How dare they offer a reasonable plan that lives in the real world rather than based on doomsday cult ravings!
House Republicans unveil energy and climate plan that would boost fossil fuels, hydropower
Republicans this week introduced a road map describing how they would mitigate rising gasoline prices and address climate change if the party wins control of the House of Representatives in the November midterms.
The plan arises from the energy, climate and conservation task force established last year by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and involves proposals that run counter to the warnings of climate scientists.
The strategy provides a broad overview of how the party would address high energy prices but doesn’t set specific greenhouse gas emission targets. It calls for ramping up fossil fuel production and liquefied natural gas exports, as well as streamlining the permitting process for major infrastructure projects, according to The Washington Post, which first reported the plan.
The agenda also endorses legislation to expand hydropower, one of the oldest and largest sources of renewable energy, and condemns policies that increase U.S. demand for critical minerals mined from China, which are necessary for electric vehicle and renewable energy production. In a document introducing the road map, House Republicans cited Department of Energy statistics showing that only 3% of the more than 80,000 dams in the U.S. currently generate electricity.
“If Republicans earn back the House majority in the fall, we will be ready to enact that strategy and ease the suffering of working Americans’ wallets,” Rep. Garret Graves, R-La., the task force chair, wrote in a blog post.
Well, really, this has zero chance of getting signed by Biden if the GOP passes it.
The GOP plans to unveil the six policy areas of their plan, called “Unlock American Resources,” “American Innovation,” “Let America Build,” “Beat China and Russia,” “Conservation with a Purpose” and “Build Resilient Communities,” over the next two months.
Well, I hope it includes nuclear power
Environmentalists and congressional Democrats argue the GOP plan is not only insufficient but would worsen the climate crisis.
Yeah, it sounds like it’s just including ‘climate change’ for the hell of it, but, then, the climate cultists plans aren’t really about climate, but, governmental power.
Lol
Gee those all sounding great ideas
Why didn’t Trump do them? He probably should have since 2 years ago he personally asked OPEC to CUT production because the low price of oil was hurting American oil producers. That drove the price up
Which was at the time necessary to aide the American oil companies. Of course being economically illiterate you wouldn’t know that there is such a thing as too low a price. That would be when the producer stops producing because he can’t make money. Or does that not make sense to you? The way monopolies usually take over a market is by selling so low they drive out the competition. Do you want domestic oil driven out of the market?
FJB
OPEC+ has agreed to increase their oil production. They can do it cheaply and quickly.
Besides the Saudi-led increase in oil, the Saudis announced a cease-fire with Yemen. Although the crown prince of Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian murderer, the U.S. remains friendly with them. President Biden is planning a visit. Good job, Mr. President, sir.
If the Saudi increase in production causes crude prices to drop too much it could spell more problems for the U.S. producers, who cannot compete with Saudi oil.
Should the U.S. nationalize the U.S. crude industry and keep all that oil for ourselves??
Should the U.S. be dependent on the Saudis and OPEC?
Think the U.S. went down that road in the 70s.
Remember?
Oh, that’s right you joined the Army around then right?
#LetsGoBrandon
#Enough Excuses
Bwaha! Lolgf
The largest problem for U.S. oil producers is the Biden administration.
#LGBFJB
#Enough Excuses
Bwaha! Lolgf
Uh… climate crisis? Where?
The only crisis facing our country today is the lack of responsible leadership.
#LetsGoBrandon
#BelieveTheLie
Bwaha! Lolgf
Our distinguished host quoted:
That’s primarily because they are mostly small dams.
Local to me, Berea College funded a small hydroelectric power generation plant on now closed Lock #13 of the Kentucky River. It’s small, providing enough sparktricity for a couple thousand homes, but it’s still something. The next project is a slightly bigger one on Lock #14 near Beattyville. Berea College might have a bit of a selfish motive, because it claims that this now offsets its own power consumption from fossil-fueled power plants, but whatever.
The locks on the Kentucky River mostly shut down a couple of decades ago, as coal mining, and barging coal down the river, died out, but those locks are still there, and most of them should be suitable for hydroelectric power generation. The problem is that they would all be smaller projects, meaning not that much power generation individually.
That sounds like an excellent concept, I’m sure the useful idiots can find issues with it, but…
Lots of the heavy work is done, modern generators in the appropriate size are relatively efficient, probably little property acquisition, etc., and in more rational times, permitting should be reasonably straight forward.