• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • A New Green Economy?

    Perhaps the oddest reaction to the financial meltdown and looming recession comes from environmental activists and bureaucrats who see it as a rationale to transform the economy along green lines. They argue that the old brown economy has shown itself to have reached the point where it no longer generates wealth, and that it is time for a paradigm shift towards an environmentally sustainable economy. For a description of this agenda, check out the UN’s Global Green New Deal.

    To listen to them, the economic problems have little to do with things like Fannie or Freddie or policies pushing subprime mortgages in a housing market that was bound to cool. No, the slump was caused by too many coal-fired power plants and not enough wind turbines, too much gasoline and not enough cellulosic ethanol, and a severe lack of organic foods and recycling programs.

    The general idea is that economic growth and prosperity will be restored by heavy handed federal mandates and subsidies for a bunch of politically correct alternatives that couldn’t survive without massive handouts. This bizarre opportunism would be funny if were knew that the new Congress and President won’t take it seriously, but they very likely will.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    2 Responses to A New Green Economy?

    1. Lynwood Dunn, North says:

      Moonshine used to be popular around here, and the funny thing is it is made the same way ethanol is, which requires a ton of corn for a couple of gallons of white lightning. The amount of fuel this process would provide this country is so miniscule it tends to be rediculous. I do believe if we would give nice incentives to companies to develop energy efficient vehicles and energy producing alternatives our free market would solve the problem. For now I believe clean coal, nuclear and natural gas, with a dose of drilling will do us good. Let's quit making the people who hate us rich. Thank's

    2. Thomas Gray says:

      No project has yet made it through the BLM’s permitting process. Overwhelmed, the agency tried this summer to put a moratorium on new applications.

      “I don’t see us putting 80 solar projects on BLM land, there’s no way. I don’t see us putting 30,” says Mr. Miller, who notes the agency must manage the land for multiple uses. “And I hope the solar industry hears me on that.”

      The BLM’s pace has displeased some in Congress. Rep. Jon Porter (R) of Nevada introduced a bill last week that would limit the BLM’s permit process to 180 days. And Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R) of California is proposing doing away with environmental impact reviews. Mr. Rohrabacher says he is trying to “make sure that people who have something to offer other human beings [won’t] be stymied because the BLM thinks insects or reptiles are more important.

      environmental activist [ BLUES ] .

      You reap what you sow.

      Lets propose building a nuclear power plant in california on BLM land.


    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.