Warmist Wants Obama To Stop All Oil Production On Public Lands

by William Teach | November 11, 2015 7:25 am

What is one of the best ways to help the lower and middle class? Cheap, reliable, affordable energy. Why is the Cult of Climastrology against this? Here’s Lydia Millet in the NY Times

Obama Should Let Fossil Fuels Lie[1]

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S rejection of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline last week had the ring of a great victory for the environment. But even as he declared the United States a “global leader” in the transition to cleaner energy, he revealed a challenge that neither he nor his administration has confronted: “If we’re going to prevent large parts of this earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes,” the president said, “we’re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground, rather than burn them and release more dangerous pollution into the sky.”

The logic is clear. If we don’t extract them, we can’t burn them. Even better, this is a change the president can actually make, without the approval of Congress. With the climate summit meeting in Paris near, and the Keystone decision fresh, the United States can truly take the lead on these fuels by stemming their production, not just their consumption.

Most climate debates have focused on cutting the use of fossil fuels. But besides a few high-profile scuffles over fuel extraction in vulnerable wild places like the offshore Arctic, political leaders have ignored fossil fuel production as a necessary piece of climate strategy.

Globally, we will have to use far less of our already proven reserves of oil, gas and coal in the next 35 years if we are to even have a shot at avoiding the most disastrous warming effects. Some say we need to keep a third of the earth’s oil reserves, half its gas and 80 percent of its coal unused. We need to lock up those fuels that would push us past the tipping point. And the most logical place for the United States to start is on our public lands.

This is the extremist view of the CoC. What happens when energy costs skyrocket? Who gets hurt? Not the very rich. What happens when people can no longer afford to drive to work? Who gets hurt? Not the rich.

Secretary Jewell’s circular argument won’t get us anywhere we need to go. No one in the “Keep It in the Ground” movement was suggesting the immediate cessation of fossil fuel extraction — merely an end to new leases on federal public lands. Existing leases, stretching decades into the future in some cases, already cover some 67 million acres of public land and ocean — 55 times bigger than Grand Canyon National Park — whose fuels contain the potential for up to the equivalent of 43 billion tons of carbon dioxide pollution.

Actually, some are. And those who aren’t now, will be if they get Obama to deny any new leases. That’s what they do. Ask for an inch, take a mile, then come back for another inch. This is being pushed by 350.org, the extremist ‘climate change’ group, which does indeed[2] want to stop all fossil fuels extraction on federal lands and offshore.

Who gets hurt? Not that Warmists seem to care in the least. Progressive revolutionaries aren’t worried about that.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove[3]. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach[4].

Endnotes:
  1. Obama Should Let Fossil Fuels Lie: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/opinion/obama-should-let-fossil-fuels-lie.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
  2. does indeed: http://www.hcn.org/articles/fossil-fuel-extraction-on-public-lands-is-the-next-climate-fight
  3. Pirate’s Cove: http://www.thepiratescove.us/
  4. @WilliamTeach: http://twitter.com/WilliamTeach

Source URL: https://rightwingnews.com/climate-change/warmist-wants-obama-to-stop-all-oil-production-on-public-lands/