THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume X, Issue # 217, September 3, 2008
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF COAL:
Relying More on Coal Generates Benefits That Are Too Often Ignored
By Paul K. Driessen
WHAT THE HARDCORE LEFTIST & ENVIRONMENTALIST VERSION OF "CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY" LARGELY
IGNORES: THE MANY BENEFITS OF FOSSIL FUELS & NUCLEAR POWER -- ADVERSE LAND & ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS OF UTILIZATION OF ALTERNATIVE, RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES -- OPPRESSIVE EFFECTS OF SOARING ENERGY
PRICES ON EMPLOYMENT LEVELS & LOW-INCOME FAMILIES -- WHY MINING & BURNING COAL IS A SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE
COMPONENT OF A SOUND ENERGY POLICY -- MAJOR NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS OF OVER-RELIANCE ON OIL &
NATURAL GAS IMPORTS FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES -- SERIOUS FLAWS IN GLOBAL WARMING THEORY AS JUSTIFICATION
FOR GOVERNMENTAL ANTI-ENERGY POLICIES
FULL STORY:
They get little credit for their efforts, but most resource extraction, manufacturing, and power generation companies strive
to be “socially responsible” – by emphasizing energy efficiency, resource conservation, pollution control, and worker
safety in producing the raw materials, consumer products, and electricity that improve, safeguard, and enrich our lives.
It’s not easy, due to the nature of their business, public intolerance for any ecological impacts, and the fact that “corporate
social responsibility” is often defined and used by radical Leftist and environmentalist activist groups to promote
ideological agendas. Above all, activists want to engineer a “wholesale transformation” of our energy and economic
system, away from hydrocarbon fuels and into “eco-friendly” renewable resources; reduce our living standards to
“sustainable” levels (their definition again); and give them control over the power that sustains our modern society.
This hardcore Leftist and Green version of CSR largely ignores socio-economic considerations, the many benefits of fossil
fuel and nuclear power, the significant land and environmental impacts of wind and solar power and the production and
use of ethanol as a motor fuel, as well as the oppressive effects of soaring energy prices on jobs and poor families.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi closed down the U.S. House of Representatives on August 1, 2008, to avoid an energy vote that
Democrats would have lost, and later displayed her acumen on the subject when she opined: “natural gas is a clean, cheap
alternative to fossil fuels.” News flash: Natural gas is a fossil fuel.
An Energy Economics 101 course is clearly needed, so that members of both major political parties can legislate more
astutely, understand why mining and burning coal is a socially responsible component of sound energy policy, and help
stanch the unnecessary flow of $700 billion a year in foreign oil payments.
Energy is the master resource, the foundation for everything we eat, use, and do. Sound policies ensure that energy is
abundant, reliable, and affordable. Restricting supplies in the face of rising global demand drives up prices and sends
shockwaves through families, industries, communities, and nations.
Average total energy costs for a typical American household doubled from $2,400 in 1997 to over $5,000 in 2007. Food
prices also soared, while wages remained stagnant. More low and middle income families have been forced to choose
between heating, eating, driving, medicines and rent, with little left over for vacations, emergencies, retirement, college, or
charity.
Thankfully, most electricity bills rose more modestly, because half of all U.S. electricity is generated using coal, and the
price for that fossil fuel has risen far less than oil, gasoline, and natural gas prices. However, in places like Florida, where
coal is verboten, natural gas is promoted but drilling for it is banned, and wind and solar are all the rage, electricity prices
continue to climb. Florida Power & Light Company must pay four times as much for photovoltaic power as for coal power,
the Heartland Institute reports, and schools face budget crunches for buses and electricity.
America has centuries’ worth of coal. Our reliance on this resource has tripled since 1970, but sulfur dioxide and
particulate emissions are down 40% and 90% below 1970 levels, respectively, notes air pollution expert Joel Schwartz. New
technologies and regulations will reduce coal power plant emissions even further by 2020, but even current emissions
(including mercury) pose no significant risks to human health, he emphasizes.
Radical environmentalists worry and wail about speculative health risks, to justify anti-coal campaigns. But their concerns
often disappear when the discussion shifts to millions of Africans who die every year from real, preventable lung and
intestinal diseases that result from an absence of electricity for cooking, heating, refrigeration, safe drinking water, hospitals
and decent living standards. Wind and solar will save few of those lives – and, yet, Green pressure groups stridently
oppose fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydroelectric power for Africa.
