Big Green is a big threat to the pocketbooks of Americans

Washington Examiner:

Average folks who are in need of reliable and affordable energy sources during the COVID-19 pandemic are up against a “big green” machine that is burrowing into cities and municipalities.

While President Trump champions policies for affordable energy, Joe Biden is favoring restrictions on the use of fossil fuels that will impact local communities most in need of financial relief.

Biden recently unveiled a “clean energy plan” that calls for the United States to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. If elected, Biden would move to eliminate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 2035, “make dramatic investments in energy efficiency buildings,” and accelerate the manufacturing of electric vehicles to achieve his net-zero goal, the plan explains.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, natural gas generates about 38% of electricity generation and coal another 23%, for a combined total of about 61% market share. Some have questioned if the true cost of such a radical upheaval of our energy system would exceed Biden’s proposed $2 trillion plan, all of which is expected to take place during Biden’s first four years in office.

The Institute for Energy Research, a nonprofit group that favors free market policies in the energy sector, finds that the Biden plan would only serve to exacerbate the economic fallout from COVID-19. The attempt to eliminate emissions from the power grid by 2035 “might be a renewables-only approach or a net-zero carbon dioxide emissions goal that would include nuclear energy and carbon-capture technology,” IER explains. "But Biden’s $2 trillion proposal is not a policy to recover from the devastation of the COVID-19 recession because the time goals are not consistent, and changing the energy portfolio of the nation is an extremely costly endeavor that requires reallocating labor, capital, and innovation.”

Others have pointed to the anticipated financial impact to families. Robert Bryce, author and documentary filmmaker on energy topics, points out that “Biden’s plan calls for expenditures equal to five times the amount that consumers and industry are now spending annually on electricity.” According to the EIA, the average monthly residential electric bill hovers around $120 per month. If Bryce’s predictions are accurate, that means consumers could see monthly bills of $600 or more, and that’s only for their household electricity consumption. Other anticipated increased energy costs would hit them in the wallet via transportation and other budgetary areas.

Meanwhile, Trump’s deregulation of the energy and other sectors has saved taxpayers tens of billions of dollars, according to a Heritage Foundation study and other studies. If he runs on unleashing American energy production at a time when it’s needed most, Trump could reverse current polling trends. In a key swing state such as Pennsylvania, where the natural gas boom has made a critical difference to the state’s economy, there’s an opportunity for Trump to put Biden back on his heels. During a primary debate in March, Biden said he would restrict the process of hydraulic fracturing, which is used to extract natural gas. Biden also said he would prevent drilling from occurring on federal lands. IER cites figures that show a fracking ban in Pennsylvania would cost 600,000 jobs and lower the state’s GDP by $261 billion.

...

The Biden plan would be a disaster for energy-producing states and would also be a disaster for US national security.  It would force the stopping of fracking which has made the US energy independent and has reduced the cost of energy for everyone.  Electricity bills would skyrocket for a less dependable source of energy that is also more vulnerable to extreme weather.

It is a bad plan that is based on bad "science."