• Consumers will pay big for Obama’s alternative energy push

    CFACT contributor Larry Bell notes that President Obama is making good on his promise of skyrocketing energy costs — with new mandates for expensive, inefficient, and unreliable Green energy. Worse, each new Green energy job — based on experience in EU countries — will cost two to five conventional sector jobs, thanks to higher energy costs that drive employers to reduce payrolls.

  • Obama: Iranian oil, good. Canadian oil, bad. American oil, bad.

    Another day, another way in which the Obama Administration undermines U.S. energy security and prosperity — this time through granting ridiculous concessions to Iran while hunkering down to depress the U.S. and Canadian oil markets. Such an energy policy could have only been designed in places like Tehran — or by those whose desire to placate the iranians is so intense that common sense and the U.S.national interest have been thrown overboard.

  • Questionable data, secret science

    CFACT contributor Charles G. Battig, in a letter published in the Wall Street Journal, lashes out at the EPA for its apparent collusion with radical environmental activists in the orchestrated “sue and settle” consent decrees and asserts that the agency’s Clean Air Act policy continues in a self-perpetuating bureaucratic endeavor far removed from its original congressional mission.

  • Mexico’s energy reform is rolling, albeit with training wheels

    For the first time in over 80 years, Mexico held an auction for developing oil prospects — with offerings for 14 shallow-water blocks. The downsides included the drop in the world oil price, the escape of the notorious cartel leader El Chapo (adding to distrust over Mexico’s political stability), and the U.S. deal with Iran that opens up its oil to world markets. The upside — these were among the least likely to be profitable blocks that the Mexican government has available to offer.

  • Singing in the new revolution

    Opposition to the excesses of the Obama EPA and other related agencies is mounting — unions are seeing jobs die; landowners do not like trumped up “endangered species” habitat designations rob them of economically productive land, and ordinary citizens are recoiling from the higher costs for unreliable renewable energy.

  • Ethanol and biodiesel: Guilty as charged

    Biodiesel and ethanol are killers — and thieves of fuel efficiency, engine life, and pocketbooks. They exist in our society primarily thanks to corruptible politicians who took advantage of an “oil crisis” to entrench themselves into the American automobile. They typically reduce gas mileage, increase engine wear, and create a multitude of other problems for consumers — including higher expenses for transportation.

  • “Farming in Fear” Watch the trailer

    “Farming in Fear” pieces together Martha’s story from interviews and documentation, tracking the nearly 10-year ordeal she’s gone through just to earn a living in spite of corrupt local ordinances, abusive management of her conservation easement, and personal attacks through the introduction of an amendment to Virginia’s Right to Farm Act called the ‘Boneta Bill’, designed to protect small farmers so that what happened to Martha never happens again.

  • EPA targets the airline industry

    Despite the fact that similar regulation of airline emissions has been put on hold by the United Nations following threats of massive retaliation from China and Russia and declarations that the entire action violted the UN Charter, the Obama EPA is now proposing very similar regulations for U.S. airlines — rules that could cost customers both money and flight options.

  • Japan: The other nuclear country

    Since Japan shut down all of its nuclear power plants after Fukushima, the nation has suffered from high fuel costs that make Japanese products less competitive in the world economy. Japan thus rejoins a number of nations who rely on uranium (and now thorium) as well as fossil fuels — because it was the economically wise thing to do. Would that the U.S. would base at least some of its energy policy (sic) on economics.