Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The Green Energy Rhetoric Continues
The Green Energy Rhetoric Continues
Dec 7, 2025 9:31 PM

Last week President Obama gave an address outlining his new energy policy. In light of the tragic events in Japan, the speech was much anticipated especially considering the president’s mitment to nuclear energy.

As expected President Obama continued advocating for a greener energy policy while continuing to push for the country’s independence from oil. However, the President’s speech, an article by Reuters points out, was “short on details on how to curb U.S. energy demand.”

Furthermore, the President’s call for a path towards greener energy and energy independence will not be easy. The New York Times appropriately states, “The path to that independence — or at least an end to dependence on the Mideast — could well be dirty, expensive and politically explosive.”

President Obama continues to voice his support for alternative fuels and green energy. He argued for energy from wind, solar, natural gas, biofuels, natural gas, and nuclear. However, as I have argued in the past, these alternative fuels have costly subsidies, unintended consequences, are not cost effective, and have proven to be largely inefficient (I address the unintended consequences of ethanol here, here, and here and the unintended consequences with wind turbines here).

The president is calling for more government regulation. He gave a glimpse of a new energy standard he is going to pursue this summer, “This summer, we’re going to propose the first-ever fuel efficiency standards for heavy-duty trucks. And this fall, we’ll announce the next round of fuel standards for cars that build on what we’ve already done” he said. In an economy that is looking to rebound from a recession, businesses do not need another costly government mandate forcing them to change their transportation fleet. Instead, the President should rely on the market. Businesses will upgrade their transportation fleet naturally through the market when it is efficient and more cost effective for them to utilize heavy-duty trucks that are more fuel efficient.

The president also stated that we need to look to other countries, such as Brazil, for oil. However, an article published by Real Clear Markets is very critical of the President’s pursuit of Brazilian oil:

Now, with a seven-year offshore drilling ban in effect off of both coasts, on Alaska’s continental shelf and in much of the Gulf of Mexico – and a de facto moratorium covering the rest – Obama tells the Brazilians:

“We want to help you with the technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely. And when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers.”

Obama wants to develop Brazilian offshore oil to help the Brazilian economy create jobs for Brazilian workers while Americans are left unemployed in the face of skyrocketing energy prices by an administration that despises fossil fuels as a threat to the environment and wants to increase our dependency on foreign oil.

Furthermore President Obama’s talk of expediting drilling permits is not wholly accurate. The Obama Administration has not been friendly to offshore domestic drilling since the BP disaster last year. As the above quoted article from Real Clear Markets explains, there has been a seven-year offshore drilling ban on Alaska’s continental shelf and in much of the Gulf of Mexico. That has not changed under the Obama Administration. The Heritage Foundation pointed out in February:

Putting aside calls from some who want to increase domestic exploration to areas in Alaska and elsewhere, President Obama pletely shut down the existing oil drilling infrastructure in the U.S. At least 103 permits are awaiting review by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement. The federal government has not approved a single new exploratory drilling plan in the Gulf of Mexico since Obama “lifted” his deepwater drilling moratorium in October 2010. Obama also reversed an earlier decision by his administration to open access to coastal waters for exploration, instead placing a seven-year ban on drilling in the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts and Eastern Gulf of Mexico as part of the government’s 2012-2017 Outer Continental Shelf Program.

As expected the president’s energy speech is not receiving much praise from the oil industry. Obama claimed that the oil industry is sitting on leases instead of using these for oil production. Ken Cohen, Exxon Mobile Corp.’s vice president of public and government affairs addressed the President’s claims and reflected on his speech in a Wall Street Journal article:

Said Mr. Cohen: “90% of the words sound relatively right in line with what you’d hear us say,” in terms of enhanced use of natural gas, increasing energy efficiency, more research and development and more domestic production. But the speech didn’t address policies that Mr. Cohen said are hampering oil development, such as opening areas that are off limits to the industry, and insisted on uneconomic mandates for renewable fuel. Moreover, the mention that panies are hoarding unexploited leases is off the mark, he said.

“The notion that there’s some economic incentive to sit on a lease is wrong,” Mr. Cohen said, particularly when oil prices are above $100 a barrel.

Despite the recent tragic events of Japan’s nuclear power disaster, it was relieving to see the president not call a halt to nuclear energy. While it will most likely take time for nuclear energy to rebound from the catastrophic events, the president looked at the situation pragmatically by continuing to voice support for nuclear energy while requesting a Nuclear Regulator Commission safety review to make sure all existing nuclear energy facilities are safe.

Despite the criticism, it is still important to keep in mind that we are all stewards of the Earth and need to take care of the planet God has given us. We do not get a replacement and we must see that future generations have a planet they can live in without problems created by our generation. The President’s call to not waste energy should be applauded, and advice we should all heed. However, as the United States continues to define its energy policy it is also equally important to keep in mind we are called to not just be environmental stewards, but also financial stewards. Our energy policy should be for the well-being of the planet but also economically feasible without being burdened with costly subsidies and unintended consequence.

