Trump Signs Order to Protect Fracking, Fossil Fuel Jobs

“Will you remember that Texas?” The Trump / Biden debate moment when Biden realised he just promised to destroy the jobs of millions of oil workers

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

In the wake of Biden’s promise to abolish the oil industry, President Trump has signed an executive order to protect fracking. But some Biden supporters claim even Pennsylvanians don’t care about fossil fuel jobs.

Inside Clean Energy: Biden’s Oil Industry Comments Were Not a Political Misstep

Republicans thought they could use the Democratic candidate’s remarks to scare voters in states like Texas and Pennsylvania. Surveys suggest they were wrong. 

Dan Gearino
OCT 29, 2020

During the final presidential debate last week, Joe Biden said that he would “transition from the oil industry,” a statement immediately seized on by President Donald Trump and oil industry groups, who treated it as a political gaffe that would harm Biden in Texas, Pennsylvania and other battleground states.

It wasn’t a gaffe. And the reaction showed that Trump and others are out of touch with how public opinion has changed.

Before I get into the numbers that show that, you should know that I have some experience navigating the disconnect between perception and reality in the energy economy. I covered energy for about 10 years for The Columbus Dispatch in Ohio and spent much of that time under the assumption that the coal industry was a vital source of jobs for much of the state.

So I was surprised to learn that the state had fewer than 2,500 coal miners in 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s less than the number of florists, to name one of many examples of industries that have much less clout than coal, despite having more jobs.

This shift in the job market is happening alongside a broader shift in which a majority of the public acknowledges the threat of climate change and supports the transition to clean energy.

Yost found this to be true in his office’s March 2018 Pennsylvania poll, in which 67 percent of respondents said the state should “definitely” or “probably” do more to address the problems associated with climate change.

Read more:

Presiden Trump’s executive order;

Donald Trump Signs Order to Protect Fracking Industry

31 Oct 2020

President Donald Trump on Saturday announced the signing of an executive order to protect both the fracking and oil and gas industries following former Vice President Joe Biden’s pledge to “transition from the oil industry.”

“Just signed an order to protect fracking and the oil and gas industry,” the president wrote on Twitter. “This means JOBS, low energy bills, and continued AMERICAN ENERGY INDEPENDENCE! Sleepy Joe would BAN fracking and destroy American energy jobs! He has NO clue!!”

Read more:

President Trump’s full statement is available here.

I think Inside Climate News author Dan Gearino, and Joe Biden, are making a big mistake.

For starters I don’t trust polling on climate action. The safe course if a stranger calls and asks your opinion on polarised political issues is to agree with the caller. Few pollsters have the communication skills to hide their personal opinion.

Promises of green jobs sound amazing. But until those green jobs appear, they’re just another empty government promise. From September this year;

Payton Wilkins is national director of the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists’ Education Center. The coalition has about 8,000 members and recently endorsed Biden — marking only the third time since being founded in 1972 that it picked a candidate. Even though the coalition is “pretty radical” in supporting climate justice, members get skittish when discussions about compensating displaced workers arise, Wilkins said.

“Some people call it socialism, some call it communism. A lot of people are turned off by the notion of a universal basic income, but want to know what their income will be during a transition [to a cleaner economy],” Wilkins added, noting that Black workers also wrestle with an additional burden: the American stereotype that they are lazy.

“Members understand the link between health and the workplace. But we don’t want to exchange the public health crisis of being exposed to pollution for an economic one where we can’t put food on the table,” he said. …

Read more:

Mining jobs might be down in Pennsylvania, but its a big leap to infer this means people don’t care; nobody wants to see their neighbours, friends and family lose their jobs. A lot of other jobs depend on well paid mining jobs. And nobody wants regular blackouts like California.

If Joe Biden presented a credible and well costed transition plan which didn’t involve massive new public debts, and which provided a clear roadmap demonstrating how people could maintain their standard of living during the great transition, union leaders like Payton Wilkins would probably be more supportive.

But no such plan is possible.

At least President Obama was honest about the horrendous cost of renewable energy.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Leo Smith
November 1, 2020 6:18 am

Sleepy Joe? He’s not sleeping, he’s DEAD. Where’s Buffy when you need her.

comment image

Reply to  Leo Smith
November 1, 2020 6:47 am
Reply to  Leo Smith
November 3, 2020 9:55 am

Buffy slayed vampires — not sure about zombies.

