leviramsey's Journal: The Idiocy of Environmentalists

Yes, Virginia, it's possible to be opposed to ANWR oil/gas exploitation while in favor of construction of a pipeline to bring natural gas from Alaska. Enviro-nuts can't get this through their skulls; nor can they get it through their skulls that moving as much oil/coal consumption to natural gas is a good thing.

IS THERE A PIPELINE IN THE PIPELINE?
Gregg Easterbrook
The New Republic, 16 April 2004

The United States got through another winter without a natural-gas shortage, though prices continue to be high. Right now, with the weather warming, the wholesale price of natural gas is about a third higher than it was during the winter of 2001, the coldest recent winter. Natural-gas supply is the next energy problem waiting to happen. There appears more chance of bad news on natural gas than on oil, which gets all the political attention.

Don't even get me started on their idiocy with respect to nuclear power....

And on a similar note:

ENVIROS RELIEVED, SOME BAD NEWS FOR A CHANGE
Gregg Easterbrook
The New Republic, 15 April 2004

Thus today's new regulation does not mean "clear skies no more for millions." Okay, headlines must fit the space, but the ability of The New York Times news pages and editorial page to be wrong about the most basic aspects of air-quality science has become quite spectacular. Skies have not ceased to be clear; they are getting clearer all the time, though you would never know this from reading any major American newspaper. In turn, today's stricter rules will put increased pressure on state and local officials to enforce smog controls, open car-pool lanes, encourage mass transit and take other antipollution steps. (Areas in violation of the new regulation risk loss of federal funds and other penalties.) In other words, the new smog rule will be yet another clean-air achievement for the Bush administration. Will anyone get this right? Expect the phony spin to be, "Oh my God, smog violations increasing!"