Here are three important questions to ponder:
1. Which is cleaner?
a. Producing electricity in coal burning plants.
b. Producing electricity in oil fired plants.
c. Producing electricity in natural gas fired plants.
2. Which is cleaner?
a. Driving a car powered by gasoline.
b. Driving a car powered by natural gas.
c. Driving a car powered by a hybrid engine.
d. Driving a car powered by an electric engine.
3. Which of these systems is not able in the next twenty years to produce sufficient energy to satisfy our nation's power needs.
a, Solar Power.
b. Wind Power.
c. Hydroelectric Power.
d. Natural Gas Power.
These are not difficult questions. The answers are settled science to use the vernacular of the global warming crowd. The cleanest way to produce electricity using fossil fuels is by burning natural gas. It reduces particulate emissions compared to the other fuels and it reduces greenhouse gas emissions by at least half compared to the others. The cleanest cars are also those powered by natural gas. There is no competition between natural gas and any gasoline or diesel engine. Electric cars themselves produce fewer emissions than the natural gas powered cars, but the electricity used to power the cars comes from a system which uses coal to produce the bulk of its power. That makes them less clean than the natural gas cars. Lastly, the only power source that could provide sufficient energy for the nation in the next two decades is natural gas. Solar and Wind might someday become really efficient energy sources, but they are not there yet. More important, one cannot get solar energy at night or when the weather does not cooperate. Hydro power is already fully developed in the USA and it provides just a small percentage of the needed power.
Put all this together and it is clear that natural gas is an essential part of the future of America's energy needs. So why is it that the left, including candidates like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are so opposed to fracking? For those who don't know, fracking is a production method increase production of natural gas from wells. It has been in use for over fifty years. The imaginative combination of fracking and horizontal drilling, however, was the method used to start getting natural gas from shale fields in the USA. It has brought the price of gas down from $14 to $2 per unit. It has also made the USA into the world's largest producer of natural gas. We also have such large reserves of the fuel that it could supply all of our energy needs for the next few centuries without problem.
So let's summarize. America could switch it's energy usage to very low cost domestic natural gas. That would end our dependence on foreign oil. Indeed, we have sufficient reserves of natural gas to export it in large amounts to places like Europe and East Asia where energy is in short supply. That would give America markets for its products and would produce hundreds of thousands or millions of good jobs here in the USA. It would also make it nearly impossible for Russia to threaten the Europeans with the cut off of their gas supplies. It would undermine the countries like Iran that use oil revenues to support terrorists. It would help raise the standard of living around the world by providing less expensive energy. All of this switch to natural gas would greatly clean up the environment and would reduce carbon emissions in dramatic fashion. Just the current switch to natural gas around the USA has led to our reducing our emissions by about 2% per year at a time when the rest of the world keeps increasing their emissions. Despite all this, the left wants to stop fracking. The very people who talk non-stop about reducing carbon emissions are the same people who want to stop the best way of accomplishing that goal.
The next time someone starts to tell you about the perils of global warming, ask them about fracking and natural gas. Watch them try to explain why they oppose the one thing that will bring major economic benefits to the USA and will accomplish their goal of reducing greenhouse gases.
1. Which is cleaner?
a. Producing electricity in coal burning plants.
b. Producing electricity in oil fired plants.
c. Producing electricity in natural gas fired plants.
2. Which is cleaner?
a. Driving a car powered by gasoline.
b. Driving a car powered by natural gas.
c. Driving a car powered by a hybrid engine.
d. Driving a car powered by an electric engine.
3. Which of these systems is not able in the next twenty years to produce sufficient energy to satisfy our nation's power needs.
a, Solar Power.
b. Wind Power.
c. Hydroelectric Power.
d. Natural Gas Power.
These are not difficult questions. The answers are settled science to use the vernacular of the global warming crowd. The cleanest way to produce electricity using fossil fuels is by burning natural gas. It reduces particulate emissions compared to the other fuels and it reduces greenhouse gas emissions by at least half compared to the others. The cleanest cars are also those powered by natural gas. There is no competition between natural gas and any gasoline or diesel engine. Electric cars themselves produce fewer emissions than the natural gas powered cars, but the electricity used to power the cars comes from a system which uses coal to produce the bulk of its power. That makes them less clean than the natural gas cars. Lastly, the only power source that could provide sufficient energy for the nation in the next two decades is natural gas. Solar and Wind might someday become really efficient energy sources, but they are not there yet. More important, one cannot get solar energy at night or when the weather does not cooperate. Hydro power is already fully developed in the USA and it provides just a small percentage of the needed power.
Put all this together and it is clear that natural gas is an essential part of the future of America's energy needs. So why is it that the left, including candidates like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are so opposed to fracking? For those who don't know, fracking is a production method increase production of natural gas from wells. It has been in use for over fifty years. The imaginative combination of fracking and horizontal drilling, however, was the method used to start getting natural gas from shale fields in the USA. It has brought the price of gas down from $14 to $2 per unit. It has also made the USA into the world's largest producer of natural gas. We also have such large reserves of the fuel that it could supply all of our energy needs for the next few centuries without problem.
So let's summarize. America could switch it's energy usage to very low cost domestic natural gas. That would end our dependence on foreign oil. Indeed, we have sufficient reserves of natural gas to export it in large amounts to places like Europe and East Asia where energy is in short supply. That would give America markets for its products and would produce hundreds of thousands or millions of good jobs here in the USA. It would also make it nearly impossible for Russia to threaten the Europeans with the cut off of their gas supplies. It would undermine the countries like Iran that use oil revenues to support terrorists. It would help raise the standard of living around the world by providing less expensive energy. All of this switch to natural gas would greatly clean up the environment and would reduce carbon emissions in dramatic fashion. Just the current switch to natural gas around the USA has led to our reducing our emissions by about 2% per year at a time when the rest of the world keeps increasing their emissions. Despite all this, the left wants to stop fracking. The very people who talk non-stop about reducing carbon emissions are the same people who want to stop the best way of accomplishing that goal.
The next time someone starts to tell you about the perils of global warming, ask them about fracking and natural gas. Watch them try to explain why they oppose the one thing that will bring major economic benefits to the USA and will accomplish their goal of reducing greenhouse gases.
No comments:
Post a Comment