Joseph Zorzin
November 1, 2020 6:50 am

“I have some experience navigating the disconnect between perception and reality in the energy economy. I covered energy for about 10 years for The Columbus Dispatch in Ohio and spent much of that time under the assumption that the coal industry was a vital source of jobs for much of the state.

So I was surprised to learn that the state had fewer than 2,500 coal miners in 2015”

Oh, wow- the Columbus Dispatch! I’m impressed. So, he was wrong in his assumption but now he has a new assumption and he assumes he’s right.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 1, 2020 1:11 pm

Nobody he knows has a job in fossil fuel production and everybody he knows believes in Climate Change. Therefore, obviously nobody cares about fossil fuel jobs anymore. Theoretically there might be some deplorable bitter clingers still left in PA, but they’re negligible. He doesn’t even know one of them!

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 2, 2020 8:29 am

“Dan Gearino OCT 29, 2020

I covered energy for about 10 years for The Columbus Dispatch in Ohio and spent much of that time under the assumption that the coal industry was a vital source of jobs for much of the state.

So I was surprised to learn that the state had fewer than 2,500 coal miners in 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.”

Pure sophistry.
Gearino’s real role is writing shell game articles without admitting there is a pea involved.

In the modern OSHA safe world of coal mining, just how many people with the job title of “miner” did Gearino expect?

Next Gearino will write up the Pennsylvania Nuclear electricity generating industry and about how few “Nuclear Powerplant Operators” are actually employed.

At Gearino’s rate, Pennsylvania can dismiss all of the people occupying unique positions as completely unimportant and unnecessary; e.g. governor, Lieutenant governor, energy reporter at the Columbia Dispatch, etc.

Gearino’s alleged enlightenment rates a Doh!, at best.

I also note that Gearino pretends the downstream coal benefits do not exist. Another Doh! by Gearino.

Steve CASE
November 1, 2020 6:52 am

Liberals really believe that the world economy can be powered by Wind “Turbines” and Solar Panels – they really do. My favorite liberal, a really smart talented guy confirmed that a while ago. There’s nothing you can say when discussing the matter with a true believer, and there are a lot of them.

An off topic aside, comparing the 2012 and 2016 elections, Wisconsin’s population increased by about 50,000 from 2012 to 2016 but there were about 90,000 fewer votes cast in the 2016 election and Wisconsin went for the Republican for the first times since 1984. What changed? Voter ID that’s what changed. Wisconsin didn’t have voter ID in 2012. The Democrats have had four years to figure how to work around that fact – I expect they are up to the job. If you voted early, someone you don’t know will feed your ballot through the scanner or somehow make sure it isn’t counted. Determined people can be very creative.

Reply to  Steve CASE
November 1, 2020 7:01 am

And why not? Plenty of nations outside the backward USA with over 50% renewable electricity.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 7:38 am

Yes many remote villages claim 100% renewable solar panel electricity source, usually donated by NGOs. But to really get things done, their local businessmen rely on Honda generators…..which is unreported.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
November 1, 2020 8:13 am

Count the number of doctors in rural African “hospitals” that spend half their time juggling between electricity for the refrigerator to keep the drugs usable and power to their “operating theatre” to provide light for surgery or power for instrument sterilisation.

As for anything else, forget it! When the standard of care in those hospitals equals the standard you expect and demand, griff, you will have earned the right to an opinion. Till then, shut yo’ f****n’ mouth, man!

Reply to  Newminster
November 1, 2020 9:04 am

Or for a few hours a day for a few days a year in super sunny countries during daytime – but not night – funnily enough.

Or for a few hours a day for a few days a year in windy countries when there is enough (but definitely not too much) wind.

Evidence selected to prop up an invalidated point.

Is this guy just some turkey that is allowed on here for target practice?

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 7:43 am

California in front with rolling blackouts, yeah 😀

Keith Harrison
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 7:46 am

Could you please enumerate and name these countries?

They appear to be well ahead of North America and Europe.

Bryan A
Reply to  Keith Harrison
November 1, 2020 9:14 am

UM…Griff’s F A V O R I T E country of choice for any argument, Germany of course.
Tired olde argument Griff
One day out of 365 when they managed to do it

Reply to  Bryan A
November 3, 2020 9:59 am

Griff’s F A V O R I T E country of choice for any argument, Germany of course.

Is griff a goose-stepper?

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 7:49 am

Discounting hydroelectric power, griff’s statement is true if “plenty” is defined as none.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 8:01 am

Griff are you 100% and off the grid?

