The War On Energy

I was reading stuff on the interwebs today, and found an article on The Daily Caller that talked about the “war on coal” by the EPA.

But, it is really energy in general that progressive types, like the EPA (because lets face it, only tree-hugging communists join the EPA), are at war with. Or, better put, they are at war with solutions. Because the left isn’t interested in solutions, per se. Or, not per se. Pretty much all se, they are against actual solutions to the issue of energy production with limited environmental impact. Otherwise, they would love nuclear power. But they hate nuclear power.

How do I know? Because that is what I do for a living…nuclear power. Using atoms to turn on your light bulb, because I care…about my paycheck. But also, because I think nuclear energy is pretty awesome. I mean, we split atoms and make energy from it. How cool is that? And we give off no emissions. Sure, there is waste, but that is what caverns under a mountain in the middle of nowhere are for. Oh wait, Harry Reid blocked that idea. Why?

Because he is at war with actual energy solutions.

The left doesn’t want a solution. They don’t actually want electric cars that are economical and viable. They don’t want cheap solar or wind energy. They want it as expensive as possible. The Volt costs a lot of money to buy, and isn’t a very good car. That is what they want. We cannot manufacture cheap solar panels, because science hasn’t quite caught up with those ambitions…to a leftist, that’s a good thing.

Why? Well that’s easy. Because, if the private sector solves these problems, then they can’t use those problems to try and control the private sector. It’s really as simple as that. As popular as environmentalism has become amongst the common populace, if it were really feasible to create energy without waste and whatnot, then everyone would be doing it, and saying they did it better than their competitors. Because that is how the free market works.

But, nuclear energy doesn’t give off any CO2, or any other pollutants. The waste is solid and can be contained. Compared to coal or even natural gas, nuclear energy seems perfect. And it is nuclear energy that proves the left’s lie. Because it is a solution to their supposed problem. I say “supposed” because it is the problem that the left uses to further their aims, not actual solutions.

That is how the left works: pose an “unsolvable” problem, and challenge the right to fix it. If the right has any solutions, simply point out any flaw, no matter how minor. Rinse, repeat, ad nauseum. If the right does not have a solution, claim that they don’t care. The old catch-22.

Science! could come up with a way, today, to turn unicorn farts into a perfect energy source, and the left would find fault with it. Because they don’t want a solution, they want a problem. Their theme is that government solves all problems. It is this theme by which they operate. If you solve problems, they lose their talking point. Which is why they don’t ever solve problems themselves, but simply perpetuate them.

Poverty? Keep the poor, poor. As long as they keep voting for you.

Social issues? Trump the causes of this or that group, but never commit to anything.

Environment? Spread the message of doom and gloom and propose government regulation as the answer…without giving any actual solutions.

Economy? Create more public sector jobs, even if you cannot hope to pay for them.

Deficit? What deficit?

Foreign policy? What embassies? We have embassies?

Failure? It’s Bush’s fault.

Angry post? Yes, this is an angry post. Feel my wrath.

Send to Kindle
1 Star (Hated it)2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (Awesome) (13 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)


  1. The way I understand the effects if 3 Mile Island, and I may be wrong, is that the backup system kicked in and people were exposed to less radiation than they get from a microwave. Like I said though, I could be wrong on that, I am a man with a girlfriend so being wrong happens a lot.


  2. Actially, the primary backup system didn’t kick in because it had been isolated for maintenance and never restored. The secondary backup system did kick in, but it was turned off by an operator who was concerned about putting in too much water. In the end they had to vent hydrogen out of the containment building, when they did they also released some radioactive fission product gasses, the highest exposure received by the public was on the order of a chest X-ray.

    Really TMI should be touted as a successful failure. A problem stemming from poor design, exacerbated by poor maintenance practices and poor operations, resulted in no deaths, no off-site damage, and no significant exposure to the public. We went all the way to the last line of defense, and it held. Since then we’ve revamped our designs, our maintenance practices, and our training (operators are now trained to violate every rule, break any piece of equipment, or sacrifice to any dark god necessary to keep the core covered with water). It is literally I possible for there to be a repeat. And the new reactor designs are even safer, you could literally walk away from some of them for a week with no problem.


  3. On an average work day I’ll be within close proximity to significant quantities of nuclear waste. When I’m asked “What’s the most dangerous part of your job?” I can honestly answer that it’s the commute to and from work. Those of us handling nuclear power and the resulting waste are professionals, but they’ll give a driver’s license to just about any idiot.

    The misinformation that various “public interest groups” spread about our field is infuriating and has permanently stigmatized a perfectly good energy source.


  4. Keln – Nailed it!

    All the histrionics about this type of energy or that is just more good ol’ smoke & mirrors. The truth is as you’ve said it – they’re at war with all actual energy solutions.


  5. Pingback: The Left's War On Energy | EPA Abuse

Comments are closed.