Greens are the Enemies of Energy

Greens are the Enemies of Energy

“What would you call a radical organization that threatens to shut down 25% of our electric grid?

Greens are the Enemies of Energy

Electric Grid

By Alan Caruba

Here in America and elsewhere around the world, Greens continue to war against any energy other than the “renewable” kind, wind and solar, that is more costly and next to useless. Only coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear keeps the modern and developing world functioning and growing.

The most publicized aspect is Obama’s “War on Coal” and, thanks to the Environmental Protection Agency, it has been successful; responsible for shutting down several hundred coal-fired plants by issuing costly regulations based on the utterly false claim that carbon dioxide emissions must be reduced to save the Earth from “global warming.”

By government edict, the incandescent light bulb has been banned.
How insane is that?

Light BulbThe EPA is the government’s ultimate enemy of energy, though the Department of the Interior and other elements of the government participate in limiting access to our vast energy reserves and energy use nationwide. By government edict, the incandescent light bulb has been banned. How insane is that?

The Earth has been cooling for seventeen years at this point, but the Greens call this a “pause.” That pause is going to last for many more years and could even become a new ice age.

A study commissioned by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) on the impact of the proposed new EPA regulation of emissions found that, as CNSNews reported, it “could be the costliest federal rule by reducing the Gross National Product by $270 billion a per year and $3.4 trillion from 2017 to 2040” adding $2.2 trillion in compliance costs for the same period. Jay Timmons, CEO and president of NAM, said, “This regulation has the capacity to stop the manufacturing comeback in its tracks.”

EPA FactsAs Thomas Pyle, the president of the Institute for Energy Research (IER), said in June, “President Obama is delivering on his promise to send electricity prices skyrocketing.” Noting a proposed EPA regulation that would shut more plants, he said “With this new rule, Americans can expect to pay $200 more each year for their electricity.” Having failed to turn around the nation’s economy halfway into his second term, Obama is adding to the economic burdens of all Americans.

The U.S. has enough coal to last 9,000 years

America could literally become energy independent given its vast reserves of energy sources. In the case of coal, the federal government owns 957 billion short tons of coal in the lower 48 States, of which about 550 billion short tons—about 57 percent—are available in the Powder River Basin. It is estimated to be worth $22.5 trillion to the U.S. economy, but as the IER notes, it “remains unrealized due to government barriers on coal production.” It would last 250 years, greater than Russia and China. When you add in Alaska, the U.S. has enough coal to last 9,000 years at today’s consumption rates!

In 2013 the IER estimated the worth of the government’s oil and coal technically recoverable resources to the economy to be $128 trillion, about eight times our national debt at the time.

There isn’t a day that goes by that environmental groups such as Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the National Resources Defense Council, and the Union of Concerned Scientists, along with dozens of others, do not speak out against the extracting and use of all forms of energy, calling coal “dirty” and claiming Big Oil is the enemy.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the Greens held off attacking the nuclear industry because it does not produce “greenhouse gas” emissions. Mind you, these gases, primarily carbon dioxide, represent no threat of warming and, indeed, as the main “food” of all vegetation on Earth, more carbon dioxide would be a good thing, increasing crop yields and healthy forests.

Events such as the 1979 partial meltdown at Three Mile Island and the 1986 Chernobyl disaster raised understandable fears. The Greens began opposing nuclear energy claiming that radiation would kill millions in the event of a meltdown. This simply is not true. Unlike France that reprocesses spent nuclear fuel, President Carter’s decision to not allow reprocessing proved to be very detrimental, requiring repositories for large quantities.

To this day, one of the largest, Yucca Mountain Repository, authorized in 1987, is opposed by Greens. Even so, it was approved in 2002 by Congress, but the funding for its development was terminated by the Obama administration in 2011. Today there are only four new nuclear power plants under construction and, in time, all one hundred existing plants will likely be retired starting in the mid-2030s.

The Greens’ attack on coal is based on claims that air quality must be protected, but today’s air quality has been steadily improving for years and new technologies have reduced emissions without the need to impose impossible regulatory standards. As the American Petroleum Institute recently noted, “These standards are not justified from a health perspective because the science is simply not showing a need to reduce ozone levels.”

The new EPA standards are expected to be announced in December. We better hope that the November midterm elections put enough new candidates into Congress to reject those standards or the cost of living in America, the capacity to produce electricity, the construction and expansion of our manufacturing sector will all worsen, putting America on a path to decline.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Alan Caruba’s commentaries are posted daily at Warning Signs, and shared on dozens of news and opinion websites. His blog recently passed more than 3.1 million page views.

If you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books It is ideal for anyone who loves to read, reporting on many new fiction and non-fiction titles.

For information on his professional skills, is the place.


21 thoughts on “Greens are the Enemies of Energy”

  1. Alan Caruba is an optimist.

    It is worse than Alan Caruba thinks.

