[the_ad_placement id=”banner-right-placement”]

[the_ad_placement id=”banner-left-placement”]

Letter to the Editor: Addressing the cause of climate change does hurt

Why does gas cost so much?

Why does gas cost so much? It is because of the theory, that humans are responsible for causing climate change, is being sold as fact. So, to shift you away from fossil fuels (natural gas, oil and coal) the politicians have decided to make the use of those fuels prohibitively expensive. This has nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with control over you and me. How can they do that? They artificially reduce the supply resulting in a corresponding increase in price given a steady demand. Not exactly university level economics. They are manipulating you outside of the 3 branches of government that fall under the constitution by way of executive order and presidentially appointed heads of federal agencies. That sounds a lot like taxation without representation. Admittedly the Senate gives approval to presidentially appointed department heads but once in place they do the bidding of the president or are replaced.

You would be madder then all get out if you pulled up to the gas station and they charged you a $50 entrance fee. Yet, when you pull in to fill your tank your astonished that it cost $80 to $100. They got their $50. Why are we putting up with an artificial reduction in oil supply? I do not know. We cannot go down to the Boston Harbor and dump barrels of oil into the bay.

In 2020 the U.S. was a net exporter of oil products and gas prices were low. What was it that happened in November of 2020? A presidential election was held. Think what you like about the outgoing president. The energy policies that made us free from the rest of the world for energy was working. A simple case of cause and effect? I think so. Putin had nothing to do with it. European nations did not like President Trump so they turned to Russia (away from the USA) for their natural gas supply. How’s that working out for them now?

I am old enough to have lived through the oil embargo of the early 1970s (I felt a strong need to include the 19 in that date). At that time, we were told from the most reliable scientist that there was only enough oil to last 10 to 20 years. This was an undeniable fact. Very much as some believe that carbon dioxide and methane concentrations are causing warming of the atmosphere is an undeniable fact, today.

Similarly, Paul Erlich, a biologist out of Stanford University, warned in 1968 that population growth would outrun the resources of planet earth in 10 years and we would suffer mass starvation if we did not do something right then to slow the rate of growth or reduce the earth’s population. Does this sound familiar? Here we are 60 years later. He is now in his late 80s. His book The Population Bomb https://tinyurl.com/Article-on-Population-Bomb if you’re interested.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she thinks that there is an urgency needed in addressing man-made climate change, warning that it will “destroy the planet” in a dozen years if humans do not address the issue, no matter the cost. Ref, https://tinyurl.com/The-Hill-Article

Greta Thunberg, a young Swedish girl, is scared to death. She addressed the United Nations on the subject and the urgency of addressing climate change. Again claiming 12 years is all we have. Is this fair to our youth based on a wistful hypothesis based on models? Is it fair to young Miss. Thunberg to use her to meet political agendas?

You have the right to be wrong every much as I do.

Phillip Shafer
Quincy, CA

[the_ad_placement id=”banner-left-placement”]