Here is the stark reality: Progressive/World Without Borders/Environmentalist do not give a flip about the working poor. Here is proof.

Editor's note: What the population may not understand - because they are not being told -  has to do with our residential/commercial energy supply.  With all the talk of "wind, solar and bio-fuels,"  these three categories of supply give us no more than 8% of our fuel supply, on average.    As can be seen on the chart, below,  that fact has not trended "up," over the past 5 years.  To put it differently:  there is no hope of a short-term  "quick fix" to the energy concerns facing us in the next 50/100 years.   Importance?  If we are not going to overburden the working poor,  transitioning from one category of fuel supply to another needs to take into consideration a little thing called "availability."  Question: When environmentalism condemns coal,  natural gas and/or nuclear supply,  (as, perhaps, it should)  and moves to cut those supplies before quantitative sources are in place in ample supply,  who pays the price: the working poor forced to finance this untimely transition, or,  the industries that supply these transitional energy sources and the new "fat cats" of the world?  

Understand that when Obama promised that his energy policies would cause energy prices to "skyrocket,"  that is not because one source of energy is more costly,  than another  -  in and of itself.  Rather,  it is because he and his Harvard Nitwit activist,  do not understand the capitalist principle of "supply and demand."  These clowns want to suspend that principle,  and force the working poor in the Northeast,  for example,  to pay through the nose for energy supplies and procedures that are in short demand,  if available at all.  The world is not going to end tomorrow.  We have time to create a compassionate transition from fossil to alternative fuels.  But that will take decades, regardless of the phony demands placed on industry,  otherwise.     



The U.S. Energy Information Administration said in a report that in August 2012, coal produced 39% of U.S. electricity, up from a low of 32% in April 2012, when the natural gas share of generation equaled that of coal. Increased demand for electric power in the summer months—to run air conditioners—created more room in the market, and generation from both fuels increased between April and July. The August coal share of generation is still notably lower than the 50% annual average over the 1990-2010 period.


Every year during the height of summer, natural gas-fired generation from peaking generators (used to meet the highest levels of electricity demand, and typically burning natural gas) increases to meet the demand for electricity, largely regardless of fuel prices. As demand for electric power moderates in the autumn months and the need for peaking generation moderates, total natural gas-fired generation decreases. Through the fall, if natural gas prices remain higher than in the spring, coal’s share of generation may continue to increase. . . . .  Source for text below the chart:  http://www.lngworldnews.com/eia-electricity-generation-from-natural-gas-up-with-summer-heat/

No comments:

Post a Comment