The terrible consequences of Democrat climate policies

 Patrick Hynes:

Republicans have wisely decided to go on the offensive when it comes to climate change.

Last week, Rep. Garret Graves (R-LA) introduced the GOP’s first Energy, Climate, and Conservation Task Force, which, over the next two months, will lay a road map for an alternative to the Democrats’ climate agenda. Many swing voters, particularly young people and suburbanites, will be grateful to hear another option that leans on a diverse and competitive market of clean technologies rather than government bureaucrats picking winners and losers.

Over the past year, the predictable consequences of liberal climate policies have quickly revealed themselves in the forms of energy insecurity, inflation, and war. Russian President Vladimir Putin took advantage of misguided energy transitions in Europe and weaponized them for his expansionist ambitions in Ukraine. American gas is helping clean up the mess for Europe, but Democrats are repeating the same radical top-down policies that got us to this point.

On the other hand, Republicans have struggled to convince voters that they care about climate change, which is becoming an increasingly prioritized problem. The ECC Task Force’s framework should allow Republican candidates confidently to pitch a more cohesive, transparent, and positive message that helps ensure voters that a successful energy transition doesn’t hinge on taxpayers spending trillions of dollars during inflationary times. For much cheaper, we can return to similar policies largely responsible for the largest emissions reductions “ in energy history ,” as the head of the International Energy Agency put it.

On the campaign trail this summer, Republicans must explain how unleashing American oil and gas production today will alleviate gas prices in the short term and help the world reach its long-term climate goals. Explain how liberal climate policies are empowering Russia and China, which have shown a lot more interest in expanding their empires than tackling climate change. And give examples of how the liberal playbook on climate has turned out for those who have embraced it.

For example, Germany’s energiewende ("energy transition"), defined by aggressive subsidization of renewables and banishment of natural gas and nuclear, is virtually indistinguishable from its counterparts in California and New York. But it has landed Germany with the highest electricity prices in the world, a failure to reach self-imposed emissions reduction goals , and paying Russia an estimated $200 million per day for oil and gas.

Why? Because it adopted a climate agenda focused on hastily transitioning to all renewable energy, dismissing the predictable consequences. It’s the same agenda Democrats are now committed to in this country, but it’s up to Republicans to call out this negligence.

...

Biden and the Germans helped to finance Putin's war in Ukraine.  Restricting supply chiefly benefited the Russians and OPEC while driving up the cost for US and European consumers. Rather than increase US production Biden has sought to increase production from other countries and the avoiding of the impactor US production on lowering prices.