Protecting the Environment from the danger of the Green New Deal

Protecting the Environment from the danger of the Green New Deal
sasint / Pixabay

A New Policy Brief from The Heartland Institute on solar panels, wind turbines and other green new deal ideas

ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL (January 27, 2020) – The Green New Deal (GND), advocated by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and supported by prominent policymakers and candidates for public office, would replace all energy generated by fossil fuels like coal, natural gas, and petroleum with so-called “renewable” energy sources, principally solar panels and natural gas. These policies are based on the dubious fear that fossil fuels are creating runaway global warming and that nuclear power is inherently dangerous and should be banned.

Know more about Russia than your friends:

Get our free ebook on how the Soviet Union became Putin's Russia.

Q4 2019 hedge fund letters, conferences and more

Crypto Hedge Fund Three Arrows Blows Up, Others Could Follow

CryptoA few years ago, crypto hedge funds were all the rage. As cryptocurrencies rose in value, hundreds of hedge funds specializing in digital assets launched to try and capitalize on investor demand. Some of these funds recorded double-digit gains in 2020 and 2021 as cryptocurrencies surged in value. However, this year, cryptocurrencies have been under Read More

In a new Heartland Institute Policy Brief, titled “Protecting the Environment from the Green New Deal,” Paul Driessen shows how renewable tech would cause significant harm to the environment. Among other things, Driessen argues:

Solar panels and wind turbines unrealistic?

  • Replacing all fossil fuels and nuclear with solar power, which currently generates about 1.5 percent of the country’s electricity, would require, at the very least, blanketing an area the size of New York State and Vermont with solar panels, a move that would have a severe impact on local lands and wildlife habitats.
  • Replacing all fossil fuel and nuclear generation with on-shore wind turbines, which currently generate only 7 percent of U.S. electricity, would require huge towers covering an area the size of Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon, and West Virginia combined. Environmentalists already lament the killing of millions of birds, including endangered species.
  • Off-shore wind turbines are touted by GND supporters as far more efficient than on-shore ones, but there is only one wind facility currently off America’s coasts because other planned facilities have been blocked by environmentalists who fear damage to ocean habitats and sealife.
  • The production of the steel, concrete, and toxic materials required to build and operate the solar panels, wind turbines, and two billion batteries needed to store power from renewables when the Sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing would not only endanger the environment, it would also require the use of the very same fossil fuels GND advocates oppose.
  • Disposing of solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries that are no longer useful already poses environmental dangers. Expanding the use of outdated GND tech would overwhelm the country with toxic trash.

This new Heartland policy paper shows GND technology would create more pollution and pit environmentalists against GND advocates. This intellectual ammunition is crucial for those desiring to head off environmental as well as economic catastrophes that would result from the GND, and is something that advocates of the GND must address.

Get a PDF copy of the paper at this link.

Updated on

No posts to display