Full text from President Obama’s speech can be found here.

The American Enterprise Institute also provides and insightful critique on the President’s speech which can be found here.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Rev. Sirico to appear on America’s News HQ on Easter Sunday
On Sunday, March 27, Acton’s President and Co-founder, Rev. Robert Sirico will join Shannon Bream and Leland Vittert on Fox News’ America’s News HQ. He will offer an Easter reflection ment on any significant breaking news. You can catch him between 1 and 2PM Eastern. America’s News HQ on Fox News Channel reports the latest national and world news. It reports expert insight on health, politics and military matters. ...
Work Is Not About You: How Theology Can Save Us from Trade Protectionism
It’s e rather predictable to hear progressives promote protectionist rhetoric on trade and globalization. What’s surprising is when it spills from the lips of the leading Republican candidate. Donald Trump has made opposition to free trade a hallmark of his campaign, a holethat petitors have been slow to exploit. Inthemost recent CNN debate, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich eachechoed their own agreement in varying degrees, voicing slight critiques ontariffs but mostlyaffirmingTrump’s ambiguous platitudesabout trade that is“free but fair.”...
The FAQs: Religious Liberty and the Little Sisters of the Poor
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments todayin a casefrom religious nonprofit groups challenging thefederal government’s contraceptive/abortifacient mandate. Here is what you should knowabout that case. What is this case, and what’s it about? The case the Supreme Court will hear, Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. bines seven challenges to the Health and Human Services’ (HHS) contraceptive/abortifacient mandate. To fulfill the requirements of the Affordable Healthcare Act (aka ObamaCare) the federal government passed a regulation...
Video & Audio: Todd Huizinga On The New Totalitarian Temptation
Acton’s Director of International Outreach Todd Huizinga has been quite busy since therelease of his bookThe New Totalitarian Temptation: Global Governance and the Crisis of Democracy in Europe.Last week Thursday, he continued to talk about this topic in an Acton Lecture Series address that we’re pleased to share with you today on the PowerBlog. Additionally, we’ve posted audio of Todd’s hour-long appearance last night on WBZ Boston’s “Nightside” show with host Dan Rea after the jump. ...
Little Sisters of the Poor to the Obama Administration: Don’t Force Us to Violate Our Conscience
The Little Sisters of the Poor,an international congregation of Catholic women religious who serve the elderly poor in over 30 countries around the world, have been given a difficult choice: violate your conscience or pay $70 million a year in fines. For the past few years the Obama administration has been attempting to force the Little Sisters — and other nonprofit religious organizations — to help provide their employees with free access to abortion-inducing drugs, sterilizations, and contraceptives. But on...
Anti-GMO Activists: ‘Heartless, Callous and Cruel’
Former Indiana Governor and current Purdue University President Mitch DanielsIf it seems your writer is obsessing over genetically modified organisms in this space, it’s only because the progressive side of the equation won’t let it go. Team Anti-GMO includes the radicalized religious shareholder activists of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility and As You Sow. Whether it’s misrepresenting the science or ignoring pletely, these groups celebrate every GMO labeling initiative and perform handstands every time a mits to producing organic...
Rev. Sirico: When politicians want your money
In the Detroit News, Rev. Robert A. Sirico, co-founder and president of the Acton Institute, offers mentary on the two-year battle with the city of Grand Rapids over the institute’s exempt status under state property tax law (see the March 15 Acton news release, “Acton Institute Prevails in Property Tax Dispute with City of Grand Rapids” for background). In his opinion piece, Rev. Sirico writes: We were assured earlier from then-City Attorney Catherine Mish that it all wasn’t political, but...
When the American Colonists Experimented with Socialism
Do you remember the story about colonial Americans experimenting with socialism? Probably not. It’s a tale that rarely finds its way into the textbooks of high school and college students. Indeed, I had been out of school nearly 20 years when I first heard about it. If your not familiar with this part of American history, this short video by Larry Schweikart will fill you in on explains what happened when the early settlers who arrived at Plymouth and Jamestown...
Not a nanoparticle of science in this shareholder resolution
Sometimes clearer heads prevail, but at considerable costs to individual stock portfolios and corporations who have to mount a defense against uninformed, nuisance shareholder resolutions. Last week the Securities and Exchange Commission slowed the progressive roll of religious activist group As You Sow by denying an AYS proxy resolution seeking a detailed nanoparticle risk assessment by Mondelēz International Foodservice. Mondelēz successfully convinced the SEC that its use of food whitener titanium dioxide (TiO2) in its Dentyne Ice chewing gum does...
The EU: Global Judicial Despotism and the International Criminal Court
“Americans’ instinctively refuse to recognize as legitimate any international organization, law or treaty that claims any authority over Americans above the U.S. Constitution,” says Todd Huizinga in this week’s Acton Commentary, “particularly if that organization, law or treaty contradicts the Constitution or violates Americans’ constitutional rights.” In the American system, it is because sovereignty rests in the people that the U.S. government does not have a right to transfer sovereignty to any other organization, government or group of governments. But...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved