The Biden family's green New Deal
Some will benefit, while most people's lives, standards of living and the environment will have a great impact
About 90% of all US wells are now hydraulically broken. Broken wells in shale formations open up huge reserves of oil, natural gas and petroleum liquids that were previously closed and inaccessible. By fracking traditional wells, production expands and extends, leaving less energy in the ground.
Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, AOC, the Democratic Party and U.S. environmentalists are determined to make climate change, the Green New Deal, and the replacement of fossil fuels with wind, solar, battery, and biofuel power the core of their foreign and domestic policies . They would ban fracking outright – or the price, and put it out of existence through a slow, painful death from a thousand regulatory cuts.
This would cost up to 19 million jobs and billions of dollars in annual royalties and tax revenues, drive energy prices up, and end America's newfound status as the world's leading oil and gas producer.
This would also affect the quality of the environment, especially in sunny and windy locations such as in the west, the Midwest, and coastal states. Your fossil fuel revenues would disappear; their wind and sunshine would be taken advantage of; Their open spaces, scenic areas, and wildlife habitats would be covered with wind turbines, solar panels, transmission lines, and warehouses filled with backup batteries.
However, some would benefit greatly from it – including those with financial and other interests in the mining, processing and manufacturing of minerals related to wind, solar and battery technologies. Hunter Biden's email treasure trove and the growing cascade of other evidence continue to reveal fascinating Biden family connections to China, Russia, and Ukraine: countries that would benefit greatly from a U.S. Green New Deal because they are the supply most of the metals, minerals and components that are absolutely indispensable for any GND vision.
Many news outlets, social media and search engines routinely sharpen, censor, or bury stories that could harm the Biden candidacy, cast doubt on man-made climate chaos, or undermine claims that the GND transition is easy, affordable, ecological, sustainable and would be painless. It wouldn't be.
Wind and sunshine are definitely clean and renewable. Using them for American power is not.
Fossil fuels still provide 80% of US energy. In 2018 they generated 2.7 billion megawatt hours of electricity. Other natural gas-powered factories, emergency power systems as well as stoves, ovens, ovens and water heaters in restaurants and private houses with a value of another 2.7 billion MWh. Cars, trucks, buses, semi-trailers, tractors, bulldozers and other vehicles used the equivalent of another 2 billion MWh.
That is 7.4 billion megawatt hours per year that the GND would have to replace! We would also have to generate another 142 million MWh per year to charge the batteries for every week on windless, cloudy days.
The more we try to do this, the more we would have to place turbines and panels in low quality wind and solar locations where they would only produce 15 to 20% of the year electricity: 80 to 85% below the nameplate capacity. ”
That means this conversion to an all-electric nation would require millions of onshore wind turbines, thousands of offshore turbines, billions of solar panels, millions of vehicle battery modules, billions of backup energy storage modules, thousands of kilometers of new transmission lines. Millions of vehicle charging stations, tens of billions of tons of concrete, steel, copper, plastic, cobalt, rare earth elements and countless other materials – and digging up hundreds of billions of tons of overburden and ores!
Even if the United States and the world could somehow mine, process, and smelt enough metals and minerals – and make, transport, and install all of those turbines, panels, batteries, and transmission lines – the GND would be the greatest expansion of mining, manufacturing and land use require in human history.
With Democrats and Greens still firmly opposed to mining in the US – even though the US likely has all of these metals and minerals literally under our feet – America would be on China, Russia for the critical materials that wind turbines and solar power are made from and Ukraine rely on panels and rechargeable batteries possible. US foreign and domestic policy would be held hostage.
Almost all of this mining, processing, and manufacturing would require gasoline, diesel, natural gas, and coal … overseas … because these operations cannot be done on wind, solar, and battery power. Global CO2 and other emissions would increase. Global atmospheric carbon dioxide levels would continue to rise. They would just come from outside of the US.
In addition, much of the overseas mining, processing and manufacturing would take place under nearly non-existent workplace safety, fair wage and child labor laws. The horrors that we are already experiencing in the African Congo region would be minor compared to the GND requirements for cobalt and other materials.
To replace oil and gas for petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals and plastics, these feedstuffs would have to be imported or millions of acres planted in canola, soybeans and other biofuel crops. The demands on water, fertilizer, pesticides, tractors, harvesters, processing and transportation would be astronomical.
The wind, solar, battery, and biofuel systems would impact hundreds of millions of acres of America's farmland, natural areas, and plant and animal habitats. Birds of prey, other birds, bats and wild animals from forests, grasslands and desert would suffer significant losses and in many areas would even be threatened with extinction.
The GND would also mean ripping out flawless natural gas appliances, replacing them with electric models, installing fast charging systems for vehicles, and upgrading household, neighborhood, state and national electrical systems for the additional loads. That would require even more raw materials.
Would Biden AOC & Co. require “responsible sourcing” for all GND materials and components, which means certified compliance with all US laws on wages, workplace safety, child labor, and the environment?
Would you require wind and solar companies to go through a comprehensive, multi-year NEPA environmental assessment process for every industrial installation and transmission line? Are you demanding compliance with the Endangered Species Act, the Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act, the Migratory Birds Treaty, the Clean Water Act and other laws that have been strictly enforced on other industrial facilities for decades?
Or will they claim that all of these turbines, panels, batteries, and power lines are needed to "save the planet from impending climate cataclysms," and therefore need to be exempted from wildlife and environmental laws? Will they claim that the killing of birds, bats and other wildlife is "unintentional" and "unintentional" and should therefore be excused or legalized – with the exception of the massive carnage associated with GND-scale installations?
Families, factories, hospitals, schools, and businesses used to paying 7-11 ¢ per kilowatt-hour for electricity would pay 22 ¢ per kWh, as they already do in "green" US states – or even 35 ¢ per kWh if families pay in now Germany. Petrol and natural gas prices would also skyrocket until the GND banned these fuels. How many companies would survive? How many jobs would disappear? How many people would have to join those who have to choose between heating and eating?
If power can't meet demand, or if California-style rolling blackouts occur, who would be cut first? Politicians who imposed the GND and Deep State bureaucrats who run it? Big Tech Server? Environmental groups and schools whose teacher unions supported the Biden Harris AOC deal? Or innocent hospitals, factories, workers and families? Who would be able to make these decisions?
If states or counties are forced to build wind turbines, solar panels and transmission lines, can they decide to meet their own congestion needs before exporting power to advanced states and cities? Could they declare themselves fossil fuel sanctuaries and refuse to close mines and power plants?
Who will design and enforce the GND income seizure and redistribution programs in the name of "social, environmental and economic justice" – with much of the redistribution likely to go to the ruling elites and their corporate and activist allies? Do we really want to enrich the creators of COVID further?
All of these issues require an open, robust debate that too many schools and universities, news and social media, corporate and political leaders, and anti-fascist mobs continue to censor and cancel. America deserves answers before November 3rd and before action is taken on a Green New Deal.
Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor to the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of books, reports and articles on energy, the environment, climate and human rights issues.