As you undoubtedly know, back in January 2021 newly-inaugurated President Biden ordered the entire federal bureaucracy into full-battle mode in the crusade to suppress production and use of fossil fuels, aka “carbon emissions” (or maybe “climate pollution”). From Biden’s January 27, 2021 Executive Order (“Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad”):
It is the policy of my Administration to organize and deploy the full capacity of its agencies to combat the climate crisis to implement a Government-wide approach that reduces climate pollution in every sector of the economy. . . .
And thus we have every federal agency, under orders from the boss, whether or not its statutory mission has anything to do with “climate,” diligently devising schemes to outdo the other agencies in the fossil fuel suppression game. It’s not just EPA scheming to force closure of perfectly good power plants, but also Interior imposing a “moratorium” on oil and gas leasing on federal lands and offshore; and FERC putting out new standards of review to make it impossible for any new gas pipeline to get approved; and the Department of Energy imposing costly new efficiency standards on mobil homes; and even the Federal Reserve promising to make life difficult for banks that lend to fossil fuel producers; and the SEC imposing new and costly “climate” disclosure requirements on issuers; and on and on.
And now, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, add the goal for both the U.S. and Europe of rapidly reducing purchases of oil and gas from Russia. Surely then the government-wide war against fossil fuels must at least be put on hold or slowed for some period.
If you think that, you are not thinking like a true-believing climate crusader. On March 14, with the recent energy price spike reaching crisis levels, Biden gave a speech to a DNC fundraiser in Washington where he doubled down on his fossil-fuel-suppression promises. Actually, it was worse than that. Biden, in his usual eloquent way, promised to end “fossil fuel dependency” by aggressive build-out of so-called “renewables.” From the official White House transcript of the event:
Imagine where we’d be right now if, in fact, Europe was in fact energy- free of fossil fuels and was — we were in a situation where — (coughs) — excuse me — where — where we — it was all renewables. It’d be a different world. And — and so, we have to get off the dependency on fossil fuels . . . . I mean, literally, not figuratively — meaning both here [U.S.] and there [Europe]. And the dependence of Europe on fossil fuels is — way exceeds any dependence we have. And so, it’s not an immediate solution to the crisis, but it’s all about the future if we were to change the fossil fuel dependency.
So Biden — who appears to be completely unaware that the intermittent renewables cannot replace fossil fuels without massive amounts of battery or other storage that are totally unaffordable and don’t even exist as a technological matter — keeps the government-wide fossil fuel suppression campaign going at full tilt.
If wind and solar don’t work without fossil fuel backup, and we are to have an intentionally-imposed shortage of the fossil fuels courtesy of government orders, what is the result? We have come to the place where a government command economy always leads: obviously, you must rein in your comfortable lifestyle, peasant. Yesterday the UN’s International Energy Agency came out with its “10 Point Plan to Cut Oil Use.” The key message is that only by your reducing your excessive consumption can we “pave the way” to putting oil use on “a more sustainable path”:
In the face of the emerging global energy crisis triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the IEA’s 10-Point Plan to Cut Oil Use proposes 10 actions that can be taken to reduce oil demand with immediate impact – and provides recommendations for how those actions can help pave the way to putting oil demand onto a more sustainable path in the longer term.
The UN geniuses think that they have come up with ways that almost effortlessly can reduce oil consumption by some 2.7 million barrels per day. (Since oil consumption is currently running about 97 million barrels/day worldwide, this would come to less than a 3% reduction.). So what exactly do they have in mind? It’s a medley of great ideas from the good socialists. Here is a sample:
- Reduce speed limits on highways by at least 10 km/h. Your time has no value in the coming utopia.
- Work from home up to three days a week where possible. Note that this will be by government order, rather than by your choice.
- Car-free Sundays in cities. Did you think you were going to take your kids to the zoo on Sunday? Think again.
- Make the use of public transport cheaper and incentivise micro-mobility, walking and cycling. It’s bicycles for you in January from now on. Remember, it’s to save the planet!
- Alternate private car access to roads in large cities. This is one of my favorites. “Alternative access” means that use of roads by private cars will be restricted “to those with even number-plates some weekdays and to those with odd-numbered plates on other weekdays.” Do you have a deadline you need to meet by the 15th? Too bad, you cannot use your car that day.
It goes on and on from there. All items on the list constitute serious reductions in your freedoms, and to save a big 3% of oil use. Oh, and by the way these reductions are only to come from the 47 million barrels/day of oil usage (out of the total of 97 million) that occur in the “advanced economies.” After all, we wouldn’t want the likes of China to have to contribute to the sacrifice.
And if you want someone to go one better than even the UN in the category of insufferable condescension toward ordinary people, try Bloomberg. Over at Bloomberg CityLab on March 15, they have a big piece calling on the federal government at this time of energy shortage to go all in on promoting electric bicycles:
Every time an e-bike or e-cargo bike is used lieu of a car, society receives a cascade of benefits. Greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically lower, even if the car being replaced is electric. A two-wheeler consumes little street space and poses a negligible safety risk to other road users. And even with the motor providing some of the muscle, the cyclist will receive a surprisingly good workout.
You will recognize Mike Bloomberg as one of the true world champions of travel by private jet. From the Daily Caller, February 5, 2021:
Bloomberg . . . took nearly 1,700 trips in private jets over a four year period from August 2016 to August 2020, a Business Insider analysis claimed. Those 1700 trips are responsible for emitting at least 10,000 metric tons of CO2, Business Insider reported. To put the level of those emissions in perspective, a standard car emits about 4.6 metric tons of CO2 per year. . . .
But just think, you can reduce your car’s 4.6 metric tons of CO2 emissions down to maybe 2 metric tons by switching over to an electric bike under government coercion.
What about the 24 hour industries that require people at 2 hours notice. Shipping in particular would grind to a halt if only public transport were to be used. Shades of Prohibition in the United States or 6 o clock closing in Australia after zWorld War One
The scariest thing is who is running the country , let alone the world . They really believe they are saving us and the world from the dreaded CO2 as though it is more damaging than what their own actions are doing to civil liberties and general well being and lifestyles .
Sending us back to the dark ages on the way o the stone age .
Incredible the population is allowing us to be treated this way .
The only way Humanity gets back to the energy consumption of the Dark Ages would be if we kill off 90% of the human population. And the policies I see in such things as the “Green New Deal” forces me to believe that’s what they’re working on. I believe I have just proven the “Social Cost of Carbon” is not only negative (i.e., a net benefit), but it’s value may be infinite.
We’re beset by morons at every level of government.
Only on our lucky days. I submit, if the Brandon Administration were merely incompetent, chances are their policies and pronouncements would help at least half the people at least half the time. Since ALL policies and pronouncements from the Brandon Administration have been continuously destructive, I must conclude that not only is that the objective, but that the Brandon Administration has been wildly successful at accomplishing its goals!
Interesting article on why a two car city slicker household could only afford one EV in the family at best at present-
Why this car-guy isn’t ready for an EV (msn.com)
Strictly city shopping trolley and work commuters at present assuming you’ve got your own home charger and qualify for the repayments.
From the article: “It is the policy of my Administration to organize and deploy the full capacity of its agencies to combat the climate crisis to implement a Government-wide approach that reduces climate pollution in every sector of the economy. . . .
And thus we have every federal agency, under orders from the boss, whether or not its statutory mission has anything to do with “climate,” diligently devising schemes to outdo the other agencies in the fossil fuel suppression game. It’s not just EPA scheming to force closure of perfectly good power plants, but also Interior imposing a “moratorium” on oil and gas leasing on federal lands and offshore; and FERC putting out new standards of review to make it impossible for any new gas pipeline to get approved; and the Department of Energy imposing costly new efficiency standards on mobil homes; and even the Federal Reserve promising to make life difficult for banks that lend to fossil fuel producers; and the SEC imposing new and costly “climate” disclosure requirements on issuers; and on and on.”
That’s exactly what is happening.
Biden wants to pretend the high prices are not his fault. Biden is an accomplished liar.
The war on fossil fuels has always been an act of self-sabotage, weakening economies, which makes countries weaker militarily. Both China and vile Russia have of course applauded these efforts of self-sabotage. But we are now engaged in an undeclared (so far) WWIII, and self-sabotage, for whatever reason or motive can only be viewed as acts of treason. Now Biden’s competence is suspect which might excuse his traitorism somewhat, but certainly not that of his advisors, and all of those traiterous hordes within government and without who continually bombard us with their Greenie cruise missiles. Strength is what is required to beat the evil Putin regime.
You have got to be one of the most stupid, ignorant climate alarmists, BareRant. What are you, 12 years old? Roads are made of asphalt, a left-over product from refining all that petroleum that gets burned. Stop making petroleum distillates to burn, and you also stop asphalt production.
The dominance of unreliable renewables won’t be possible until something gets invented to back them up when the wind isn’t blowing (frequent) and the sun isn’t shining (every night). Right now that backup doesn’t exist and there’s nothing on the horizon. All postulated backup is either not efficient, not affordable, materials limited, or limited to unique locations. Even if something that’s actually doable gets invented, you still need to deal with the extremely bad environmental effects of widely expanding renewables like how windmills kill rapters and bats.
Pull your head out, BareRant.
Fuel is something someone sells for a profit like ice cream; who cares how much I purchase. Why all the BS crap about conservation. No response necessary.
Last week, I posted a comment/essay which uses the conceptual framework of the
Supply Side Carbon Emission Control Plan (SSCECP) as a vehicle for examining the following question:
How far could Joe Biden go in quickly reducing America’s consumption of fossil fuels using his own authorities as President — authorities already granted to him under current law?
It is impossible to install enough wind turbines, enough solar panels, enough energy storage facilities, and enough new transmission lines nearly as quickly as President Biden and progressive members of Congress say it must be done. Energy conservation must carry most of the burden of getting America from here to there in reaching Biden’s highly ambitious greenhouse gas and fossil fuel reduction targets.
That said, Joe Biden does in fact have all the authority he would need as President to unilaterally impose a strict program of energy conservation measures on the American economy, doing so without another new word of legislation from Congress.
The odds are that Joe Biden will be President at least until January 20th, 2025. Unless the Republicans gain veto-proof majorities in the House and the Senate, nothing could stop Biden from adopting a plan like the SSCECP if he were determined to pursue a highly coercive program for fulfilling his promises to the climate activists.
But the Biden Administration has a patron constituency which goes well beyond the climate activists and their environmental NGO’s. His patron constituency includes a variety of high tech corporations, Wall Street investment firms, government agencies at the local, state, and federal level, and a number of non-governmental organizations of various kinds which stand to gain from his economic, fiscal, and energy policies.
Many of Biden’s most senior advisors are sourced from these high tech and Wall Street corporations, from these governmental agencies, and from these NGO’s.
The SSCECP caters directly to these kinds of people. It is structured in a way which guarantees that the profits of fossil fuel corporations will actually rise as carbon fuel production and consumption falls, thus incentivizing their voluntary participation in the plan. The SSCECP also has the potential for generating enormous new revenue streams for the federal government and for the fifty state governments.
At a high conceptual level, here is a list of the methods and means through which the Supply Side Carbon Emission Control Plan (SSCECP) can be implemented without additional legislation from the Congress:
A – Establish a unified energy policy framework for carbon emission reductions and for fossil energy conservation measures which is highly resistant to legal challenges in the courts.
B – Integrate the President’s environmental protection authorities with his national security authorities under the umbrella of an Energy & Climate Crisis Response Plan (ECCRP).
C – Re-prioritize those policy goals addressing quick reductions in our greenhouse gas emissions and in our fossil fuel energy consumption, placing them above all other environmental, social, and economic policy goals.
D – Incentivize energy conservation through imposing higher prices for all forms of energy and through imposing direct rationing of fossil fuel energy.
E – Redirect capital investments away from fossil fuels and towards wind and solar energy technologies backed by grid scale energy storage technology.
F – Consolidate all currently existing greenhouse gas reduction plans and agreements into the ECCRP and place these plans and agreements under direct federal control.
G – Identify yearly reductions in America’s carbon emissions as the primary metric for measuring progress in fighting climate change.
H – Identify yearly reductions in America’s consumption of fossil fuels as the primary metric for measuring progress in achieving American energy security and independence.
I – Expand and extend federal regulation of all greenhouse gases by classifying carbon emissions as criteria pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
J – Establish cooperative agreements with the states to enforce the EPA’s anti-carbon regulations.
K – Establish a system of carbon pollution fines which is the functional equivalent of a legislated tax on carbon.
L – Establish a carbon fuel rationing program which directly constrains the production and distribution of all fossil fuels.
M – Establish production control agreements with private sector fossil fuel producers and distributors.
N – Establish a guaranteed profit schedule for the carbon fuels industry in return for production & distribution cutbacks.
O – Indemnify and insulate carbon energy corporations against climate change lawsuits brought in the courts.
P – Ban the export of coal, liquefied natural gas, and crude oil to nations outside the North American continent after December 31st, 2029.
Q – Identify those lands, waters, and properties, either publicly owned or privately owned, which are to be reserved by the federal government for wind, solar, energy storage, and power transmission development.
R – Bypass or remove any and all regulatory review and planning obstacles to the siting and construction of new wind and solar energy facilities.
S – Establish a hard-target schedule for closing the greater portion of America’s legacy fossil fuel energy production and support infrastructure.
T – Continuously monitor and assess America’s progress in achieving President Biden’s climate change and energy security policy goals.
One key strategy of the SSCECP is to use credible threats of extreme regulation against the fossil energy corporations as leverage in gaining their full cooperation in reducing the import, production, and distribution of all carbon fuels.
This would be done using production control agreements with fossil fuel producers in which these corporations systematically reduce their production and distribution volumes in return for a guaranteed schedule of profits, profits which equal or even exceed those they earned prior to signing the production agreements.
Another key strategy of the SSCECP is to establish a system of carbon pollution fines which is the functional equivalent of a legislated tax on carbon. These ‘fines’ would offer the federal government and the fifty state governments the prospect of a massive new revenue stream which can then be directed towards their environmental and social spending priorities.
Assuming Joe Biden remains as President another three years, and assuming that the Republicans can’t gain veto-proof majorities in the House and in the Senate, nothing could stop Biden from adopting a plan like the SSCECP if he were determined to push the envelope in exerting his Executive Branch authorities to their outer limits.
In any case, the SSCECP is the ultimate expression of how government agencies and private corporations can work together to achieve their mutual profit making objectives.
Interesting conjecture. Makes for an intellectual exercise. But no plan survives contact with the enemy. Even if tried, it’s not going to happen once the costs become apparent.
Without oil, there is neither fuel for farm equipment nor fertilizer. Crop yields per acre will fall drastically. Everyone too poor to afford armed guards will either starve in the cities or be forced out into the countryside. Maybe our “betters” send their army out to impose order in the countryside, but I doubt it. Those who do not starve to death will gradually make their way out into flyover country, looking for some room to grow food for their own family. Eventually, what is left of the population will be engaged in subsistence agriculture among all the windmills making ele tricity for our “better” and searching each morning among the windmills for bird and bat carcasses for protein.
Funny how the party of diversity (Democrats) don’t want energy diversity.
And funny how the party of renewable energy doesn’t want to admit to us that lithium and other minerals needed for this “green revolution” are not renewable.
Of course all of these restrictions in the 10 point plan don’t apply to government officials, their donors and well off liberal friends.
When it comes to alleviating the shortage of oil (as it is with water in CA), the Democrats plan is for you, the consumer, to use less, not for the government to help produce more.
However, when it comes to government budgets, there is no way politicians plan to use less money when times are tight – you, the taxpayer, are to produce more money for the government.