Killing Virginia Drilling: Pro-Military or Anti-Energy?
So now we read a new one, courtesy of Greenwire (subscription required), that a little bit of drilling off Virginia’s shore could interfere with the Navy — and so that’s why we’d better not do it.
Specifically, “The Pentagon has expressed concerns about how offshore drilling along Virginia’s coast could hinder military operations there. That, in turn, may complicate plans to sell leases there.”
Huh. I seem to recall our Secretary of Energy and Obama’s hand-picked chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission both saying that we didn’t need to build coal-fired or nuclear power because we can just put some windmills off the Atlantic coast. Which is the same, ahem, “plan” that got the Brits to the point where they openly discuss impending blackouts and their global humiliation if they should occur during the London Olympics.
As I detail in Power Grab: How Obama’s Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America, following the Obama agenda as articulated by Secretary Chu and FERC’s Jon Wellinghoff, would be a lot of windmills — the entirety of the Atlantic coast, thirty miles deep by one expert’s calculation if you wanted to replace all of the power generation that retires, let alone add for growth. As you might imagine, this would pose a slightly greater impediment to naval passage.
This crowd are willing to say anything in opposition to domestic electricity production, and anything in opposition to domestic oil and gas production offshore (as well as onshore).
They aren’t anti-offshore energy, while the public remain pro-offshore drilling; they’re anti-energy. But the public remain pro-exploration and -production, having grown up pretty quickly on these issues a couple of years ago. They sense that the greatest risk lies in not being able to assess relative risks.
And the risks of imposing an energy-scarcity agenda on America are terrific, yet it remains the Left’s plan for you. About which I have made my case.