Who Supports Alternative Energy?

If you answered: “the Sierra Club and their allies,” you’d be right.

By John Droz, Jr., Physicist

This is a commentary based on breaking news of international importance. Please give careful consideration to these key energy questions. Who is it that wants:

1. US nuclear energy facilities to close down?
2. US fossil fuel reserves to stay in the ground (onshore and offshore)?
3. the costs of fossil fuels to go up (e.g. with a carbon tax)?
4. a high percentage of the US electric grid to be based on unreliable sources?
5. the US to waste trillions of dollars on unreliable electricity?
6. to have our national security weakened by wind energy interference with our military?

However the correct answer is also our communist opponents: Russia and China.

Consider the fact that when it comes to energy policy, there is an almost identical agenda between these two groups.

Here is last week’s amazing Congressional Report about this collusion.

This is not new news, but information that the national media has (for some reason) not been interested in pursuing and publicizing. Consider this report last year. And a similar report back in 2014.

You would think that anyone concerned about purported collusion between Russia and President Trump would be extremely concerned about documented proof that the Russians are purposefully trying to undermine our economy and national security by supporting the environmental movement’s six-point energy agenda (above).

Fossil fuel exports account for around 16% of Russian GDP, 52% of government revenue and 70% of Russian exports (see here), so it makes sense that Russian propaganda efforts would be focused on protecting their fragile economy.

The US is the biggest threat to China’s political and economic aspirations, so it makes perfect sense that they would also love to see our economy and national security undermined — and a frivolous, counter-productive national energy policy would be a very effective way to do that.

Right now this is playing out regarding US offshore drilling. For example, in North Carolina, environmentalist are aggressively opposing any and all offshore fossil fuel exploration (e.g. here and here and here).

So, in summary, one side wants US fossil fuels to stay in the ground, so that our costs will go up, and that we will be forced to rely on expensive and unreliable sources of electricity (like wind energy). This will harm our economy.

The other, pro-American side, wants us to get more energy independence, to expand our economy by having lower cost reliable electricity, and to be able to give our European allies an alternative to Russian natural gas.

The wind energy matter is a proxy fight over these issues.

Lastly, if you know anyone involved in the offshore anti-drilling fight for America, please let me know - John Droz aaprjohn@northnet - and I’ll be glad to pass along our new ten-point Position Paper on that issue, which should be ready soon.

Update 3/5/18 7:15 AM:  Originally this was a correspondence from John, and I asked for permission to publish it in an article form.  Requests to publish came in from many of those to whom he sent this correspondence. Here are his comments and the replies he received showing how broad and insidious this issue truly is.  RK

My correspondence about the overlapping of interests between Communists and the leaders of some mainstream environmental movements, clearly hit a nerve and resulted in an unusually high response rate. (I was correctly reminded that this is not just a fight going on in America.) At this point over 95% are in agreement. 

A sample comment: 

“I watch Russia Today (RT) quite a bit as an antidote to the pro-EU propaganda of the BBC. I have long noticed RT’s support for every Luddite environmentalist group opposed to a realistic energy policy."

I got many requests to repost, and my answer to all was that in this case I’d prefer anyone who would like to do that, to put this important matter in their own words. None if this is about me anyway.

 Regarding this collusion, I cited three sources of references, and here are three more:

#4 — Please carefully read what this news report which is about a Congressional effort to require leaders of certain environmental organizations to register as foreign agents! In part it says:

“U.S. environmental activists who are working to halt the production and use of fossil fuels could be required to register as foreign agents if Congress gets serious about enforcing an existing law… An international campaign known as “Keep It in the Ground” has been pushing an anti-fossil fuel agenda that advances Russia’s geopolitical interests at the expense of the U.S. and America’s allies. The campaign claims support from 

more than 400 organizations across the globe, with a sizable percentage operating inside the U.S. The campaign is opposed not just to the extraction of fossil fuels, but to any fossil fuel-related project including pipelines, rail transportation, refineries, and energy exploration. These groups include Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, 350.org, etc.”

 #5 — Natalie Grant was an expert in Soviet propaganda (see here). Way back in 1998, she wrote “Gorbachev and Global Enviro-Communism”— which is about the Marxist roots of the Global Warming issue, which in-turn spawned the renewable energy craze.

#6 — So what’s really going on? IMO the movie Grinding America Down gives the answer: this is all about sabotaging the country leading the free world. Please watch this five minute trailer that succinctly explains it all better than I can.

A solid understanding of who the coalition is, and what their agenda is, makes it crystal clear why they hate President Trump. Any leader promoting “Make America Great Again” is an arch-enemy to the forces that want the US to regress to an agrarian age (e.g. with our economy crippled by a high dependence on antiquated, unreliable, expensive electrical energy sources like windmills, that unrelentingly spit out an unpredictable and uncontrollable output). 

Oh, and if that isn’t bad enough, wind energy (“the gift that keeps on taking”) also inexorably divides many communities, pitting neighbor against neighbor. Who benefits from that divisiveness in the free world?

[Note: be particularly sensitive to terminology, as the Left has mastered this art. For example, there is no such thing as a wind "farm" (which is dishonestly trying to convey that an industrial facility is pastoral and benign). For example, when you hear the word "sustainability" this is code for extracting the rights from unwitting citizens. Etc.] 

In a nutshell there is strong evidence that ultimately the renewable energy, climate change, and education system clashes we are engaged in, are really about Communism vs Freedom.

Avoid being a victim by getting educated, keeping your eye on the ball, and defending your rights…