Flash, thanks for pointing out the WSJ article (Sierra Club plans to attack nat gas)
The green lobby picks its next fossil fuel target.
<<The big green lobbying machine has rolled out a new website that says "The natural gas industry is dirty, dangerous and running amok" and that "The closer we look at natural gas, the dirtier it appears; and the less of it we burn, the better off we will be." So the goal is to shut the industry down, not merely to impose higher safety standards. The battle plan is called "Beyond Natural Gas," and Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune announced the goal in an interview with the National Journal this month: "We're going to be preventing new gas plants from being built wherever we can.">>
My comment: So the left wants to demonize coal and natural gas. That leaves only nuclear in the foreseeable future for electrical power generation. Weird that they would support what they demonized in the previous forty years. And this shift after the nuclear accident in Japan? This reflects the Obama's strategic plan to move the US to essentially entirely nuclear power (eliminating fossil fuels entirely) and mandating (through EPA powers) an entirely electric surface fuel (except for large trucks which will continue to require fossil fuels). Interesting that Pickens was surprised in his discussion with the newly elected President Obama to discover that the new president did not realize 18-wheelers could not be powered by electric motors.
Flash, I sure enjoy reading your efforts to debate liberals.
However,trying to debate liberals with facts is a waste of
time as liberals are blinded by ideology.
Liberalism is not only a desease, it's a childhood psychiatric disorder.
Thanks for your attempts to change their hearts and minds,but forgetaboutit
Bcz wrote: <<So the left wants to demonize coal and natural gas. That leaves only nuclear in the foreseeable future for electrical power generation. Weird that they would support what they demonized in the previous forty years.>>
Bcz, Thank you for your comments. I believe the leftists' agenda is more about promoting renewable fuels such as wind, solar and biofuels, than it is about promoting the massive use of nuclear power. Imho, their plan is for the Department of Energy and EPA to gain control over the production and use of natural gas from individual states, and then to gradually drive up the price of natural gas through regulation and taxes to a point where renewable energy, wind, solar and biofuels becomes a more cost competitive alternative, as well as to mandate more use of renewable energy and to put limitations, "caps", on the use of fossil fuel energy. The EPA is currently scheduled to come out with a new study on fracking, with that study being conducted to arrive at the pre-determined conclusion that Federal control over fracking is necessary rather than state control --- imho.
Thomas Friedman, a prominent columnist at the New York Times, laid out this plan again in a column at the New York Times just yesterday. (See link below.) Lest somebody ask me, "Well what does Thomas Friedman have to do with Obama?", I would remind people that Thomas Friedman recently presided over an energy conference where former EPA chief and former Obama Energy Czar, Carol Browner, attended, and she wholeheartedly endorsed this plan. In fact, Friedman and Browner went a step further at the energy conference and concluded that once the Feds have control of fracking, the Feds should next only allow ongoing fracking in exchange for the natural gas industry's support for mandates for the use of renewable energy and in exchange for taxes on carbon. That is coercive, economic blackmail. I would also remind people that current Obama Department of Energy head, Stephen Chu, was on record before taking the Energy job, saying that the Federal government needs to drive up the price of fossil fuels to the prices in Europe, which is more than double, to make renewable energy more cost competitive. And finally, the Obama administration did everything it could to ram through a cap and tax bill on fossil fuels through Congress early on its Presidency, HR 2454. The White House succeeded in getting the cap and tax plan passed in the Pelosi led house, but they could not get more moderate Democrat Senators (and of course more conservative Republicans) to pass the cap and tax bill in the Senate. Now they are looking to carry out the objectives of the cap and tax plan over time through actions of the executive branch, while going around Congress and the will of the people when possible.
Here is this weekends' Thomas Friedman column in the New York Times below, which I believe lays out the plan that is consistent with the current White House agenda. JMO.
Get It Right On Natural Gas
For those who believe Obama is demonizing energy companies, read the following:
And it was the Republicans who blocked all the nat gas bills in the last couple of years. Majority of Republicans voted against and a majority of Democrats voted in favor.
Get your facts straight you ignorant tea baggers.
“Fossil fuels have no part in America’s energy future – coal, oil, and natural gas are literally poisoning us. The emergence of natural gas as a significant part of our energy mix is particularly frightening because it dangerously postpones investment in clean energy at a time when we should be doubling down on wind, solar and energy efficiency.”
—Robin Mann, Sierra Club President
Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) to overseas markets is a dirty, dangerous practice that lets the industry make a killing at the expense of human health.
"That’s why I’m proud to announce that today the Sierra Club is endorsing President Barack Obama for re-election. The President has demonstrated exceptional leadership in standing up to big polluters, implementing historic mercury protections, and strengthening the clean energy economy.
If President Obama is reelected, he will have a clear mandate to protect Americans' air, water, land and health, creating momentum for progress on the issues we care so deeply about for generations to come. That’s an essential victory for parents like me who want a better, safer and healthy future for our kids -- and an essential victory for all Americans."
blah blah blah
-- Mary Anne Hitt
So which side of his mouth do YOU hear words coming out of?
Gjoo84, Calling people ignorant doesn't help your cause. You and I have been through this discussion before. The partisan Motley Fool piece, just like President Obama, is erroneously trying to take credit for energy produced on private and state lands (most of the Bakken oil is produced on private lands), and in addition, the statistics make no differentiation for increases in oil and natural gas production resulting from leases and permits granted by the Bush administration versus the leases and permits granted by the Obama administration. The Obama administration has been slow walking leasing and permitting on Federal lands and waters.
Rather than you and I spend a lot of time rehashing arguments, I suggest that anyone seriously interested check our points from mid June made in the "Diesel Exhaust Linked to Cancer" thread here:
I actually had one of these green libtards tell me that fracking for nat gas was bad because it produced more methane, which is a greenhouse gas.
He didn't understand that methane is natural gas and that is the entire point of fracking....to produce more gas. And he votes.
I am not a member,or supporter of the Sierra Club.
Of the 15 board members,I do not see Pres.Obama's name on that list,so how does he control ANY of their policies.You made a statement not based on fact,but want the general public to believe you.
Pres. Obama has stated he supports all alternative energy sources,including NG,SOLAR,and WIND.
He stated so,while standing in front of a CLNE fueling Station.