Ken Irwin
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 8:13 am

Griff, like I said before – renewable energy = poverty.

When your only fuel is dung – you are one hundred percent renewable.

I suggest you go to Africa and try it Griff.

Reply to  Ken Irwin
November 2, 2020 3:29 pm


I recently saw part of a TV show where some climate warrior was traveling the third-world, and his host was showing him how they use dung to cook. He was excited and impressed about how sustainable this was, and that it was great for the environment.

That’s the mindset at work here.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 8:14 am

Flat lie, griff. With the exception of Norway which relies on hydropower, there are NO nations that achieve 50% renewable across industry, transportation, and electricity. NONE. NOT A ONE. You know this, yet you choose to lie. Why?

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 8:15 am

When the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, where from is the electric power coming?
Created from thin air?
You have to rely on strong power lines connected to the grid or on diesel generators that will run days and nights until the wind and the sunlight are back.

Reply to  Jack
November 1, 2020 9:09 am

In Australia, the “icon” of purported grid-scale wind & solar power – the State of South Australia – they need a veritable armada of huge diesel generators to prop up the periods of no power from the unreliables.
Cost $millions per hour to run.

SA tries first to source its power deficits from neighboring mainly coal-fueled State Victoria, but when the wind dies, it usually dies in Vic as well.
And that’s also when Vic has to fire up its own armada of diesel behemoths to ensure its own needs are supplied, having retired its Hazlewood coal power plant a few years ago (14% of all Vic’s electricity gone there).

But the costs of running these diesel armadas are not revealed to the public by either State, because they are declared to be “commercial in confidence”.

But these costs are definitely making their way into consumers’ power bills, with $0.34 per kilowatt hour rates draining many household budgets.

Reply to  Mr.
November 1, 2020 3:02 pm

And South Australia also doesn’t obtain 50% of its power from solar and wind – it’s under 50% when averaged over an entire year. Naturally there are times, particularly in spring and autumn, when the percentage goes above 50%, but this the usual cherry-picking.

Mark A Luhman
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 8:24 am

Yes they are they are called third world countries and if they stay on that track they will remain third world countries. Norway may be the exemption and that is only due to the terrain they live in.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Mark A Luhman
November 1, 2020 5:55 pm

Norway may have a large chunk of power derive from hydro but it’s major income is from oil.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 9:28 am

Griffo, dear boy
You need fossil fuels to make wind turbines and solar panels.

Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 11:45 am
Michael Jankowski
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 3:28 pm

“…Plenty of nations outside the backward USA with over 50% renewable electricity…”

Iceland thanks to geothermal, etc. Great. How widespread is the availability of that in the USA?

How do their population densities, land area, surroundings, etc., compare to the US? Most of those nations are comparable to a US state. Where appropriate, US states can have high rates of renewable energy. As a whole, without close neighbors to import energy from as needed like countries in Europe do, the US has to be pretty energy-independent. It can’t depend on intermittent stuff, like wind, solar, or your brain. It can’t depend on hydroelectric or geothermal that isn’t a possibility everywhere.

fred ohr
Reply to  griff
November 2, 2020 8:38 am

No large population can rely on wind and solar power without a fossil fuel back up . It’s that required duplication that renders renewable energy uneconomic. See electricity prices in Germany and Australia if you don’t believe it.

David Blenkinsop
November 1, 2020 6:59 am

For some reason, I find it amusing in the Obama video that he could say, more or less braggingly, that “electricity costs will necessarily skyrocket”.

It’s like a satire, dark humour, almost on a ‘Dr. Strangelove’ level.

Reply to  David Blenkinsop
November 1, 2020 8:38 am

But We The People elected him twice.

CD in Wisconsin
November 1, 2020 7:00 am

“..But we don’t want to exchange the public health crisis of being exposed to pollution for an economic one where we can’t put food on the table,” he said. …”

Health crisis. Economic crisis. Climate crisis. Biodiversity crisis. Environmental crisis. Racism. Inequality. With all of these crises being thrown at us, the average person begins to get the impression the world (or the U.S. anyway) is in the worst shape it has ever been in. If you are worried about sustainability, one thing we will never run out of are crises.

To whatever extent the mainstream media have abandoned journalistic ethics and principles, they have become as much a brainwashing and propagandizing industry as anything else. If life is now just a matter of going from one crisis to the next, then living a normal life anymore seems a hopeless prospect. And many Internet websites (such as in the post) are certainly helping the cause. The clueless person that believes everything the Internet and mass media tell us begins to wonder if life is even worth living. Young people are especially vulnerable to this, and they are certainly being taken advantage of.