    All of the Coal plants that are going to keep running will have to be up-graded to meet the new standards. The upgrade takes 18 months and the EPA gave industry a three year window to do the upgrade. This means AT LEAST 1/3, more likely 1/2 of the remainder of the coal plants will be shut for 3 years. link

    Then comes Nuclear. Several U.S. Nuclear Plants Retiring Early; Others at Risk ‘…Nuclear energy currently generates 19 percent of our nation’s electricity. If all 38 units at risk were prematurely retired, about one-third of our nuclear fleet would be shut down…” That is another ~6%

    And then there is Hydro. The Greenies are removing dams and the Wild Rivers law makes any new dams very unlikely. That is another couple percent (sorry lost the link)

    Congress passed a resolution of producing 25% of our power from ‘renewables’ from our “farms and forests” by 2025, a short 12 years from now. The EPA has a regulation that is shutting down 10% or more of our coal capacity or about 5% of our electric. Texas has ~ 12% wind power and CenterPoint Energy is now planning to use ‘Smart Meters’ to preferentially shutdown residential electric during rolling blackout to deal with the problems reliance on ‘renewables’ is causing.

    The market-clearing price for new 2015 electric capacity went from a price of just $16 per megawatt in 2012, to a high of $357 per megawatt for Ohio. For the people in Ohio this is the same as shutting down their electricity because they are losing one third of their coal plants 30 coal-fired power plants in Ohio threatened. ( The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity predicts a total of 204 closings will be spread across 25 states.) Who can afford to go from $160/month to $1,000/month and eventually $3500/month in today’s economy?

    Coal fuels 78 percent of Ohio’s electric generation and Ohio ranks third in manufacturing employment. Ohio had 119 coal-fired generating units at 35 locations, with 23,825 MW of capacity so if 6,600 megawatts of electric generating capacity were to be shut down by the EPA it would be about one third.

    Here is a Graph: Forecast Price of Residental Energy 1996 to 2031 As those costs are rising causing the price of everything to also rise, American wages are declining.

    And if you think you can use a wood stove to heat your home think again.

    The new EPA rules on wood would reduce the maximum airborne particulate emissions for new wood-burning stoves to 4.5 grams per hour initially, and after 5 years, further reduce the level to 1.3 grams, (an 80 percent reduction). It will add between $300 and $500 to the cost of a new stove to achieve the targets. Many people who burn wood to save money will not be able to afford this cost increase. According to Reg Kelly, founder of Earth Outdoor Furnaces, “There’s not a stove in the United States that can pass the test right now. This is the death knell of wood burning.”

    …These standards come on top of previously released EPA regulations where EPA reduced allowable particles in the air from 15 micrograms per cubic meter to 12 micrograms. To put this in perspective, a lighted cigarette in a closed automobile releases 3,000 to 4,000 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter. According to the Washington Times, “The rule isn’t about improving actual air quality, but about Washington asserting control over what sort of businesses can operate and what sort of products Americans can buy.”


    They really do want to kill of the ‘Useless eaters,’ the poor and the elderly the way the UK is at a rate of 30,000/year or 0.05% a year and that does not include the 1316 deaths last year from thirst and starvation in Uk hospitals. (It is called the Liverpool Care Pathway)


    This post fails to include a major contributor to current electric power production (ex Green Peace, Patrick Moore says 20%). This source is also the cheapest and the most environmentally friendly …. hydro electric power. Be it provided at the smallest scale or mega enormous scale.

  3. Quick cure for these people is to cut their energy allotment in half by throttling it at the meter and charging/billing them two and half times more for the amount of usage. Them first and lets see how much they complain for the same thing they want to do to us.

    I their minds my remedy’s will be truly worse than the disease.

  4. When you consider that converting from incandescent technology to LED reduces the Watt hour consumption by some 85%, I imagine the reasoning is simple. Decimate the coal fired plants, force consumers to dump incandescent lighting , and the impact to the grid for eliminating 25% of the available ampacity on the grid should be offset by the savings in Watt hour consumption realized by switching to LED. Genius when put on paper. Remember to realize these savings you need to convert to 100%LED. A couple 100Watt conventional bulbs left in service will ruin the math. I calculated a >$600.00/yr savings on my electric bill by switching to all LED. And my saving have been tracking as calculated. My up front conversion costs were about $300.00.

    Now back to planning with myopia. With all the new electric vehicle and plug in hybrids coming on line. Where’s all the new capacity planned to serve that new demand? And while e vehicles are so much more efficient than petroleum vehicles (supposedly) . Let’s not forget that battery charging (80-90%efficient) “and the electronics and motors in the vehicles are running about 25% efficient. So net net, you’re getting one Watt of energy producing work for every three Watts taken from the grid…. Last time I checked typical commuters charge there cell phones and cars overnight, when the Sun is down. Storing photovoltaic energy in batteries to charge your car at night is a possible solution,but again at the cost of energy conversion losses and $$$ invested in an off grid system to do this.

    So yes electricity is going to get very expensive. How’s that $4.00 a gallon gasoline looking now?

    In closing lets also not forget the conversion losses of getting all that electric energy created and put onto the grid in the first place. I imagine I’d get better energy conversion out of a gallon of LNG in a gasoline converted vehicle, than say the equivalent work to covert an equal amount of LNG to electricity on the grid(conversion loss), transport over the grid (impedance loss), charging(more loss), out of an e vehicle. You get the picture…

  5. You know when you consider a coal fired car (Stanley Steamer) vs an electric vehicle charged with coal fired electricity. It’s obvious that coal is still a very viable source of energy. These people are looking at this all wrong . LOL.

  6. Australians have many idiot and uninformed politicians just like you do in America and they try to convince us that having emission trading schemes, carbon taxes, renewable energy targets, and the like will help the poor in our communities and those in poorer countries. Australia presently makes billions of dollars yearly selling coal and gas to countries like Japan and Korea (and others) and this helps to maintain our standard of living. Hopefully our current Prime Minister will not waiver in trying to terminate our existing renewable energy targets. Unfortunately your EPA seems to be a law unto themselves.

  7. grab the incandescents while you can,
    the damned approved…tube ones are crap dont last that long and pretty near send you blind trying to see to read or do any fine work!
    pretty stupid..the enviro nutters now enforce a globe that not only doesnt work very well, it uses HEAPS more energy plastic and minerals etc to produce ie circuit board n components.
    opposed to recyclable wafer thin glass small metal component and hair thin tungsten. incandescents also dont tend to catch on fire the new ones DO.
    we have just had yet another solar excresence here in aus shut down before it got up n running
    WE taxpayers funded a good part of that..we lose again.meanwhile good productive farm land got subverted for the scam.

  8. Actually it is getting greener out there according to NASA. However that’s not the green the Greenies are interested in. The green they’re talking about, that green is the green Billionaires stuff into their bank accounts.

  9. “What would you call a radical organization that threatens to shut down 25% of our electric grid?

    Environmental terrorists: A terrorist sub-faction working for the NWO/JWO terrorists.

  10. Wind and solar energy is a pipe dream. Besides being costly and inefficient, they are bird and bat killers. I read an article just this morning about people who work at the large solar facilities calling the birds that fly over them streamers. That is in reference catching on fire as they fly over. I read another article in National Geographic a few years ago on the number of birds and bats killed at wind turbines. The number was 100 birds and bats per wind turbine per year. They may be green but they have me seeing red. In a country with as bountiful coal and natural gas reserves as we have, this is a travesty.

  11. There was an article today regarding a giant solar project in California that produces “streamers” otherwise known as flying burning birds – several per day – and is interfering with pilots vision due to the glare. Clean but not so “green.” I guess our flying friends are in for problems due to wind and solar power.

  12. “Greenism” has become a pseudo-religion, a set of beliefs based on feelings and faith, not science.

    That said, however, it is perfectly rational to clean up the environment as we can, we all want clean air and water.

    That said, the cleanest and safest known source of large-scale energy is nuclear, and the Greens, out of ignorance and unreason, are adamantly opposed to it.

    Most of them.


    The rational people who understand the issues here have spent the last thirty years doing a PERFECTLY DISMAL job of explaining them to the nation.

    Why hasn’t anyone produced a movie in answer to Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” – say, “The Greatest Hoax of All Time!”

    That’s a title that could get some box.

    In the last few years I’ve asked a few dozen people, in conversation, to estimate the CO2 content of the atmosphere. The estimates have ranged from 4% to 50%. Nobody came close.

    It’s 0.04%.

    But if nobody is getting the truth out there, we’re stuck with a mass of misinformed voters.

    Ice Age Now is a good start, but I’ll guess it reaches less than 1% of the voters, most of whom have never heard of it.

  13. Even the Republican Party, and some of the Republican members of Congress understand the hoax, has done a totally incompetent job of educating the voters about the truth of CO2 and the global warming hoax.

  14. “Decimate the coal fired plants, force consumers to dump incandescent lighting , and the impact to the grid for eliminating 25% of the available ampacity on the grid should be offset by the savings in Watt hour consumption realized by switching to LED.”

    That’s BS since the total electricity budget for incandescent lightning only took 3%. Replacing incandescent by LED does bring an 85% in savings but it’s 85% from the 3% budget. Total BS if you ask me.

    In the mean time our overlords continue to dream about millions of battery powered cars all charged by the grid.

    We already have millions of families in the West who have to make a choice between paying their electricity bill or a good meal.

    The eco agenda of the West is aimed to bring down Western civilization and destroy the Middle Class.

    Now stand up and do your civil duty.

    Bring down the House.

    • LOL, I’m just giving you the glimpse into the logic that these people are using in planning and thinking in ways that dont make sense. (I really did save with the LED converaion though). In the bigger picture I would encourage everyone think about how they are going to secure their energy security. We are all being forced to go “green” at the tremedoua cost to the consumer, and profit for the folks promulgating this legislation and their facilitators/handlers. Start by getting off your chairs and voting all incumbents out of office. Party affiliation is meaningless these days.

  15. With many people worried about a CME form the sun hitting earth and knocking out power for years, or a EMP attack happening, how can they say nuclear power is better, and safer than coal?

Comments are closed.