Tag: Fossil Fuels

Kevin Book, Managing Director at ClearView Energy Partners, joined “Plugged In” host Neil Chatterjee to help explain how sanctions on Russian oil — and potentially gas — amid the Ukraine war affect the United States’ efforts to transition to cleaner energy and domestic production.

Book, who is a member of both the Council on Foreign Relations and the National Petroleum Council, shared his insight on energy security and what it will take for renewable resources and LNGs to really take off on American soil. While he said it is possible somewhere down the line to diverge from fossil fuels, industry and government need more pragmatism in their goals.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, Republican of Louisiana, joins “Plugged In” hosts Josh Siegel and Neil Chatterjee to discuss rising energy prices, his leadership over the bipartisan infrastructure law, and climate policy.

Cassidy pushes back against Democratic calls to curb U.S. oil and natural gas exports to combat high energy prices at home, and accuses the Biden administration of inconsistency for pleading for more production at the same time they want to reduce the economy’s dependence on fossil fuels over time.

Join Jim and Greg as they enjoy watching Terry McAuliffe make mistake after mistake in the homestretch of the Virginia governor’s race. They also welcome a Wall Street Journal report on the simple reality that only fossil fuels can meet our energy needs in terms of abundance and cost but fume that Democrats insist on pursuing policies that are not realistic and are sending prices much higher. And they they wince as reports suggest Democrats appear to be closing in on a consensus for a $2 trillion spending binge on far left priorities.


Environmental Extremists Don’t Believe Their Own Predictions


In public discourse, it’s considered bad form to insult your opponent’s integrity. But it’s almost impossible to believe that climate alarmists believe their own apocalyptic predictions.

Greta Thunberg, Al Gore, and other experts sternly warned that our planet will be an uninhabitable, unsalvageable oven unless within 15 years (now 10 or 12) we bend all human activity to the goal of eliminating carbon emissions. If true, this creates an obvious moral imperative.

So on his first day in office, President Biden terminated the extension of the Keystone pipeline, created to export shale oil from Alberta to the US. It was, uh, controversial.

Abundant, Limited Resources


This article by Spencer Jakab at the Wall Street Journal leaves me unsure of whether to laugh or rant. I agree with Jakab that the regular burning of unprofitable natural gas at some oil wells is a problem, but for different reasons. First, an introduction:

Even as more and more gas gets supercooled and shipped around the world in expensive, liquefied form, an estimated 5.1 trillion cubic feet of gas was flared world-wide in 2018, according to The World Bank—equivalent to the combined consumption of France, Germany and Belgium.

Member Post


http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190905-how-localisation-can-solve-climate-change Wow, so while we were fearing that the globalists will push their way forward with use of climate change, the agenda just got turned inside out (although it may take politicians awhile to refocus their efforts). Of course only a world government could possibly enforce this. Bonus: it could even fit right in with […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Hidden Costs of Renewable Fuels


I received an email from my alma mater, Brown University, which linked to this story:

A new Brown initiative with Constellation and Energy Development Partners will transform a former gravel pit in North Kingstown into Rhode Island’s highest-capacity contiguous solar generation project.

Recorded on October 6, 2017
A new administration means a new approach to federal energy approach, in the case of Donald Trump’s presidency, a new look at nuclear energy. Hoover research fellow Jeremy Carl, coauthor of Keeping the Lights on at America’s Nuclear Power Plants, examines the choices available to Trump on clean, green, and fossil energies.

Member Post


A few questions, only loosely related: Do we still rely on Middle Eastern nations to produce oil and natural gas? The US now has access to plenty without them. Also, the region has been in turmoil for years and yet I’m paying less than $2 per gallon, so even their impact on the world market doesn’t […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Energetic Advocates Needed


Some months back, I wrote about the Environmental Kuznets Curve, which posits that, as societies become richer, their citizens can afford the luxury of caring about the environment in ways they currently cannot. I suggested that some of this preference could be expressed through government regulation or taxes on dirtier forms of energy, though said I would oppose these in favor of market-driven means.

Clinton’s Solar Panel Plan Leaves America in the Dark


hillary solar panel

On Hillary Clinton’s campaign website, she calls for the creation of 500 million new solar panels to “power every home in America.” Voicing a strong preference for solar may win over the hearts of some environmentally conscious voters, but it should not win over their minds. A proposal to comprehensively retool the nation’s energy systems to solar power ignores a couple of very basic, yet critically important, complications.

First, every home in America is already powered. The country does not need to undergo a massive, redundant, and expensive overhaul to duplicate what has already been accomplished. Second and more importantly, this plan, if you can call it that, hinges on a physical impossibility. Solar panels cannot power homes. At least not in any way people in the industrialized world would consider acceptable. Solar power is unreliable, intermittent, and inflexible. This means solar panels are intrinsically incapable of handling the country’s home energy needs.

How Green Was My Fracking


turbine_county_fracking_county_scrIn The Telegraph, Christopher Booker points out that being Green means you are willfully murdering wildlife:

When Professor David MacKay stepped down as chief scientific adviser to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) last year, he produced a report comparing the environmental impact of a fracking site to that of wind farms. Over 25 years, he calculated, a single “shale gas pad” covering five acres, with a drilling rig 85ft high (only needed for less than a year), would produce as much energy as 87 giant wind turbines, covering 5.6 square miles and visible up to 20 miles away. Yet, to the greenies, the first of these, capable of producing energy whenever needed, without a penny of subsidy, is anathema; while the second, producing electricity very unreliably in return for millions of pounds in subsidies, fills them with rapture.

Environmental Imperialism


shutterstock_146843426The western Left has determined that people around the world must severely restrict their use of fossil fuels. Doing so would condemn billions of people to endless poverty. The “free” biomass fuels — wood, peat, and animal dung — that impoverished people in developing countries are forced to use exact terrible costs: the destruction of whole forests and jungles, loss of habitat and the attendant loss of flora and fauna, and respiratory problems and shortened lives from breathing smoke and fumes. As economist Deepak Lal stated in Poverty and Progress:

The greatest threat to the alleviation of the structural poverty of the Third World is the continuing campaign by western governments, egged on by some climate scientists and green activists, to curb greenhouse emissions… To put a limit on the use of fossil fuels without adequate economically viable alternatives is to condemn the Third World to perpetual structural poverty.

These “Green Imperialists” as Lal has called them, would deny billions of people the energy that has pulled the West out of poverty and that is essential to providing clean air and water, adequate lighting, communications, computer services, and life-saving medical care.

Fuel For Humanity


The modern environmental movement is guilty of a great many sins — alarmism, data-fudging, it’s knee-jerk embrace of socialism — but the clear winner is its indifference to human well-being. Occasionally, this manifests itself in open misanthropy, complete with comparisons of humans to locusts who decided to ditch their usual standards of social responsibility and just live in the moment. More often, however, it’s simply a matter of ignorance combined with selfishness: fossil fuels hurt the earth; using them makes me feel bad; therefore, we should try to use less of them ourselves and force others to do the same.

Even if fossil fuels are less-dangerous than advertised — as seems to be the case — this ignores the other half of the the ledger: what are the benefits of using hydrocarbon fuels? Only after examining that can one arrive at an informed opinion.