PrintDo Democrats have any comprehension of how intentionally destructive their energy policies are? Do they care?
There are all kinds of nonsense going on now over the issue of global warming that Democrats fawn over. It's an unscientific theory that has gripped big-money Democrats and their media allies for decades, and what they are trying to do is force this non-science into every area of society — destructively so.
Let's take airports to start. Here are some headlines:
$1 billion from infrastructure law to boost 85 airports, Biden administration says
Why are we spending so much on airports since we are supposedly going to soon stop using fossil fuels, and we won't have many battery-operated plane in the greenie future?
The airports certainly won't be very crowded.
There is also this:
Why are we building a new Air Force One, with its huge carbon footprint, since we will no longer use oil in a few years and it will be worthless?
Here are some questions for Biden, Harris, Kerry, AOC, Pelosi, and Schumer:
How will we get all the solar panels and rare Earth minerals for batteries from China without ships and planes powered by oil?
Won't we have trouble building all the roads without asphalt? Where are the electric road graders and other equipment?
What type of tires will go on all the electric cars, trucks, and bicycles since we won't have rubber?
How will we fight wars against China, Russia, Iran, and other adversaries without machines powered by oil, since they won't give theirs up? Won't we lose? Are Democrats so naïve that they believe that Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and other oil-producing countries care about their carbon footprint and will destroy their economies to pretend they can reduce temperatures by a degree or two?
Where will we put the junk from all the worthless gas-powered machines?
Do the poor and middle class have the money required to junk all their gas-powered stuff and replace it with battery-operated machines, if they exist?
Meanwhile, we don't have enough lithium, and the price is surging.
Lithium prices have surged a staggering 438% above last year. The increase comes as the amount of the metal used has almost quadrupled over the last decade.
Why are Democrats promoting the highly flammable pollutant lithium while seeking to control CO2, a clear, innocuous, non-pollutant gas that makes plants thrive and allows the world to be fed? There are also no statistical data to prove that it causes warming.
Study finds that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant
At this point, there is no statistically valid proof that past increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations have caused the officially reported rising, even claimed record setting temperatures.
How many farmers will go broke when their gas-powered machines won't run and when they can't afford to replace them? How many rural banks will go broke if their equipment collateral becomes worthless?
The other day, AOC, in protest of Roe v. Wade, was getting her nails done. About those nails...
Nail Polish is a concoction of petrochemicals and pigments put together for their properties.
I hope she added that to her carbon footprint since nail polish is derived from oil. Anyone who believes that getting her nails done is a form of protest might believe that the nail polish fairy provides the nail polish.
How many of the 6,000 products derived from crude oil have the Democrats prepared to replace? Wind turbines and solar panels are derived from crude oil.
When Ford and GM sell big gas-guzzling trucks and then buy carbon credits from a company like Tesla, does that reduce the carbon footprint of the trucks, or are they just pretending?
Why wind power depends on oil and natural gas
What keeps a wind turbine turning?
Yes, it's a trick question.
You need a good breeze, of course — but there's something else that's essential, something that you might not associate with wind power. And that something, would be oil or natural gas. Yep. Wind power depends on the hydrocarbon.
That's because inside those turbines are gears, axles, a generator — all sorts of moving, turning parts — and moving parts need lubrication — and lubrication means oil. Which shouldn't be surprising. Petroleum products are in all sorts of other products, including other sources of energy.
And those moving parts? The windmill blades have been getting longer and longer, which is good for the work of catching the wind — but the only way to make blades like that, is through carbon-reinforced resins made from petrochemicals.
When greenie gurus like John Kerry, Bill Gates, Barack Obama, Michael Bloomberg, Mark Zuckerberg, Al Gore, and other rich people fly in private jets, does it reduce their carbon footprint from the jets when they buy carbon credits and plant trees, or are they just pretending?
Can Democrats give one piece of scientific data that directly links oil and coal usage to temperature changes the last 150 years? Hint: There is none, because we have had periods where the temperature dropped.
The media and other Democrats call themselves progressive, but there is nothing forward-looking about policies that move the country backwards. They should be called the regressive party. They are Luddites.
It is pure arrogance and greed for power when politicians and bureaucrats claim they can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity forever if we just let them destroy our quality of life, destroy tens of millions of jobs, and confiscate trillions more dollars from us. The policies have nothing to do with scientific facts.
Wouldn't it be humorous and sad to see the word salads that came out of Joe's and Kamala's mouths if some journalist ever cared enough to ask real questions about climate change and oil?
Image: Pixabay, Pixabay License.
