-
Another Correa Problem
April 15, 2013 | 9 comments
-
The Lady Wasn’t for Turning
April 8, 2013 | 20 comments
-
Let’s Lose LOST
March 26, 2013 | 25 comments
-
The Missing Word on Trade
February 15, 2013 | 4 comments
-
A Carbon Copy of a Bad Idea
November 19, 2012 | 24 comments
The Environmental Spectator
Obama’s Amazing Energy Spin Machine
By now he’s out of control.
The bankruptcy of Ener1, a “green energy” firm that got a $118 million stimulus grant, has brought the Obama administration’s commitment to sinking billions of dollars into alternative energy boondoggles back into the spotlight. Unfortunately, President Obama remains committed to continuing down this wasteful path, as his statements about energy in his recent State of the Union Address made clear. While the president spent more time on the topic than any other policy area, he distorted the facts, misrepresented his plans, and ignored his record.
Obama announced that “tonight, I’m directing my Administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil and gas resources.” For those who favor energy production, this sounds great, but a close inspection reveals that this announcement was nothing new — the sale should have been scheduled last year, and the only reason the administration is planning it now is that it is required under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. In fact, he didn’t direct his administration to do anything new — he just recycled a plan actually released in November 2011 that actually kept closed key areas for future oil and gas exploration in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Atlantic coastline.
The president claimed that, “over the last three years, we’ve opened millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration…. Right now, American oil production is the highest that it’s been in eight years. That’s right — eight years.” But that’s no thanks to the federal government. In fact, oil production on federally owned lands has gone down during Obama’s first three years. The administration didn’t hold a single offshore lease sale in all of 2010 and canceled sales off the coast of Alaska and Virginia this year. It’s the oil boom in North Dakota on private lands that’s kept domestic oil production from falling — not the president’s policies.
Obama continued, “The easiest way to save money is to waste less energy. So here’s another proposal: Help manufacturers eliminate energy waste in their factories and give businesses incentives to upgrade their buildings.” But manufacturers already have huge incentives to reduce wasted energy. Airlines today, for example, use almost half as much energy per passenger mile as they did in 1979 and 24 percent less than in 2000. No one needed to tell them to do that. Energy is only “waste” if it cost less to save it than to not. Forcing taxpayers to pick up the tab for manufacturers’ energy costs isn’t eliminating energy waste — it’s creating government waste.
Obama has already been burned by his poor energy investments, but that hasn’t stopped him from promoting them in every speech. “In three years, our partnership with the private sector has already positioned America to be the world’s leading manufacturer of high-tech batteries,” he said in reference to stimulus grants to an electric car battery manufacturer. That manufacturer was Ener1. Two days later, it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
The president insists that it’s time to “double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising. Pass clean energy tax credits and create these jobs.” Double-down on a slew of bankrupt clean energy investments? In addition, Ener1, Evergreen Energy, and Amonix — all of which received millions of taxpayer dollars — have either gone bankrupt (as Enr1 and Evergreen have) or cut their workforce by two-thirds (as Amonix has). And let’s not forget Solyndra.
To be clear, the president does oppose some taxpayer-funded projects: “We have subsidized oil companies for a century. That’s long enough. It’s time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s rarely been more profitable.” The oil industry does receive some subsidies — which should be eliminated — but they are orders of magnitude less than the clean energy industry. In fact, in 2010, according to the Energy Information Administration, clean energy and conservation programs received $22.4 billion in federal stimulus compared to $4.2 billion for coal, oil, and natural gas — much of it designated for the environmentally motivated “clean coal” program.
The president made it clear that no Congress will stop his agenda. “So far, you haven’t acted,” he told Congress. “Well tonight, I will…. I’m proud to announce that the Department of Defense, the world’s largest consumer of energy, will make one of the largest commitments to clean energy in history — with the Navy purchasing enough capacity to power a quarter of a million homes a year.” The role of the Defense Department isn’t to promote the president’s energy investments, it’s to defend the United States. Forget energy independence — our defense will now be weather dependent. If only we could get battleships that ran on spin.
About the Author
Iain Murray heads the Center for Economic Freedom at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and is the author of Stealing You Blind: How Government Fatcats Are Getting Rich Off of You.
About the Author
David Bier is a research associate at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
c. j. acworth| 2.8.12 @ 7:50AM
"Airlines today, for example, use 110% less energy than they did in 1979..."
Um, does that mean that airplanes actually produce more fuel than they burn? Talk about a frequent flyer discount!
Dixie Pixie| 2.8.12 @ 8:11AM
There are three possibilities for Obama's executive behavior.
One....He seriously does not know his “Green Energy” policies are a catastrophic failure and has no wish to find out how his policies are working.
He simply refuses to comprehend he can fail at anything and will not tolerate nor listen to any information that even hints of his failure.
Two....Obama knows that the “Green Energy” are simply scams where the taxpayers pay for private corporate development by Obama's financial supporters.
If the companies are successful, then Obama's financial supporters gain a publicly funded windfall far in excess of what they gave to Obama's election campaign.
If the Green companies fail, then the taxpayer is responsible for the debt and Obama's financial supporters loot the failing company.
Third....Obama knows “Green Energy' is a environmentalist fantasy beloved by the Ruling Class so he goes along with it to maintain his position within the Socialist hierarchy.
Obama could not care less if “Green Energy” was a success or failure as it is public money not his money.
The only thing that is important to Obama is the Environmentalists believe it is a success because of Obama.
So Obama tells the world his “Green Energy” are a wonderful success and blames any information otherwise on those nasty racist Wascally Wepublicans.
In all the above cases, Obama's behavior point to outright executive malfeasance of the highest order.
If it occurred in the private sector, Obama would have long ago crashed the companies stock-price and would be under criminal investigation.
But then as a Black Democrat, Obama is above and beyond Ruling Class suspicion or investigation.
Thus there is no evidence that Obama did anything wrong and is therefor a flawless executive.
It is a web of lies that keeps Obama aloft in Democratic hopes and admitting any fact would pop Obama's bubble and crash his administration into reality.
Jobe| 2.8.12 @ 2:42PM
Yes, it's true. It is a web of lies and truth manipulations that obama is tossing our way. But how does this differ from what he has done his entire life. The fact of the matter is that these lies and misstatements SHOULD, and WOULD, be exposed for what they are by a press and news media that was doing it's job. Instead, we get the major newspapers, television networks, and other publications shilling for this hypocrite who lies as smoothly as a silk necktie lies on the front of a shirt.
If the major lamestream media ever reported what is out there about the policies of this massive, arrogant failure, his career would be over. Rather, they cover, back and fill, and give us Carney released shlock. I have to admit, that if I had not found some conservative sites on the internet, I wouldn't know how bad this industrial strength communist is. I wonder. Perhaps I'd be happier in the dark.
Dixie Pixie| 2.9.12 @ 12:17AM
Jobe.... Face the facts.
The MSM are a sub-division of the entertainment complex of the international global companies.
They have no desire,wish or inclination to expose the “Truth” of Obama.
“Crony Capitalism” has been very profitable to them.
After all Obama has recently secured 2.4 Trillion dollars in American debt to spend on his friends.
Obama has made sure the MSM has been bought and paid for until the election cycle is over.
The international companies are doing very well under Obama.
The MSM has no reason to change such a profitable relationship.
The “Darkness” is where political corruption breeds.
It will not change until Obama leaves office, then the MSM will boast how they fooled the American public.
Then it will be too late for America.
Brian Mc| 2.8.12 @ 8:12AM
I'd like to see the graph for that 110%, please.
I can envision massive wind turbines on our aircraft carriers! Makes it a bit touchy during recovery of aircraft (but just think of the energy we saved)...especially on that flight deck that's been converted to a solar panel.
fckewe| 2.9.12 @ 3:20AM
The quote in the article was 24%
POST American| 2.8.12 @ 8:16AM
---'90's Show' sideshow.
MEANWHILE
WHY is no one focusing on open Globalist
traitor and unrepentant arch EUGENIST
Warren Buffet's massive profiteering on transporting 80% of our Alaskan oil ----to RED China?
IF we had a functioning, NON-Rockefeller-Gates
owned press, this jerk would be nailed to the wall.
Dixie Pixie| 2.8.12 @ 9:10AM
Post.... you actually made some sense this time.
Except for the fact that Warren Buffet railroad is shipping the crude oil to American refiners at 3 to 5 times the cost of a pipeline.
That is the point of killing the Keystone pipeline, so as to keep those profits flowing to Buffet and his fellow Democrats.
Presumably, Buffet and Obama did read Ayn Rand who postulated a similar scenario.
Either way the oils gets refined and put in the American distribution network and yes, some refined oil is sold to China.
Keep improving Post.
fckewe| 2.9.12 @ 3:25AM
So the cost of designing and building the pipeline, leasing the land and maintaining that pipeline (oh, forgot, oil companies don't actually do that so they can windfall a profit from pipeline failures) is less than using existing equipment and only paying for fuel and a crew of 6?
Where is your fiscal conservatism when you don't need to be shoving cash in the Kock brothers pants? (you know, the guys who stand to make the most off the boondoggle)
Wouldn't it be cheaper to build new refineries (something no oil company has done in more than 3 decades) closer to the oil? Gasoline flows more quickly and through small diameter pipe than gelatinous tarsand gunk. Let the Chinese choke on it.
JimH| 2.8.12 @ 8:55AM
If you could hook up this administration's spin to a generator the energy crisis would be over.
Mike Hawk| 2.8.12 @ 11:07AM
I think it would be more like relief on a tight fertilizer market.
Louis Jenkins| 2.8.12 @ 2:36PM
I, for one, am disgusted and appalled when Obama takes to the podium. His entire speech on energy was a lie, and the truth will never be in him. Don't worry folks, we've got another five years of this stuff ahead. Stock up while you can.
Fairbanks99| 2.8.12 @ 3:06PM
I am employed by the Army at a large western post. Last summer I was issued a new Ford E350 "Flex Fuel" van. For the first six months, I used Regular E10, which is what the vast majority of Americans use. My average mileage over that time was 11.5 mpg. Last month I was told that I must use E85. Since then, my mileage has dropped from 11.5 to 7.5 - a 35% decrease. As an added bonus, E85 is 40 cents more a gallon than E10! Most all new GSA fleet vehicles are either Flex Fuel or run biodiesel. Multiply this mileage decrease and fuel cost increase by many thousands of government vehicles, and we, the taxpayers are paying an awful lot of money to enrich Big Ag and drive up the price of food. But hey, we're "saving the planet!"
fckewe| 2.9.12 @ 3:26AM
Did you get the thing TUNED to take the new fuel? Thought not!
Lecar| 2.9.12 @ 1:14PM
Moron! Computer controlled engine management system. You do not"tune" the engine. What dipstick!
Thom| 2.8.12 @ 6:20PM
Fairbanks99,
Biodiesel doesn’t drop off like E85 does but it does drop at least 5%-10% and you need some real diesel to get the engine started in cold weather before you switch to biodiesel after the engine is warmed up. A friend with a Ford 350 added a 50 gallon Bio tank and was getting 17 on the road with real diesel and 16 with Bio. It is a given that E85 will get at least 30% less MPG since any engine that can run on current gasoline octanes won’t run a high enough compression to get the energy out of alcohol. E85 will never be economical to use short of a miracle in fermentation with the whole plant stock.
Pat| 2.8.12 @ 7:20PM
Does anyone actually care what Obama’s commitments to alternative energy consist of? What happened to the hundreds of millions sunk into these companies? Yeah, we know these Green Movement abortions declared bankruptcy but what happened to our money? And, by the way, this is not Obama’s personal funds but rather our tax dollars which disappeared into that convenient black hole called: “they declared bankruptcy“. Was the point ever alternative energy – or was it always about the money?
And how do we know where the money actually went? After their 5 minutes of media exposure, Congress has no desire to pursue trivial details like who got all the money and which bank account does it currently occupy?
We buy thousands of firearms for Mexican drug dealers – but using what for funding? We indirectly murder innocent Mexicans and Americans courtesy of our tax dollars – but no one is accountable for either the deaths or the funds?
We could write our Congressman asking for specific details and we’d most certainly get a polite form letter in return expressing heartfelt concern, but not much else. When our tax dollars are being used to kill Americans, our focus – and our outrage - needs to shift from Obama’s “Green Movement” concerns to who among our federal employees requires a new mailing address within a maximum security federal prison.
Occam's Tool| 2.8.12 @ 7:58PM
In another news, a worker at a nuclear power plant fell into radioactive water today---and every commenter on that website had an "Incredible Hulk" joke...
Jeff1000| 2.9.12 @ 2:37AM
"Green Energy" is money, and the joke's on us. Money that the left is using to stay in power. Green Energy! Get it?
POST American| 2.9.12 @ 5:40AM
---With Pelosi in RED China declaring the
absolute need for ALLLLL aspects of our
life to be relentlessly monitored for the
'sake of the enviornment'
-------And sitting justice Ginzburg committing
HIGH TREASON by dissing our Republic
which is embodied in the Constitution
-------------AND as EUGENISTS and other
'on board' PSYCHOPATHS are aggressively pushing for mandatory injections ----and sterilant, organ destroying GMO food
---------------IT'S TIME TO MOVE-------------------
Marc Jeric| 2.10.12 @ 1:03AM
I have been encouraged for the first time in the last 3 years when I heard that nincompoop Mullah Obama pimping for the "green energy". You see - there is no such thing, according to the immutable laws of thermodynamics and heat & mass transfer. So he is destined for a definitive defeat!