We all doomed I tell you, doomed. /sarc

November 1, 2020 7:00 am

How did he do on coal jobs? Saved not a one, as coal power declined every year of his presidency…

Keith Harrison
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 7:56 am

Coal jobs lost out to cheaper natural gas generation in the main. As gas prices rise as they are starting to do so in the last few weeks, coal generation will fill in where economical.

As one who apparently wishes to see the hydrocarbon industry fade away I would recommend reading the IEA forecast on the need for this industry over next 30 years. Electricity is important but it is not the largest conveyor of energy required across the globe. Will it ever be? Perhaps, but not generated by the current crop of renewable generation.

Do you support nuclear? This is really the only carbon free electricity generator. Unfortunately, for the future of a carbon free future, most folks for renewables are opposed to nuclear. Why? Because they believe it will lead to nuclear bombs. Frankly the globe has plenty of these already, so the argument seems facile.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Keith Harrison
November 1, 2020 1:44 pm

Don’t be confused. The reason why griff and his ilk SAY they’re against nuclear is that it’s “dangerous” (weapons proliferation being one aspect). But the real reason is that nuclear power could actually replace fossil fuels for electric power generation at a reasonable cost. It could even be at a cheap cost if an end was put to regulations designed to strangle the industry rather than to assure safety, and a whole lot of them were built from mass-produced standardized components.

That’s bad, because giving people abundant cheap energy is “like giving a machine gun to an idiot child”. They will have freedom to live lives that are not tightly controlled by government, and we can’t have that.

Right griff? Do explain where I’m wrong.

I’m sure that if miracle breakthroughs brought about cheap fusion power, griff and the rest of his troll army would be banging on about how unsafe it is. We are going to run out of water or be poisoned by helium or something.

Of course it’s very safe for griff to claim he would support fusion power. We will not have cost-effective sustained fusion on earth until the sun goes red giant. Claiming that you support fusion is also a good way to avoid any research money going to molten salt reactors or any other kind of nuclear fission. We need to spend all the money on mission impossible. MSRs are way too risky. They might be feasible and produce dangerously inexpensive power.

David Kamakaris
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 7:57 am

How did he do on coal jobs? Saved not a one, as coal power declined every year of his presidency…

Griff, that was from so many power plants switching to natural gas due to its abundance because of horizontal drilling technology and fracking.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 1, 2020 3:05 pm

Don’t forget that the 2018 election was heavily influenced by the Mueller Investigation Hoax! Andrew Weismann, the lead lawyer, knew in early 2016 that there was no evidence of ANY Russian collusion by the Trump campaign or administration! The only collusion they found was between the Clinton Campaign, the DNC and agents of Russian intel; but that was covered up to give the DemoKKKrats ammo against Trump!
The Trump administration has been much too quiet about the benefits of nuclear power but I think they had a few other fires to put out, like the soft coup of the FBI and CIA, the Impeachment Hoax that tried to cover up the corruption of the Bidens and others in Ukraine and the aforementioned Mueller Investigation that was trying to get him in an obstruction of justice trap!
If he wins Tuesday, we will continue to see a reduction of the regulations that are primarily designed to stifle the free market and the ability of entrepreneurs and innovators to create new goods and services! Hopefully, the stifling of the nuclear industry will be included in that change! If Beijing Joe wins we need to start preparing to become a larger version of Venezuela, where our tax dollars are given to the friends and families of the politically connected! It won’t end well!

David Streeter
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 3:04 pm

The use of coal declined due to the rise of fracking which increased the supply and reduced the cost of natural gas to below the cost of coal.

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  griff
November 1, 2020 3:19 pm

“…Saved not a one, as coal power declined every year of his presidency…”

So 1,000 people go into the water in a sinking ship. 300 drown. 700 are rescued.

By your logic/stupidity, not a single person was saved.

George V
November 1, 2020 7:01 am

If Biden is elected and fracking for oil and nat. gas is eliminated, one has to wonder how many of these people supposedly OK with a fracking ban will complain when their electric bill quadruples in price, or their natural gas heating bill or gasoline goes up similarly. We know from Europe’s experience that “transitioning from fossil fuels” is not cheap.

We also know American citizens squeal like distraught pigs whenever gasoline prices and heating costs rise and action by the government is subsequently demanded. Interesting political tensions will arise for sure.

Reply to  George V
November 1, 2020 8:15 am

Its like the Climate Change activists don’t care two cents about the working class. All they care about is their climate change theology and are blind to how infeasible their proposals are. All of their proposals leave out the need to long term power storage. As Bill Gates said how will renewables power Tokyo during a three day Typhoon. During those three days there is no wind or solar. Battery power storage will be depleted the first day. Batteries cost two much to be used for more than 24 hours. At that point you will need fossil fuels or nuclear. If you have nuclear why use any renewables? The cost of maintaining renewables, batteries, and the existing fossil fuel facilities will end up at minimum of tripling the cost of power and heat. It will also drive up the cost of food. This effects the working people far more than the rich or the upper middle class. They will kick the activists out of power at that point,

Mark A Luhman
Reply to  Lowell
November 1, 2020 8:27 am

It fairly easy not to worry about cost when you already rely on someone else for your living.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  George V
November 1, 2020 9:06 am

“We also know American citizens squeal like distraught pigs whenever gasoline prices and heating costs rise”

Not really, because we make plenty of money.

Ron Long
November 1, 2020 7:01 am

The only poll I trust as regards oil and Texas is whether David Middleton has the Exxon Ferrari parked in the driveway or hidden in the garage. Can somebody drive by and let us know?

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Ron Long
November 1, 2020 7:36 am

Anthony’s and David’s top secret Cayman Islands bank accounts are stuffed full of Big Oil payments for his years of service.
In fact, they are so secret not even Anthony, David nor Big Oil knows they exists. But Naomi Oreskes knows about them from the voices in her head.

Jon R
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
November 2, 2020 7:45 am

++++. Lulz

November 1, 2020 7:27 am

Trump signing an executive order is just electioneering. If Biden wins, he will just sign an executive order rescinding it.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
November 1, 2020 8:02 am

it seems like resending an executive order is much more difficult these days even if it is illegal.
The courts get involved and muddy the issue quite a bit.
Some courts have upheld previous executive orders that were declared illegal.
Don’t ask me to explain it I have common sense no legal degree.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
November 1, 2020 8:15 am

Isn’t it funny how O could issue EOs right and left and somehow they have the power of law and seem almost impossible to get around without having extensive legal battles from the 9th circuit? You get the feeling that ending a Trump EO would just happen in the background with no noise.

John Garrett
November 1, 2020 7:54 am

Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

$2.00 gasoline, $2.90/Mcf to heat the house and $0.11/Kwh electricity have absolutely no effect on the economy or jobs.

That’s AOC, Gore, McKibben, Jane Fonda, NPR, WaPo, Pravda, La-La Times logic and knowledge of economics on full display.

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 1, 2020 7:57 am

There are more florists than coal miners…. Well, lets try using the produce of the florists to make steel instead of that of the miners.

November 1, 2020 8:10 am

I love Trump and I would vote for him any day. My list of complaints:
1. Release all the Russia collllluuuusion documents. Even if it hurts Republicans.
2. He needs to push more Nuclear energy.
3. He needs to reduce spending in Washington that makes it easier for Joe Biden of the world to become wealthy.
4. Push for congressional term limits. This is a small list of the perpetual swamp: Schumer, Graham, Pelosi, Waters, Schiff, McConnell, Feinstein, Sanders…..

Reply to  Derg
November 1, 2020 8:43 am

Be very wary of term limits – hasn’t worked out so well in California.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
November 1, 2020 5:36 pm

Term limits throw out the good with the bad. I’m not in favor of term limits. Voting is what limits terms.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Derg
November 1, 2020 3:22 pm

Don’t forget the handling of the ChiCom-19 virus! We need to see investigations into who ordered infected patients to be placed in elder care facilities, a total contradiction of ALL established epidemiological practices; and why an inexpensive and safe drug, that nearly every study shows to reduce fatalities by about 75%, was banned or suppressed in most of the country!
Those two policies appear to have caused at least half of the fatalities, while the lockdowns are being shown to be more harmful than they are beneficial!
I, for one, would like to know why our ruling elite seems intent on killing or impoverishing so many of us peasants!

Global Cooling
November 1, 2020 8:28 am

Where are the new green jobs? For example, California and Australia are far ahead. Show me the money.

November 1, 2020 8:36 am

Dean Gearino – BA in English and Religous Studies. It’s all too predictable.

November 1, 2020 8:50 am

… the state had fewer than 2,500 coal miners in 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s less than the number of florists …

Jobs are not created equal. Each job generates work for other people. It’s called the multiplier. Florists have about the lowest multiplier. Coal miners have a much better multiplier.

On top of the multiplier, there’s the wage issue. Florists work for minimum wage. Coal miners do OK.

Each coal miner is much better for the economy than a whole bunch of florists.

Equating florist jobs with coal mining jobs is just plain illiterate. How can you have a four year degree and be so ignorant? Defund the universities.

November 1, 2020 8:51 am

OT, but…..
NOAA’s Chief Scientist Sacked

The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration’s top scientist has been removed from his position after he asked new Trump-appointed staff to acknowledge the agency’s scientific integrity policy, according to a new report.
Craig McLean, the agency’s acting chief scientist, was dismissed from his role last month shortly after sending an email to the new political appointees, including former White House adviser Erik Noble, the New York Times reported.
McLean had reportedly asked them to respect the NOAA’s scientific integrity policy which prohibits fabrication, falsification and manipulation of research data driven to fit a political agenda.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 1, 2020 10:28 am

He must have been referring to the temperature record.

Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 1, 2020 11:08 am

The guy sent his boss an email warning him not to fabricate, falsify and manipulate of research data. So, the subordinate was assuming there was a danger that the superior would do that and said so by sending the email. That was a gross insult. If that’s not insubordination, I don’t know what is … and, of course, it’s something like a Kafka trap.

November 1, 2020 9:41 am

From today’s Grumpy-an
“Russia has no plans to rein in its production of fossil fuels in the coming decades despite the global efforts to shift towards low-carbon energy, according to its energy minister.”
“UK’s bid to power every home via offshore windfarms by 2030 at risk”

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Vuk
November 1, 2020 11:48 am

I am not sure why that is news. Russia gets 60% of its export dollars from oil and gas and without that it
would be even more of a failed state than it is at present.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
November 1, 2020 1:44 pm

the news part can be found a bit further:
“Russia intends to ramp up gas production from its vast and inexpensive reserves to reach one trillion cubic meters a year by 2035, from just under 680bn cubic meters last year.”

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Vuk
November 1, 2020 7:09 pm

It remains true that the best thing that could happen to Russia and Putin is the Democrats shutting down fracking thereby driving up the price of oil and gas.
The Russians do better without trump.
As do the Iranians and Chinese.

Simple logic makes this clear, absent of any smoking gun

It’s a laugh that these countries are interfering to help Trump

Izaak Walton
November 1, 2020 11:41 am

It seems very unclear how this executive order will do what people are claiming it will do. The text specifies that “Within 70 days of the date of this memorandum, the Secretary of Energy, …, shall submit a report to the President”. Submitting a report is a very different thing from protecting fracking. All the order is access the
impact of a ban. And I am prepared to bet that the report will have zero impact at all.

Bruce Cobb
November 1, 2020 1:36 pm

It’s a shot accross the bow of the Biden camp, using their own ammo. That’s the point. Ding the enemy, and shore up the morale of the troops. Win-win.

November 1, 2020 1:58 pm

Remember the (new) thing with EO: another president can never change it.

Rich Davis
Reply to  niceguy
November 1, 2020 2:24 pm

Oh you’re confused. Democrat EOs can never be changed. Republican EOs virtually expire at the moment a Democrat is inaugurated.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Rich Davis
November 1, 2020 5:41 pm

Rich Davis has it right. Republican EO’s can be rescinded, and Democrat EO’s cannot. At least, as long as Chief Justice John Roberts is the deciding vote on the Supreme Court.

And then along came Amy! 🙂

John Endicott
Reply to  Rich Davis
November 2, 2020 2:19 am

Indeed Rich. And the reason for that disparity of outcomes for EOs is that liberal judges will legislate from the bench to protect Democrat EOs whereas constitutionalist judges don’t legislate from the bench no matter who’s EO is at stake.

David Streeter
November 1, 2020 3:07 pm

The use of coal declined due to the rise of fracking which increased the supply and reduced the cost of natural gas to below the cost of coal.

Reply to  David Streeter
November 1, 2020 4:24 pm

And because there are more ways to “regulate” coal emissions than natural gas.

OTOH coal can be massively stored.

Loren C Wilson
November 1, 2020 5:40 pm

By 2015, Obama had been in office for seven years and the war on coal was won. He destroyed West Virginia’s economy as well. The side effect is that democrats in WV now understand that when a politician says he will eliminate coal, he might be telling the truth.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights