Mark Warner: natural gas is an anti-clean fuel! Which helped us hit Kyoto goals!

…I’m sorry if that hurt your head: it hurt mine, too.

And the Virginia GOP’s:

This video is yet another example of Mark Warner’s history of saying one thing while he’s in front of the TV cameras, and another when he thinks he’s in front of a friendly audience.

In this one clip, Mark Warner manages to reiterate his support for a job-killing carbon tax that would make energy more expensive and hurt an already suffering Southwest Virginia coal industry.

He also laments the fact that the U.S. didn’t sign on to Al Gore’s job killing Kyoto Protocol – despite the fact that the U.S. Senate UNANIMOUSLY rejected the agreement.

And not to be outdone, he notes that natural gas, which has revolutionized the U.S. economy, creating jobs, and increasing our country’s energy security, has slowed the adoption of his preferred “clean energy” technologies.

If you’re wondering why this is all an issue, Virginia has a rather profitable natural gas industry going on in the southwestern part of the state. ┬áThis is of course anathema to the Greenies, given that they abruptly stopped being for natural gas when it transitioned from being a club with which to beat the oil industry with to being something that could actually keep people warm, dry, and in the light. You would think that a centrist Senator from a purple* state like Virginia would not be eager to give up that tax revenue, particularly since it’s apparently (and assuredly inadvertently) helping us to adhere to a key point of Green religious dogma.

But then, Mark Warner isn’t really a centrist Senator. To quote Stephen King, the man lies when it suits him.

Moe Lane

*Precise hue to be determined. Sometimes I wonder if Virginia itself knows.

5 thoughts on “Mark Warner: natural gas is an anti-clean fuel! Which helped us hit Kyoto goals!”

  1. I still want to give the part of Virginia that was given to DC and returned to Virginia BACK to DC. It’s making an otherwise red state purple.

  2. It should be mentioned at every opportunity. The United States is the only nation in the world that met the Kyoto Protocol’s goal for a country. This was entirely due to the uptake of natural gas.

    I am reminded that all of those projects to have city buses run on natural gas suddenly went quiet when natural gas became cheap.

    1. The thing is, I don’t mind ‘reducing emissions’ as a policy goal, because that’s pretty much the same as ‘increasing efficiency’ and ‘reducing pollution.’ Besides, the history of industry is one of discovering that hey, this industrial process’s ‘waste product’ is just what we needed for some other industrial process. I just object to the Greenies thinking that it’s all a zero-sum game.

      1. That would be fine, or at least more tolerable, if those policies were not being set by druggies, lawyers and humanities majors, or some combination of the above.
        As a practical matter, one cannot change the way energy can be handled by fiat.
        Making limits on total energy comes out of the economy, which indirectly costs human welfare, or it comes directly out of human welfare. When it is done by people who haven’t the background to realize exactly how the measures they directly regulate correspond to energy, they can fool themselves about whether they are hurting people.
        Ask your wife about getting better than Carnot in heat engines.

Comments are closed.