Reid, Obama and Dems Have No Energy Plan for Our Future Needs

02 Jul, 2008 by McQ

Print this article Font size -16+

Investor’s Business Daily brings us the latest from probably the worst Majority Leader the Senate has seen in a very long time:

The Dr. No of the drill-nothing Congress tried to deflect the issue of rising gas prices Monday by telling Fox Business News that there are costs we should worry about besides those stemming from Democratic inaction. Our guilt is supposed to replace our anger. “Coal makes us sick,” Reid said, “oil makes us sick, it’s global warming, it’s ruining our country, it’s ruining our world, we’ve got to stop using fossil fuel . . . .”

In this case, he’s partially right – we all know that in a perfect world, we’d be using something else – an alternative. But this isn’t a perfect world and our energy needs aren’t going to stand still as we try to develop alternatives. So we have to deal with and use what is available now and exploit it.

The problem is, “Dr. No” isn’t just against petroleum and coal, but he’s also against the use of very clean nuclear energy.

Instead Reid is invested in using “vapor ware” and convinced that our problem is we haven’t thrown enough money at it. And, of course, once we do, everything will by hunky dory.

Even if we tripled our current output from wind, solar and geothermal, they’d produce just 2.2% of our current energy needs.

But even if we had the technology and it could fulfill the need, Reid forgets about the movement he and others have supported over the years:

The irony here is that it’s environmentalists and Democrats who often stand in the way of alternative energy. Reid needs to talk to Ted Kennedy and John Kerry about their opposition to a wind farm off Cape Cod because it might spoil their view.

A 500-megawatt, 20,000-acre wind farm scheduled for Valley County, Mont., was stopped by environmentalists who complained that 400-foot turbines would disturb a nearby wilderness area.

The Sunrise Powerlink solar-energy project in Southern California is being fought because of a 150-mile, $1.5 billion high-voltage line connecting desert-based solar panels with the urban customers of San Diego Gas & Electric.

Not only have nuclear power plants, drilling and petroleum refineries been stopped by the environmental movement, so-called clean energy projects have been stopped in their tracks as well – aided and abetted by the likes off Harry Reid. He has no solutions, only road-blocks. And the candidate he supports is no better:

Agreeing with Reid is his party’s presidential nominee, Sen. Barack Obama. In a primary debate in Nevada, Obama pledged: “I will end the notion of Yucca Mountain because it has not been based on the sort of sound science that can assure the people of Nevada that they’re going to be safe.”

If you’re concerned with the future of our energy supply, you need to consider the fact that the present Congressional leadership hasn’t a clue nor a desire to do what is necessary to ensure our energy supply in the near future. Couple that with an Obama presidency and we’re looking at a lack of foresight that will economically effect us for decades to come.

This is a critical aspect of the coming election and people need to really dig into the plans on each side and make this a major issue for the voter. They need to demand specifics which will ensure the energy supply, even if that means coal and petroleum short-term with nuclear coming on-line and then the integration of alternative sources as they become technologically available and viable.