CFACT Senior Policy Analyst Paul Driessen suggests that President Obama's State of the Union address -- in particular, his promise to bring back jobs -- will be meaningless, bloviating nonsense if he does not approve construction of the Keystone Pipeline -- the nation's number one shovel-ready project. The State Department has once again given the pipeline project a green light -- and all but the Greens are on board. It's time to put up or shut up talking about helping the U.S. economy.
CFACT Senior Advisor Paul Driessen documents how the Obama Administration has put the lid on economic growth by locking down oil and gas and minerals production on federal lands and watyers, then imposing heavy burdens on existing and planned operations -- all the while promising jobs creation only through federal subaidies for so-called "clean" energy that in fact has its own downsides (dead eagles and other birds, the need for rare-earth minerals that must come from China since he has locked down U.S. deposits from production, etc.). Moreover, his EPA is on a mad mission to control nearly every aspect of American society. Things must change if the youth of America can rekindle real (rather than false) hope for their future.
While most people consider nature to be priceless, economists have recently attempted to place dollar values on the services ecosystems provide.
Is taxpayer money spent on Green energy hurting both the economy and environment? Well that’s the assertion of economists from the group PERC, who in a recent study found that for every $100 billion a government spends on so-called “clean energy,” that nation’s GDP is likely to decrease by nearly a half a percent.
In recent years, a number of politicians have been promoting the notion of Green jobs to help resuscitate our economy. And while it may sound appealing, the real-world experience of nations subsidizing environmental projects to reduce unemployment hasn’t fared very well.
President Obama recently announced a sweeping plan to combat global warming by massively regulating coal power plants. CFACT senior policy analyst Paul Driessen says this would be a mistake, and here explains why.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, fracking requires just 0.6 to 5.8 gallons of water per million Btu of energy produced. By comparison, “renewable” and “sustainable” corn-based ethanol requires 2,510 to 29,100 gallons per million Btu of usable energy – and biodiesel from soybeans consumes an astounding and unsustainable 14,000 to 75,000 gallons of water per million Btu!
President Obama believes we need to tax carbon dioxide emissions to stop catastrophic global warming. Paul Driessen, senior policy advisor for CFACT, disagrees.
Drilling opponents claim to be protecting the environment. In reality, they simply detest hydrocarbons, modern living standards, free enterprise and personal liberty. Commonsense policies will rejuvenate our economy, put Americans back to work....
The Keystone XL pipeline has been criticized by environmentalists for carrying oil, but Steve Goreham, author of The Mad Mad Mad World of Climatism, says they are missing the point...
Some believe that so-called Green jobs are the answer to America’s economic woes. But if recent news from Seattle is any indication, Green jobs are turning out to be a big bust.
Lord Christopher Monckton is on a speaking tour in New Zealand this month, and appeared on New Zealand's Channel 3 News today to discuss whether global warming ought to be a concern.
Do fossil fuels like coal and oil harm your health? Well many environmentalists would have you believe so, but Marlo Lewis, Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, offers a different perspective...
Average planetary temperatures haven’t budged in 16 years. Hurricanes and strong tornadoes are at or near their lowest ebb in decades. Global sea ice is back to normal, Arctic ice is nearly normal, and the Antarctic icepack continues to grow. The rate of sea level rise remains what it was in 1900.
Those concerned about global warming have recently been pushing the idea of a new tax on carbon emissions. But according to a recent study by the Heritage Foundation, such a carbon tax would cause serious economic harm without even making a dent in global emissions.