It has been advanced in conservative quarters that the argument over manmade global warming is lost; that the majority of the country accepts that it’s happening, and therefore we conservatives should abandon the efforts to argue the premise and persuade people that they’re being lied to and that they’re being hoaxed. So we gotta accept the premise because they do, and then come up with better solutions.
Here’s the problem with that, on this issue and a whole lot of others, but specifically to this issue. What, of all of the tenets of the hoax of manmade global warming, is the number-one culprit?
Fossil fuels. Oil!
Specifically oil, and then consulting from that, “the carbon footprint” — and then, of course, after that, then who uses more than everybody else?
Us! So the United States is third or fourth on the primary problem but in order to blame the US you have to first find something else to blame, and in this case it’s oil. Fossil fuels.
If you doubt me — ask yourself a question:
“Why is everybody running around with these, maybe well-intentioned, but utterly misguided efforts to replace oil with what are the equivalent of rubber bands?“
Hybrid cars, windmills, biofuels.
It’s time for a little dose of reality!
The fuel of the engine of economic growth and freedom worldwide, is oil!
And it will remain so for as far into the future as you can imagine. Brazil. Huge oil field found off Brazil. Mexico, ditto. The Chinese are drilling off the coast of Cuba with the Cubans. We can’t.
“But, there’s a security problem. We can’t depend on so much foreign oil.”
Okay. There is a little security issue here, but I think even that is being hyped.
Of the oil we import, how much we get from the Middle East? Thirty-three percent. The vast majority of our imported oil comes from friends. It comes from Canada, comes from Mexico. Now, I think all of government is hyping the security issue because energy companies want it hyped because energy companies think that there’s money in going green, because, so many Americans have bought into it.
So they manufacture a product, a car, whatever, and it’s energy efficient. “Wow, this company cares! I love this company. I want to buy this product.” Yipee… Of course, what big-time contributors want they usually get from the lobbyists and elected officials in Washington. Despite the pipe dreams, ours is a world that runs on oil. It always will.
“The coal plants are polluting the skies! They’re destroying the country. They’re destroying the world. We gotta eliminate coal.”
Fine. There’s one way to eliminate coal: nuclear power plants.
“We can’t go nuclear! Did you see The China Syndrome?”
Right. We’re not going to go nuclear because of a Jane Fonda movie! The very people demanding that we go independent are denying our right and ability to do it — the environmentalist and the Democrat Party.
Not only do we import 65% of our oil, do you know that we import 13% of our refined gasoline now? Thirteen percentage of all gasoline is imported, because we don’t have the refining capacity to handle it ourselves. Security, anybody? No new refineries in 30 years? We can’t drill in the Gulf. The Chinese and the Cubans can. The Mexicans can. The Brazilians can, but we can’t.
We can’t drill in a truly desolate, moonscape place like ANWR because of the environmentalists.
So our security issues, folks, are self-imposed. But our security issues do not result from our use of too much energy. We are a growth people. We are a growth economy. The American people expect it, otherwise they wouldn’t panic over recessions. They expect us to grow. They expect this economy to continue to provide higher wages, better products, and more opportunity.
The world demands this. The world demands that we lead economically.
Look at the stock markets last week around the world. When we were closed, they tanked. It wasn’t ’til our Federal Reserve got into gear with some fixes here on the interest rates and everything got stabilized. We are the economic stability of the entire world!
We need more energy, not less — and, sorry, folks: biofuels, windmills, hybrid cars, new lightbulbs, are a drop in the ocean. Those are all conservation oriented, and that’s fine, but that doesn’t create growth.
And that, folks, is why I cannot accept the premise of global warming based on a hoax and based on false promises as well, and yet propose better solutions. The one solution, the primary solution the hoaxers are proposing is to eliminate oil and fossil fuels.
Well, it’s not possible. It isn’t going to happen.
And if it did, your life and mine would cease to exist as we know it. We simply cannot grow; we simply cannot live; we simply cannot exist; we simply cannot advance as we have been.
Folks, go back and look at the twentieth century. The twentieth century, compared to all the previous centuries of mankind, it’s not comparable the advance, the inventions, the technology, phone, airplane, the jet engine, space travel, computers, the list is so long. I couldn’t list them even if I could remember them all. You go back to the nineteenth century and look at the progress, the eighteenth, diddly-squat. What do you think one of the key elements was?
Discovery of oil might have anything to do with it, ladies and gentlemen? The invention of the automobile might have anything to do with it?
Now they want us to go back to the horse-and-buggy days with horse manure in the streets. The point is that people are being lied to and led down the primrose path on a hoax. And you add to this what I just said about these people who think that we in the United States are the problem.
We have too much energy, we steal too much of the world’s energy, and we oppress people around the world, and that’s instability. Our power makes the Chinese want to have nukes, and the Iranians want to have nukes. “We need to resource our power. We’re causing the biggest threat in the face of the history of the earth.”
The oppressed people of the world want to get here. The people who live here want an improved quality of life every year. You know how I know this? I know this because I see it.
I don’t search for the deeper meaning of reality. Reality is enough for me. You start searching for the deeper meaning of reality and you’re going to end up such a head case.
We need growth — economic, political, energetic — all these things to provide the opportunity that America has always provided. This growth is led and must continue to be led by energy production and creation. Not until we found something better than oil at what it does should we get rid of it. Would you get rid of your current Lexus or your Cadillac for a 1930s Packard? Would you get rid of it for a Model T as your primary car?
The free flow of oil, not ethanol, the free flow of oil, not windmills, the free flow of oil, not solar panels, the free flow of oil at market prices is the fuel of the engine of freedom and democracy. The next time you’re at a sporting event and there’s a flyby of military jets at about 500 feet above where you’re sitting, when you hear that roar go by and you look up and you see what’s producing that roar, understand that oil is producing that roar, refined as kerosene, Jet A, American ingenuity in inventing the jet plane and all that, but understand that the noise you hear in that flyby is the sound of your freedom.
Story: “Five Myths About Energy Independence.” It’s from the Washington Post on January 23rd. It’s an op-ed piece. It’s by Robert Bryce, and he is a fellow at the Institute for Energy Research.
He is the author of the forthcoming Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Energy Independence. Here are the five myths that he tackles.
“Energy independence will reduce or eliminate terrorism.” False.
“A big push for alternative fuels will break our oil addiction.” False.
Illustration — “The new energy bill requires that the country produce 36 billion gallons of biofuels per year by 2022. That sounds like a lot of fuel, but put it in perspective: The United States uses more than 320 billion gallons of oil per year, of which nearly 200 billion gallons are imported,” and they think 36 billion gallons of biofuels measured against 320 billion gallons of oil by the year 2022 is going to make a bit of difference. It won’t. So what’s the better idea than biofuels fuels if that’s the best idea that’s out there. And, by the way, what’s that doing to agricultural prices and the topsoil and so forth?
Myth number three: “Energy independence will let America choke off the flow of money to nasty countries.” False.
Myth four: “Energy independence will mean reform in the Muslim world.” False.
Number five: “Energy independence will mean a more secure US energy supply.” False.
“Think back to 2005. After hurricanes ravaged the Gulf Coast, chewing up refineries as they went, several cities in the southeastern United States were hit with gasoline shortages. Thankfully, they were short-lived. The reason? Imported gasoline, from refineries in Venezuela, the Netherlands and elsewhere.”
Global economy. Think global.
If you think that getting rid of fossil fuels is the way to save the planet… Yeah, well, go back to Oklahoma when they lost power for a week, subzero temperatures, subfreezing, ask them how they liked having no oil. That’s what it would be like…