Share

Policy: Environment & Energy

Stop the Big Green mind-killer

By |
Opinion,Ron Arnold,Columnists,EPA,Energy and Environment,Coal,Natural Gas

“Fear is the mind-killer,” wrote Frank Herbert in his 1965 science fiction epic, Dune. With that melodramatic mantra as a guide, we can see how ugly, malicious and wrong the Big Green climate mafia is: It's making dead minds.

Dead minds don't ask, “If we give in to your fear and stop using fossil fuels, how will we meet our energy needs of today and tomorrow?”

Live minds do ask such questions and climate bigots don't like that. Thus skepticism becomes a civic duty to challenge everything dogmatists say and do.

Climate science is crumbling daily. In May, the Wall Street Journal ran an op-ed exposing the claim that “97 percent of the world's scientists” agree that climate change is both man-made and dangerous. It originated in a 2009 survey two researchers sent to 10,257 scientists. Only 3,146 responded, the researchers tossed out 3,069 replies, selected only 77 favorable answers - and 75 finalists agreed totally. That's “97 percent.” You judge.

Hotshot environmentalists including billionaire Tom Steyer, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Al Gore, and the Sierra Club claim that America can easily switch from fossil fuels to renewables, but don't say how. Bill McKibben, anti-carbon campaigner, says, “making the transition to 100-percent renewable energy is a political decision and an ethical imperative - the technical options do exist.”

No they don't.

The Paris-based International Energy Agency says so. The IEA is no panic peddler like McKibben's mob, with their glib pie-in-the-sky assertions and no responsibility for what they say. The IEA was created in the wake of the 1973 oil crisis to cope with physical disruptions in the oil supply, now a 28-nation energy supply regulator assuring global oil stock levels. The IEA calculates that today's 82 percent share of fossil fuels in the global mix - even with huge increases in renewable energy - will still make up around 75 percent by 2035, more than 20 years hence.

There are no technical options, only ways to stop economic growth, which is the specialty of hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer (estimated net worth $1.6 billion), Big Green's latest new action leader.

Steyer created Risky Business, an initiative to destroy the fossil fuel industry, and recruited co-chairs Michael Bloomberg, former New York City mayor ($32.8 billion), and Hank Paulson, former U.S. Treasury Secretary ($700 million), for his power elite.

The initiative's culmination was the Risky Business report released Tuesday, a mind-killer designed to scare money away from fossil fuel investments with estimated ranges of the potential costs of climate change for property, insurance, energy demand and agricultural production.

How will we meet our energy needs of today and tomorrow? The Steyer/Bloomberg/Paulson report does not offer solutions. Like all climate change gospel, the report is just an exercise in fortune-telling with a lot of footnotes. The fearful need only recall that a billionaire's crystal ball is no better than yours.

Big Green's mind-killer campaign was boosted in early June by President Obama's commencement address to University of California-Irvine graduates - it was actually an election campaign speech to fire up Democratic votes by degrading Republican climate skeptics with odious slurs (“deniers”).

Tellingly, two-faced Obama went straight from his anti-fossil fuel speech to a closed-door Democratic National Committee fundraiser at the Laguna Beach home of Getty oil heiress Anne Earhart, whose fossil fuel-drenched Marisla Foundation gives $1 million every year to John Podesta's Democratic Party holding-tank, the Center for American Progress.

It's no surprise that about the time of his speech, a Gallup poll found only 29 percent of respondents with “a great deal / quite a lot” of confidence in Obama.

Remember, Obama promised during his 2008 election campaign to bankrupt the coal industry, and his Environmental Protection Agency is keeping that promise with a proposed anti-coal carbon emission rule.

Obama now talks like he's had too much McKibben-Steyer Kool-Aid, but if you read the EPA announcement of the rule by his own employee, agency head Gina McCarthy, you will find a stunning moment of clarity in the schizophrenia. In the midst of wildly exaggerated benefits and strategically contrived evils, there appears: “We know that coal and natural gas play a significant role in a diverse national energy mix.”

Alas, in the next sentence the light fades back into bureaucratic night.

Things are slowly changing. Obama's EPA rule will be in court for years, encouraged by the Supreme Court's Monday decision that partially struck down EPA overreach.

And there's political pushback: Sen. David Vitter, R-La., told a Senate subcommittee, “The burden of proof lies with the administration and its allies to provide the specifics as to how we can power our future with wind, waves and solar -- and how we can do it, as they claim we can, quickly and without any cost to the consumer or the broader economy.”

New voices are also rising. Kathleen Hartnett White, former Texas environmental regulator, has written a guide for living minds, “Fossil fuels: the moral case.” Access to oil, gas and coal, White says, are inextricably linked with prosperity and human well-being, but policies to replace those fossil fuels with inferior and unreliable energy sources could undermine all civilization.

Now a senior fellow of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, White wrote, “Would voters choose an energy regression to less productive, efficient, comfortable, and healthy living standards? Multiple polls say no way! For the wealthy elites who make policy decisions - 'the ruling class,' it appears to be another story.”

Time to end that other story. It's beginning to stumble over its own faked, politicized climate science and its elites are teetering on the abyss of their own arrogance. Time to stop the Big Green mind-killer.

RON ARNOLD, a Washington Examiner columnist, is executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.
View article comments Leave a comment

More from washingtonexaminer.com