U.S. electricity consumption will continue climbing, even with conservation, because our population and technology use
are increasing steadily. Meanwhile, 59 coal-fired plants were cancelled in 2007, thanks to eco-activists, who are challenging
50 more.
The U.S.A. now has virtually no excess capacity, and switching to natural gas as a primary power plant fuel (and fuel for
backup generators to support wind farms) means electricity prices could increase “as much as tenfold,” says energy
analyst Mark Mills, especially if we continue to ban drilling. “After that we may see forced conservation, or even blackouts
in rotation among business and residential customers.”
Energy shortages and price hikes could cost millions of jobs in the automotive, airline, tourism, food and beverage, textiles,
paper making, plastics, chemicals, metals, and manufacturing industries – especially if Congress also enacts cap-and-trade
rules. Most will never be replaced by “Green collar” jobs that some claim will be created by intermittent, unreliable wind and
solar energy.
Switching to plug-in hybrid cars will only exacerbate the problem. They will need a well-stocked power grid to plug into, and
current energy policies virtually ensure that it won’t be there.
In addition to balance of trade issues, over-reliance on imports has major national security implications, as Russia’s invasion
of Georgia [Gruzia] forcefully reminded Europe. Germany imports 40% of its natural gas from Russia, and six Eastern European
countries are entirely dependent on Mr. Putin’s energy. Shackled further by their opposition to nuclear power, fear of climate
change Armageddon and fixation on the Kyoto Protocols, the European Union has barely protested actions by a rogue bear
that has already cut off natural gas supplies to Latvia, Lithuania and the Czech Republic, to impose its will.
That should cause Congress to reflect more soberly on U.S. dependence on oil from Venezuela, Nigeria, Iran, and Russia. Coal
could be converted into synthetic liquid and gas fuels, to replace the oil and gas we refuse to develop, but legal and
regulatory hurdles restrict that option, too.
A key justification for these anti-energy policies is cataclysmic global warming. However, 32,000 scientists have signed the
Oregon Petition, saying they see “no convincing evidence” that humans are causing climate change, or that it will be
catastrophic. Climate models continue to predict chaos but, as one scientist wryly notes, faith in their predictions is as
misplaced as reliance on emails from Nigeria, advising recipients that they have won the Lotto.
Global temperatures have not increased since 1998, despite steadily increasing carbon dioxide levels, and solar scientists like
Pal Brekke say the sun’s formerly high activity level is leveling off or abating, which could bring falling global temperatures.
China and India are planning or building 700 coal-fired power plants; European countries plan to build 50 more in five years,
to reduce dependence on Russian gas; and other nations are also increasing fossil fuel use for transportation and power
generation.
Thus, no matter how much the U.S.A. reduces its energy use, driving, heating, air-conditioning and living standards – no
matter how much it punishes poor families or commits economic suicide – its actions would not reduce global CO2 levels, or
affect the Earth’s climate.
We need to conserve, and continue improving renewable energy technologies that currently provide just 0.5% of our energy.
But, at this time, renewables are simply too inefficient, expensive, and unreliable to permit a shutdown of hydrocarbon-based
systems.
Putting “social responsibility” and “environmental justice” in the hands of eco-activists and Liberal Democrats is like giving
a machine gun to an idiot child. We need definitions that recognize the full spectrum of societal needs, and energy policies
that acknowledge life in the real world.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Political Environmentalism Versus Human Progress & Prosperity:
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
The Earth's Natural History, Global Climate Changes,
& the Future of Human Life & Civilization on the Planet:
Science, Ideology, & Public Policy
Political Economy -- Philosophies, Systems, & Public Policies:
Government, the Economy, & Economic Prosperity
The American Political & Cultural Left:
Liberals, Statists, Socialists, & Other Leftists
International Politics & World Disorder:
War, Peace, & Geopolitics in the Real World:
Foreign Affairs & U.S. National Security
Page Two
Page One
Russia & Other Former Soviet Republics
Paul K. Driessen is Senior Policy Advisor for the Congress of Racial Equality, the Committee for A Constructive Tomorrow, and the
Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise. Driessen is author of Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death, which can be
obtained at www.Eco-Imperialism.com.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume X, 2008
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity