Hillary vs. Trump on Energy | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Hillary vs. Trump on Energy
by

It hasn’t gotten much attention but both presidential candidates have now enunciated their energy strategies for the country.

Start with Hillary. She’s all in on green energy — Europe-style. She says within 10 years she will subsidize 500 million solar panels. (Solar City must be loving this corporate twinkie.) She also says within 20 years the U.S. will be 50 percent green energy — which would be a ten-fold increase. How we get there is anyone’s guess.

Then as if to acknowledge this abandonment of fossil fuels, she says that families will get subsidies of up to $600 to pay for higher utility bills. At least she admits going green would be really expensive and inefficient, so massive government support will be necessary.

Meanwhile, Mr. Trump says go with all our fossil fuel resources. He says we can make America energy independent and he’s right.

We still import 9 million barrels of oil a day, much of it coming from the Middle East and OPEC. Now for the first time in a half-century — thanks to the shale oil and gas revolution — true American energy independence is not just a pipedream but easily achievable if the next president takes the right steps.

Such an energy strategy means we could stop draining our economy of about $200 billion a year we could use here at home to rebuild our military, our infrastructure, and to reduce the budget deficit.

But this isn’t just about the economy. We know from intelligence reports that as much as $500 million a year of petro-dollars find their way into the coffers of terrorist networks, including ISIS.

His vision is entirely different from Hillary’s. Instead of windmills, Trump says we will use our natural gas, our oil, and our coal.

To achieve American energy self-sufficiency doesn’t mean building more solar panels and Solyndras.

Thanks to the amazing made-in-America technological breakthroughs of the last decade — including horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing to get at shale oil and gas reserves — the United States now has at least 150 years of oil and natural-gas resources on top of 500 years’ worth of coal.

Consider what has happened in less than a decade with oil production. ‎In 2008, the United States produced about 5 million barrels a day. We hit 8.7 million ‎in 2014 and could double that by 2025.

As we tap into the full potential of our tens of billions of shale oil and gas we can become the No. 1 export nation on the planet. This could easily mean more than $1 trillion a year in oil, gas, and coal exports each year — perhaps exceeding 5 percent of GDP. This would mean as many as 6 million new jobs, according to the Institute for Energy Research.

This will mean reversing the Obama war on coal and fossil fuels that Hillary wants to continue. It will mean drilling on federal lands and building pipelines and LNG terminals. Democrats want more infrastructure: here it is.

Think 6 to 10 million more manufacturing jobs that pay more than $60,000 a year.

Hillary has the vision wrong on energy. We’ve already wasted $150 billion subsidizing wind and solar energy and it has gotten us nowhere. Europe tried the green energy experiment and they are rushing back to more efficient and less costly fossil fuels. China and India are building hundreds of coal plants and laughing behind Obama’s back on the climate change pact.

Everyone is going with fossil fuels except the U.S. under Obama and Hillary. And we have more fossil fuels than all the rest The path to energy independence really is as simple as just getting the government out of the way. ‎Trump wants to do this; Hillary wants to double down on the green bubble.

o
Sign Up to receive Our Latest Updates! Register

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!