that will cause problems for the industry as a whole. Mitchell energy was sold to Devon Energy in 2003..... Devon sold their Deep Drill Rights to BP in 2010, because of (the expense ($200M per drill), and the low success rate (.25%). But he feels new seismic imaging technology will change the game and the success rate will go straight up in the next decade. Though he was in favor of Devons deal with giving China part ownership... a deal that had many scratching their head on the market. Mainly because Devon is flush with cash... so what was the $2.5B deal bringing them? Mitchell feels the opportunity for shale gas is even greater in China... and Devon is looking to get their foot in the door.