The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Mail
Print Email
Text Size

Reader Mail

Energy Liquidity

How much is enough for California? Also: Medieval thinking and Islam. Jimmy Carter's protocols. Tucker, Vietnam, and Iraq. Homnick Humor. More on Rudy and life. Mitt Romney explained. Coulter: A UK view. Plus much else.

(Page 2 of 17)

Bill Whalen, a purportedly smart individual, rants emotionally in his support of liquefied natural gas for California. Where are his facts? Where is the data, preferably empirical?

Alternative energy methods exist today to provide all of the electricity our state uses. This is established fact. What's needed is money to build the commercial solar plants in our deserts and to hook up the wiring. What's needed is seed money so average folks can put photovoltaic panels on their roofs.

Doing just that frees up the existing natural gas for our stoves and heaters. This will suffice for the short term as our inventive geniuses devise efficient electrical devices of providing for those needs in the long term.

If the proponents of importing foreign fossil fuels insist on persisting in their venture, then they should be required to swear in evidentiary hearings as to the known supplies available both for U.S. importation and to meet the ever-increasing needs of Asian nations emerging into the First World.

We don't want to get into an energy war with, say, China!

And if our governmental types, both political and bureaucratic, insist on such importation, they and the supposed scientific experts likewise should face evidentiary panels establishing both the need and the costs. Then they should cement their resolve by placing the first regasification plants off such communities as Beverly Hills, Santa Barbara, San Francisco and other wealthy cities. The process is safe, isn't it? It's needed, isn't it? Then why do they always pick on impoverished, small locales in which to site these facilities?

p>Fair's fair. They who reap the rewards should suffer the ills created by their aggrandizement. br> -- Roger G. Pariseau, Jr. br> Oxnard, California /p>

As a citizen of Alberta, which makes a lot of money supplying gas to California, I am pleased. The supply shortage will raise the price we get for our gas. Excellent. California is rich, they can pay for luxuries, stupidity is a luxury, let them pay.

As a friend of the U.S.A. I am unhappy. Dear stupid enviro-nuts: The law of supply and demand is immutable; you cannot change it any more than you can eliminate gravity. You are increasing supply elsewhere in the world. The price elsewhere will fall. Someone, probably the Chinese will buy the gas, and burn it. The net effect of your childish naivete is more money for me (good), less money for you (good -- less to spend on truly damaging stupidity, and bad, as the U.S.A. becomes less secure and poorer) and more money for the Chinese.

p>Cheers from Calgary, and best wishes always, br> --
Page:   12 3 4   Last ›

topics:
Education, John McCain, Business, Religion, Islam, Abortion, Environment, Law, Iraq, Iran, Israel, NATO, Communism, Conservatism, Energy

Letter to the Editor Leave a comment

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

Related Articles

More Articles From Reader Mail

http://spectator.org/archives/2007/03/12/energy-liquidity
ADVERTISEMENT

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Who Castrated Ann Coulter?

David Catron | 2.6.12

Bigoted Barack, Red in Tooth and Clause

George Neumayr | 2.10.12

Unsafe at Any Smoke

Eric Peters | 2.10.12

Access This

Ross Kaminsky | 2.10.12

The Delousing of a Movement

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 2.9.12

The Show Me State's No Show Primary

Andrew B. Wilson | 2.10.12

Justice Ginsburg Should Resign

William Tucker | 2.8.12

No Double Play

Peter Hannaford | 2.10.12

ADVERTISEMENT