Will the US Economy See Red Over Green Initiatives?

FlamingBillby Leigh Bravo   5/10/14
A great physicist, Richard Feynman said, “For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.”  •  There are so many differing views in the United States, mainly coming from the Energy producers and the Energy naysayers, the Environmentalists. President Obama recently toured the country telling a grim and scary story of the near devastation and doom we will all be facing if we do not support his ambitious climate change agenda.

But, as George Santayana said, “Those who cannot learn from History are doomed to repeat it.”

Let’s look at Germany’s history. The “Green Initiatives” that were taken on by Germany basically bankrupted the county. Thanks to their politicians, Germany’s energy policy was a total disaster. Going solar and wind, left them with a huge bill, paid for by the taxpayers and very little to show for the mountain of cash spent! Their “green energy” is extremely expensive and unreliable and has left them looking towards Russia for gas.

Recently, the German government said that 6.9 million households live in energy poverty, which means they are spending more than 10% of their income on energy. Between 2000 and 2013, electricity prices for households increased by 80%, according to data from the International Energy Agency. This occurred because Germany’s government decided to go gang busters with the Green Initiative by ultimately destroying the energy that was sustaining them, and putting all their funds into the current green technology.

Looking back to the United States, President Obama is not putting funds toward research and development in new green technology, but regulating and mandating coal companies out of business, all while they produce over 40% of the United States energy. The cost of coal is also much, much cheaper and is here in the United States in abundance. There is definitely agreement within the industry that Americans will be facing staggering cost increases if Obama is allowed to move forward on forcing quick adherence to EPA regulations that will result in even more coal plant closings.

In Germany, Merkel’s government shut down 8 reactors after the Fukushima disaster which was caused by a tsunami. Of course this is not a disaster that Germany would be exposed to, but the main source of their energy was forced to close due to their major “green energy” initiative. Despite huge government subsidies, renewable energy was not able to handle the demands of Germany’s energy needs. A former German environmental minister told the New York Times, “There is great danger that this project will fail, with devastating economic and social consequences.”

Merkel’s policy called for the addition of wind turbine power, however, wind farms are notoriously unreliable. A recent Harvard University study revealed that the potential of wind farms has been greatly overestimated. They require lots of space and kill tens of thousands of birds annually. Germany would see massive power outages, especially in winter when the demand was at a peak, and less power was generated. Because renewable power sources are so unreliable and incapable of handling the energy needs, Germany has now been forced to build numerous coal plants to supply the energy they require. They have built more coal plants in 2013 then at any time in the past 2 decades.

Two years ago, the Obama Administration invested more than $500 million taxpayer dollars in Solyndra, a solar company. Vice President Biden claimed that Solyndra would be creating “jobs of the future.” President Obama claimed, “The true engine of economic growth will always be companies like Solyndra.” The taxpayers bankrolled a loan in the amount of $500 million dollars in 2009 and Solyndra went bankrupt in less than 2 years.

The Obama administration has been picking winners and losers in the energy market and so far, the majority of the companies that were bankrolled by the taxpayer have gone bankrupt or are headed into bankruptcy while laying off workers. The 2009 stimulus package spent $80 billion to subsidize politically chosen energy firms. Currently 1,900 investigations have been opened due to abuse, waste and fraud. involving those funds. Is investing in energy companies the job of the Federal Government? Did these companies have proven potential or were they paybacks on Obama’s donor lists? As proven with the stimulus, the government does not have a successful track record in choosing the best firms in which to invest taxpayer dollars.

Like Obama, Germany did not invest the majority of its money into future technology, but on existing green technology. A group of German experts said, “this policy has had a very low technology-specific innovation impact on Germany.” Companies continue to sell the existing technology because of the massive subsidies they receive from the government instead of investing in Research and Development into new clean energy that can actually satisfy, in a more reliable fashion, the country with the energy it needs. The experts concluded “There is no justification for a continuation of the Renewable Energies Act”

When the math was done in Germany, it was determined that the billions in investments in solar energy and wind turbines would delay “global warming” by a mere 37 hours by the end of the century, according to a report cited in Der Spiegel.

A study by some of the world’s top climate economists including three Nobel Laureates for the Copenhagen Consensus Center shows that subsidizing existing renewables does so little good that for every dollar spent, 97 cents is wasted. However, investing in green innovation could make quite a difference down the road. Germany’s green initiative has left them at the mercy of Russia and has hurt their economy and the public at large.

Currently the Obama administration plans on joining with the UN to fund the UN’s Green Climate Fund which plans on spending $100 billion to be used in helping developing nations to adopt renewable energy. Should the United States, who is looking at possible default of its own bond obligations every year and is currently over $17 trillion dollars in debt, be spending this money to send overseas on green initiatives? Should the United States be funding this program while our Military is being cut to the bone, a record number of Americans are not employed or have dropped out of the job market, the nation’s GDP growth has fallen to an all time low and we have the highest number of Americans on food stamps than any time in our history? Should we be sending our hard-earned dollars overseas investing in green energy that has proven disastrous in Germany or investing it in our own economy?

Why is President Obama refusing to sign off on the Keystone pipeline? Studies show,

“the Keystone Pipeline will be the safest and most advanced oil pipeline operation in North America. It will not only bring essential infrastructure to North American oil producers, but it will also provide jobs, long term energy independence and an economic boost to America.”

Currently, 75% of Americans as well as the majority of the House, Republicans and Democrats, want the Keystone approved. Wealthy environmentalists have offered up $100 million in campaign cash to those who support their “green initiatives” and they have threatened to withhold money from candidates who support the Keystone pipeline. Are wealthy donors the reason the administration is demanding “green initiatives” be pushed through? Is President Obama putting the wants and needs of the Environmentalists over the economic stability of the US?

The question now, is will President Obama study the failures in Germany, that proved disastrous and destroyed their economy, or will he continue to push ahead with the “green initiatives” we have seen fail and set the United States up to repeat the very history he refuses to see?

Will the US economy see red over green initiatives?
__________________________________________________
Leigh Bravo blogs at The Trumpet. • (916 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Will the US Economy See Red Over Green Initiatives?

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Woo hoo! Any article that begins with a quote from Richard Feynman rocks! High five!

    Now, where did I leave my under-stated dignity? We return you now to your regularly-scheduled program.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    Around 20 years ago, I came across a Greenpeace pamphlet which cited a number of dangerous firms. Among them was the Pacific Legal Foundation, not because they were polluters (or even supporters of polluters), but because they preferred a free-market approach to dealing with environmental problems rather than government control. This is a good example of why so many “environmentalists” are commonly called Watermelons — green on the outside, red on the inside.

    HotAir, as it happens, presented tonight a short video (with subtitles) of a German satirical take (from their equivalent of Jon Stewart) on the energy policy, which has increased energy costs while actually harming the environment (even by their own standards). Note that Spain (which under its Socialist government went all in for the green movement) has also learned that this was a mistake.

    But I’m not sure those green subsidies really are 97% wasted. It all depends on what the purpose is. If we judge from the justification, then indeed they are a waste. But if we judge from the actual purpose (enriching the Corrupticrats’ cronies), they’re no waste at all, but instead a great success.

    • Rosalys says:

      And applying the same standard the Obama regime is a roaring success. I don’t think Obama is an evil genius That is to say, he is no genius – he’s lazy and privileged and arrogant. But evil? Oh yes! Very, very much so! I wonder if he’s even really a puppet in the strict sense of the word? I wonder if he has any strings to pull? I think he has been placed in position for the sole reason that being quite tanned, any criticism can be lazily countered with cries of racism. But calling him a puppet removes a certain amount of moral culpability from him that he must not be allowed escape.

      Excellent article, by the way!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *