And you thought I was paranoid

Sierra Club shifts its sights to natural gas. The object of the green movement, as I’ve argued for years, is to shut down the western world’s economy and has nothing to do with cleaner air or water. So the Sierra Club endorsed natural gas (and accepted millions of dollars in donations from the energy industry) when it was trying to kill coal and nuclear energy plants – “we aren’t against affordable energy per se”, the greens argued, and used their support of natural gas as proof of their good intentions.

But that was when natural gas was expensive; now that shale gas has arrived and the price has dropped by half, now that they’ve killed coal plants and nuclear energy, natural gas no longer serves a useful purpose as a stalking horse and it must go.

The battle plan is called “Beyond Natural Gas,” and Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune announced the goal in an interview with the National Journal this month: “We’re going to be preventing new gas plants from being built wherever we can.” The big green lobbying machine has rolled out a new website that says “The natural gas industry is dirty, dangerous and running amok” and that “The closer we look at natural gas, the dirtier it appears; and the less of it we burn, the better off we will be.” So the goal is to shut the industry down, not merely to impose higher safety standards.

This is no idle threat. The Sierra Club has deep pockets funded by liberal foundations and knows how to work the media and politicians. The lobby helped to block new nuclear plants for more than 30 years, it has kept much of the U.S. off-limits to oil drilling, and its “Beyond Coal” campaign has all but shut down new coal plants. One of its priorities now will be to make shale gas drilling anathema within the Democratic Party.


Filed under Uncategorized

10 responses to “And you thought I was paranoid

  1. Check out today’s NYT
    Mayor Bloviator dumped a pile of cash for Sierra to burn…that is real pollution…..

  2. anon

    a quick look at the board of directors is proof enough that the sierra club is a political entity first and foremost. i used to buy their calendars. no more.

  3. anon

    and their political endorsements…chris murphy in CT for one; bernie sanders for god’s sake, and duh, elizabeth warren.

  4. Just_looking

    You are paranoid, but that doesn’t make you wrong.

  5. Just relax

    You are beyond paranoid
     “The object of the green movement, as I’ve argued for years, is to shut down the western world’s economy”
    Do you see also see beelezbub behind the conspiracy?

    • What do you see as the objective of a movement that seeks to prohibit the use of all fossil fuel (see, eg, the “zero carbon” crowd) and proposes as the sole replacement for such fuels dreamy, never-to-exist sources like solar and wind? Admittedly, the majority of gullible public school graduates buy into this dream but the leaders of the movement aren’t that stupid. So if they cut off the use of all energy by the western world (China and india aren’t going to go along0, what, other than economic ruin, awaits us?

  6. RElax

    Clearly, the devil made them do it!

  7. Balzac

    If the environmental movement desired merely to reduce fossil fuel use, while allowing the western economies to prosper, the movement would be strongly behind nuclear power, which releases no carbon, removes no mountaintops in WV, drills and fracks no onshore or offshore wells.

    Instead, the environmentalists fight to eliminate all practical, abundant energy. Their objective is to change your lifestyle. Hey, they’re not comfortable with your car, your computer, your toaster and your garage door opener… these things must go….while they proclaim their moral superiority……..from their expensive real estate in Palo Alto and the Upper West Side.

  8. OG Reader

    There’s a structural problem with the clean energy movement. That is, its proponents rely on the very same people that put wildlife first.

    I witnessed this at an event promoting the Atlantic Wind Connection project, where during the Q&A portion, a Sierra Club member questioned the impact of the project on two specific species of small birds that migrate through the area. You could feel the wind being sucked out of the room – “This man is supposed to be on our side!” – was the feeling.

    Of note
    – the idea of carbon credits was still be pushed.
    – wind energy will cost about 2X the cost of current generation (24 cents per kilowatt-hour vs. 11 cents currently).
    – sufficient wind for generation exists in the proposed site about 40-50% of the time.

  9. anonymous

    This is just more proof that Mayor Bloomberg is a liberal and would be a disaster if he were elected to a higher office. I hope Greenwich Gal and other Bloomberg kool aid drinkers will take notice. He is a menace to liberty and free thinkers.