I’ve been wondering what version of an energy policy we’re going to be seeing from President Obama now that he’s won a second term: The one the embraces the gloriously robust economic growth that comes from allowing unfettered access to our abundant natural resources and embracing our productive, energy-rich destiny; the one that refuses to take full advantage of our resources and innovative technologies, insists on pouring more money into crony clean-energy venture socialism and imposing more regulations, and champions the cause of impending man-made doomsday; or some combination of the two that tries to have it both ways, as Obama did in the run-up to the election (hence the “all of the above” attempt to please everyone).
As much as the true eco-zealots of the world would adore “necessarily skyrocketing” energy prices that forced us to artificially and quixotically bankrupt ourselves in the pursuit of an all-renewable, bureaucratized world order, that full-blown scenario of self-inflicted poverty would be good for neither Obama’s legacy nor the Democrats’ long-term outlook, so I’m guessing we’re going to be subjected to an energy policy that tries to have its cake and eat it, too — i.e., going piecemeal on the traditional energy stuff while continuing to loudly tout “investments” in green energy and stricter environmental standards.
Earlier today, the White House pursued none of the fanfare that often accompanies President Obama signing a bill into law — because its a bill that’s good for consumers, businesses, and the American economy at large, but not so great in the eyes of the green-lovin’ globo-environmentalist crowd. Via The Hill:
President Obama has signed into law a bill that requires U.S. airlines to be excluded from European carbon emissions fees.
Environmentalists had framed the bill as the first test of the president’s commitment to fighting climate change in his second term and urged him to veto it. Obama signed it over their objections, though the move was not publicized by the White House. …
McCaskill’s Republican co-sponsor on the bill, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), said it will shield American carriers from an “illegal tax.”
“American sovereignty will no longer be threatened by the E.U.’s illegitimate and disingenuous ‘environmental’ tax on our country,” Thune said in a statement. “My bill will ensure that we protect U.S. air carriers and passengers from this illegal tax, freeing up billions of dollars that can instead be invested in creating jobs, modernizing or purchasing new aircraft and stimulating our own economy.”
And the United States isn’t the only entity that’s realized the utter impracticality of trying to force expensive eco-standards on an impoverished populace. Heh:
The European Union (EU) has been forced to freeze the law requiring all flights using EU airports to pay for carbon emissions under the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme.
That means only internal EU flights are bound by its rules, according to news agency Reuters.
The decision was made by European climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard, who gave in to international pressure to freeze the law, led by the United States at the United Nations meeting in Doha. The debt crisis in the European Union has been blamed for eroding support in its plans to tackle carbon emissions, with many nations within the EU as well as heavy-industry lobbyists arguing that the airline emissions laws are unaffordable at this time of austerity.
I wouldn’t have expected President Obama to tout something like this — it is a bipartisan win for the economy and businesses, but consumers won’t complain about the absence of a cost, while the well-monied greenies most definitely will. Best to just try and keep this one quiet.