The Greens vs. the Non-White Poor
The green movement is anti-free market. It proposes restrictions on the production of energy except for wind power and solar power. It favors renewable energy, especially wind and solar. A representative presentation is made by the Union of Concerned Scientists. (Note: when a group is “concerned,” it is not Right wing. There is no union of concerned gun owners, nor will there be.)
Wind power is a delusion. This is a great article on wind energy.
I am not going to review it here.
Wind power is an economic loser. In rare circumstances, it can work for an individual household, when the house is located in the equivalent of a wind tunnel. Some people who are worried about the failure of the electrical power grid may think it’s worth a huge amount of money to build such a system. But the obvious doesn’t occur to them, namely, that if the power grid goes down, the division of labor will collapse in the entire region where the power goes down and stays down. Civilization will basically disappear in that region. It will be a Mad Max scenario.
What about solar power? It, too, is mostly hype except in regions with a lot of sunshine. The percentage of power generated in the United States by solar power is one half of 1%.
The issue of battery storage is crucial. The pace of development is slow. Prices have not fallen as fast as solar power panels.
It is indicative of the political ignorance of vast numbers of Americans that anybody would take seriously the argument that the American economy can switch from coal, oil, nuclear, and natural gas to wind power and solar power. The only rival to the big four is hydroelectric power, and that constitutes 13% of power generated in the United States. To increase renewable hydropower requires dams. Dams flood the land. The greens are opposed to flooding lands — not because the land is privately owned, but because man-made flooding is not natural. The green site Ecowatch has issued a warning against hydroelectric power.
Anti-capitalists have used arguments against pollution, including carbon dioxide, to discourage the use of nuclear, coal, oil, and natural gas. Burning natural gas does produce carbon dioxide. Therefore, the greens are opposed to natural gas as much as they are opposed to the other forms of power.
Basically, the greens are opposed to the modern division of labor. They are opposed to the United States and the West in general as being enormously wealthy in comparison to the masses of the world, who do not have cheap energy. Over the last generation, the masses of the world have gained access to cheap energy, and this is the primary reason why they have become richer. The other reason is an increase of free trade, both domestically and across borders. But the greens are opposed to both capitalist trade and modern forms of energy.
The greens’ agenda would keep the Third World from getting richer. Cheap energy fuels Third World economic growth.
India and China have growing populations. Why? Economic growth. How? A major factor has been their access to cheap energy. A good study of this connection is here. This is going to continue.
From GaryNorth.com, here.