"This year, Americans spent almost 8.5 percent of their incomes on gas, about $4,155, the highest share since 1981." US Supreme Court Justice Breyer totally on board with it. "Raise the price of oil through the roof," Breyer said.
1/12/12, "Consumer head (Bryson) wants consumers to pay more for energy," Washington Examiner opinion, Murray and Bier
"Americans spent more on gas this year as percentage of their income than at any other time in 30 years. To most people this would be devastating news.
Not to the man President Obama trusts to reinvigorate business, John Bryson. The new secretary of commerce, Bryson has advocated for higher energy prices for his entire public career -- and still does.
Unfortunately, too few senators took notice of his radical views
- when they confirmed him this October.
From 1979-1982, Bryson chaired California's Public Utilities Commission where he used fixed-rate contracts to drive up electricity prices for consumers, and Bryson isn't shy about admitting the effect of his policies.
"What California has done is knowingly incur higher cents per-kilowatt-hour costs," he boasted. "They're substantially higher than the U.S. average in order to invest in the kind of systems we have in California .... that's been part of the regulatory environment for the investor owned utilities as long as I've been close to it."
In the mid-1980s, Bryson used his insider knowledge to land a position at the state's largest utility, Southern California Edison,
- where he continued to lobby for higher rates.
"At California Edison," he said, "we have 99 separate programs, very expensive programs, and those contribute to higher cent per kilowatt-hour unit costs because you're not spreading the infrastructure base across as large a set of sales. There can be a question of just how high those costs can go, but the reality is California's [prices] are higher and knowingly higher."
Today, Bryson is still working for higher prices. In a 2008 panel discussion with author Tom Friedman and Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, Bryson said, "Take global warming. It's going to cost something to deal effectively with this.
- Energy prices are going to have to go up."
His comments had an effect on Breyer. "We better get away from oil. That'll help us. I hear Tom Friedman and Bryson -- they are giving five reasons why. .... They said the world price -- raise the price of oil. Raise the price of oil! Raise it through the roof, and then people will look for substitutes,
- so I cheer," he said smiling.
They understand the consequences for the poor as well. "Developing countries have what seem to me legitimate aspirations to bring the levels of prosperity in their own countries to the levels that exist in the developed world. An appeal simply to ... living less affluent lives is unlikely to be a very successful mantra
- in meeting the global challenge here."
They don't expect it to work in the United States either, which is why Breyer recommends disguising the strategy. "What I hear is, 'It's just because you make these huge salaries in the judiciary. You haven't thought about the average person.' But I am thinking about the average person. Isn't that the problem, that the average person is going to have to pay too, and quite a lot?
"You hear these 'terrible' words: tax. But remember Alfred Kahn? Kahn was told by Jimmy Carter don't refer to the word recession, so he said, 'OK, we're about to have a banana.' Fine, let's put a banana on oil,"
- he said laughing.
These liberal establishment "beyond-oil" policies not only haven't worked since they were started in the 1970s.
- They have proven disastrous for America's poor and middle class.
President Obama's anti-drilling, anti-pipeline, anti-oil policies are costing Americans thousands. This year, Americans spent almost 8.5 percent of their incomes on gas, about $4,155, the highest share since 1981. If the commerce secretary has his way,
- they'll go even higher in 2012.""
----------------------------
"Misnamed “green energy” policies severely undermine any opportunity America may have to rebuild her economy."
1/13/11, "Going broke by going green," Townhall.com, Henry R. Jackson Jr. and Niger Innis
"President Obama’s healthcare program came under intense scrutiny in 2010. As we enter 2011, we need to open our eyes to
- what is really going on behind his green energy propaganda, as well.
To some, it may not seem as desperate an issue as healthcare, but it will grow to become just as devastating to those citizens among us who are poor, because access to
- affordable energy affects everything we do.
The administration’s green policies are being thrust into a precarious American economy.
- Every “green scenario” shows raised energy costs across the board.
Not only will the average person pay more for energy;
- many will lose their jobs as the forced transition to alternative power sources
- rocks the stability of current energy-producing and energy-using companies.
Skyrocketing energy prices and lost jobs also mean millions of otherwise healthy Americans are subjected to new health threats: higher air conditioning, heating, transportation and other energy bills. For those who cannot afford the increased costs,
- this can mean death from heat stroke and hypothermia;
- reduced budgets for healthy food, proper healthcare, home and car repairs,
college, retirement, and charitable giving; and psychological depression that accompanies economic depression.
Land withdrawals and leasing and permitting delays don’t just lock up vast energy storehouses. They kill jobs, eliminate billions in government bonus, rent, royalty and tax revenues – and force us to spend other billions to import more oil that we could produce right here at home.The White House agenda represents a double power grab. It usurps state, local and private sector control over energy prices and generation, and gives it to unelected Washington bureaucrats.
- It also seizes our reliable, affordable energy, and replaces it with expensive, intermittent power.
While many Americans are duped into thinking renewable energy sources are the ticket to a clean world, they have not looked at the downside to these energy sources. Replacing fossil fuel power with coerced renewable energy means
- millions of acres will be covered with turbines and solar panels, and built with
billions of tons of concrete, steel, copper, fiberglass and rare earth metals. It means millions of acres of forest and crop land will be converted to farming for inefficient biofuels that also require vast inputs
- of water, pesticides, fertilizers and hydrocarbon fuels.
Moreover, wind and solar facilities work only 10-30 percent of the time, compared to 90-95 percent for coal, gas and nuclear power plants. Even worse, prolonged cold is almost invariably associated with high atmospheric pressure, and thus very little wind. On December 21, 2010 – one of the coldest days on record for Yorkshire, England (undoubtedly due to global warming) – the region’s coal, gas and nuclear power plants generated 53,000 megawatts of electricity; its wind turbines provided a measly 20 MW, or 0.04% of the total. The same high pressure, no wind scenario happens on the hottest summer days.
“Renewable” and “clean” energy projects received $30 billion in subsidies under the gargantuan
- stimulus bill.
Texas Comptroller Susan Combs reports that property tax breaks for wind projects in her state cost nearly
- $1.6 million per job. “Green energy” is simply unsustainable, environmentally and economically.
President Obama and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson may be convinced that we face a manmade climate change crisis, and unacceptable health risks from power plant and refinery emissions. However, their “climate science” is little more than a self-proving theory: no matter what happens – hotter or colder, wetter or drier, more storms or fewer – it’s
- “proof” of global warming.
Thousands of scientists say there is yet no real evidence that we face such a crisis, and most coal-fired power plants and refineries have already reduced their harmful emissions to the point that only the most sensitive or health-impaired would be harmed.
- The problem is not runaway global warming. It is a runaway and unaccountable federal bureaucracy.
Putting the green power grab into even sharper focus are these eye-opening comments from two “socially responsible” CEOs, who have lobbied the Congress, EPA and White House intensely for cap-tax-and-trade, far tougher emission policies and still more subsidies. We thank the Wall Street Journal for bringing them to our attention.
EPA’s regulations “increase operating costs for coal-fired generators and ultimately increase the price of energy” for families and companies that need electricity," observed Exelon CEO John Rowe. “The upside for Exelon is unmistakable. Exelon’s clean [mostly nuclear] generation will continue to grow in value in a relatively short time. We are of course positioning our portfolio to capture that value.”
“Even without legislation in Congress, EPA is marching forward in terms of regulating carbon dioxide,” noted Lewis Hay, CEO of NextEra Energy, America’s largest producer of wind and solar power. “That puts us in a very good position.”
- The Journal summarized the situation succinctly in a recent editorial: “The EPA is abusing environmental law to achieve policy goals that the democratic process rejected,
The industry beneficiaries [of these destructive regulations] then pretend that this agenda is nothing more than
- a stroll around Walden Pond,
when it’s really about lining their own pockets.”
It is time to face reality. Misnamed “green energy” policies severely undermine any opportunity America may have to rebuild her economy.
Perpetuating current jobless rates would be just the tip of the iceberg, if we follow the path that EPA and the White House have laid in front of us.
- Let your legislators know that you do not support the White House’s current green programs.
We cannot afford to go broke trying to go green."
via Instapundit, via Tom Nelson
No comments:
Post a Comment