Skip to comments.Target U.S.A.: Greens Wage War on American Natural Gas
Posted on 03/21/2014 8:27:38 AM PDT by Hojczyk
The same environmental groups that fought construction of Keystone XL are launching a new effort to prevent the United States from exporting natural gas. If they are as successful in this endeavor as they have been in delaying the pipeline, the consequences will not be limited to the U.S. economy. Preventing American natural-gas producers from doing business overseas will hamper U.S. foreign-policy goals and slow environmental progress worldwide.
On Tuesday, the Sierra Club, 350.org, and 14 other environmental groups wrote to President Obama, claiming that exports of liquefied natural gas would contribute to global warming. They called on him to oppose the exports and as a good-faith test case in this direction urged him to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to conduct an in-depth study on the environmental impact of Marylands Cove Point export facility.
When projects cant be killed outright, they can be slowly asphyxiated through years of laborious, redundant, and soporific study and review, as Keystone XL has proven. It doesnt matter that, after five rounds of intense study, the State Department has still concluded that the pipeline would not have a significant environmental impact; it matters that, as the research dragged on, the pipeline was neither approved nor built. Green groups are trying out the same stalling tactics in their effort to prevent natural-gas exports.
But the timing of the anti-export letter is particularly gauche, given that Russian president Vladimir Putin has used his countrys energy wealth to support his aggressive foreign policy.
Michael Brune, the Sierra Clubs radical executive director, claimed that this letter is not in response to whats happening in Crimea. But clearly its a big part of the conversation. The idea that U.S. gas exports could address the human-rights abuses that were seeing in Crimea reflects a lack of comprehension
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
What do these A$$H*LES think we should use instead?
Offshore drilling bad.
Refineries and pipelines bad.
Windmills bad - kill birds
Nuclear horrible and dangerous.
Now natural gas is bad. I suggest a law be passed requiring all greens and progressives to use only solar power for all of their energy needs including transportation.
They have over-played their hand on this one......................
Greens Wage War on American Natural Gas
Must be a miss print ,should be EPA not greens ,although they are one and the same
Environmentalists are like watermelons: green on the outside but red on the inside. All the major environmental groups are funded by Globalist Banksters and Globalist Corporations.
Solar is bad, too....................
And the answer is simple,
The OIL Companies just need to compile a list of ALL MEMBERS and Their contributors, then Blacklist Them from using CREDIT in ANY FORM at all of their respective gas stations. Using Credit or Debit is not a right, it is a privilege.
Since Mexico is part of NAFTA they probably can’t control exports to Mexico. Mexico can sell LNG to whomever they chose.
there is no downside to drilling for natural gas.
This is just more proof that the left wants America to be weak.
this is a prime opportunity to sell a gas to Europe with what’s going on in Russia.
We get money jobs and you infrastructure, everyone wins.
Here east of the Mississippi a lot of our electric needs could be met by repowering some of the 800 existing dams that the DOE has named as having good potential. We could then sell even more gas.
Obviously its a long term issue but the long term is what really matters for the future of our country.
Solar is fine for space and small gadgets but is seldom worth the cost in all but the sunniest areas of the country and even then only on a private per house scale.
Hard-core Greens want a kiloholocaust for the human race.
Wherever on Earth you have lots of energy available, you have improved standards of living. This is like garlic and holy water to the Greens.
No matter how clean it isn’t enough these nut jobs have one goal and that is power and control. They don’t want cheap energy growing a vibrant US economy because in that kind of world people don’t need their progressive bs.
I remember back in the 80’s Solar water heaters were all the rage. Every new house had them on the roof. People were buying them for older houses as well. Huge apartment buildings had them, as did every housing development.
Haven’t seen one in years.............
If you go back and look at a number of my older post you will see that I have been saying for years that the energy policy of the Left is no energy.
The greenies' outer-space stupidity on the energy front makes the Constitutional argument against the EPA's existence easierjust because people are so cold, so out of work, and so PO'd.
And all those big dams make d**n good trout tailwater fisheries.
Here in Michigan solar is fine for augmenting a traditional heating method. Most people call them south facing winders.
I’ve got pine trees on the north side of the house and leafy trees on the south. The leafy trees shade the windows during the summer and without leaves during the winter I get sunlight.
“What do these A$$H*LES think we should use instead?”
Pixie dust and dried unicorn poop. Both of which are in plentiful supply, in the alternate universe they seem to occupy.
As sholes? Is THAT what sholes are?
you forgot OPEC, they are the single largest contributor...
With modern generating technology many of the much smaller dams that were taken offline in the 40s and 50s could be returned to production greater than they were before.
From my reading the retrofits are about as expensive as erecting a windmill but the usable lifespan can be as much as 70 to 100 years with proper maintenance. You might get 10 to 20 years out of a $1.5 million windmill that produces electricity intermittently.
Dams also produce wealth through high dollar lake front property.
I’m all for using everything to produce power as long as it actually works.
...and that is always the conflict. They NEVER have an alternative solution. It's been shown clearly enough they have no interest in living in a world without electricity and modern conveniences. They just like to talk about it because it makes them feel good. That's the kind of people they are, purely selfish.
Counter intuitively Trout Unlimited spends huge bucks lobbying to get those smaller dams decommissioned and taken out, while singing the praises of tailwater fisheries below the big ones.
I’m guessing that as part of the refit the smaller dams could probably be made more efficient while also improving fish populations. You probably can have it all if people are just open to the possibilities.
The core to progressives of all stripes is they need to be needed.
The “Greens,” such as the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council, are the agents of the People’s Republic of China and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Those two entities have the most to gain from the United States not using its own plentiful natural resources. These front groups cannot finance their activities solely on grandma sending them $10 because she saw a photo of a sad looking polar bear in a mailer. Armies of lobbyists and lawyers pushing endless lawsuits cost way more than that will support.
Follow the money; I guarantee you will trace it back to foreign nations who are interested in preventing American prosperity. And those people are playing for keeps in a high stakes international game. Don’t think for a minute that they would not see support of the greens as a substantial investment, and they are getting a handsome return on it too.
Very nice. My wife and I fish the AuSable by Grayling every fall.