Perry: The U.S. Will Give The World “A Better Life Through Fossil Fuels”

440px-Rick_Perry_official_portraitWith much of the world desperately trying to rid itself of fossil fuels to avoid disaster from climate change, the Trump Administration at times seems to be on a different planet.  That seems the case at the Davos conference where Energy Secretary Rick Perry proclaimed that the United States is “blessed” to be able to offer the world “a better quality of life through fossil fuels.”  Not only our closest allies like Germany and England have been making huge efforts to drop fossil fuels, but China is moving aggressively to avoid this “better world” model.

Appearing with Saudi Arabia Energy Minister Khalid al-Falih and Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak on a panel, Perry stated “We are blessed to be in countries with a substantial ability to deliver the people of the globe a better quality of life through fossil fuels.”

The United States is increasing views as the “spoiler” in the global effort to curtail pollution and climate change.  Statements like Perry’s only reaffirms the image of the United States as the outlier on this global crisis.

Perry’s controversial comments comes as France announced that it will also set a deadline for phasing out coal fired plants for 2021.

Other Western countries have been adopting similar goals and many have made strides in converting to non-fossil fuel energy production, as we have been discussing.

235 thoughts on “Perry: The U.S. Will Give The World “A Better Life Through Fossil Fuels””

  1. It isn’t just the pollution of fossil fuels, it’s the fact that we will run out one day. It is foolish and short sighted not to prepare for the future.

    1. The future that men like the Koch’s, Gates, Murdoch,.. see, is one that they like- no democracy and hunger games.
      Picketty’s economic research documented what happens in the future as a result of further concentrated wealth. Currently, the 5 richest people have wealth equivalent to 50% of the world’s population.
      If the governing cabal cared about the values most people care about, they would stop the financial sector from dragging down GDP, would encourage payments (like from their own coffers) for common goods, e.g. education/medical research, would shorten patent protections, rein in big Pharma, etc.

      Snark- Once you see the Koch’s offspring hawking money bag shirts for disco use, you see why they don’t care about the kids’ nor grandkids’ futures.

    2. True, we will one day run out of fossil fuels, probably at least 300 years in the future. And, we should be preparing for that future. But, Liberal Democrats don’t like nuclear power plants, and Liberal Democrats are determined to give the country progeny who are proficient in neither math nor English, to run those nuclear power plants should we actually get them.

      In the case of a nuclear problem at a plant, our current young people would simply run around in circles waving their hands in the air.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. “The world will run out of oil in 10 years.”
        – U.S. Bureau of Mines (1914)
        “The world will run out of oil in 13 years.”
        – U.S. Department of the Interior (1939 and 1950)
        “The world will run out of oil and other fossil fuels by 1990.”
        – Paul Erlich, Limits to Growth (1973)
        “The world will run out of oil in 2030, and other fossil fuels in 2050.”
        – Paul Erlich, Beyond the Limit (2002)

        1. I agree. And I’d rather have American workers on American-regulated platforms drilling off Florida than the Chinese platforms drilling under the Sinopec banner with their hideous safety and environmental standards drilling just outside our Floridian waters.

          What the oil haters always forget is that:

          – For a great many Americans across large parts of this country, oil isn’t just the source of fuel but it is how they make a living.

          – Oil makes a lot more than just fuel. Every person that types a reply to these forums is using oil to do so…oil is a critical ingredient in plastics. (Plastics which, by the way, make up water filtration systems used to render water potable in the third world where proper sanitation plants don’t yet exist).

        2. “Unless profound changes are made to lower oil consumption, we now believe that in the early 1980s the world will be demanding more oil than it can produce.” President Jimmy Carter, April 18, 1977.

          Here’s the video of him delivering that speech. The quote begins at about the 2:50 mark:

        3. Mespo,…
          The mass starvation and collapse of civilizations that Paul Ehrlich predicted by the 1980s should have greatly reduced oil consumption.
          The “Ehrlich predictions”, had they not been so absurdly incorrect,
          would have prevented the such a rapid end to the world’s oil supply.
          When events refused to conform to Ehrlich’s earlier disaster models/ forecasts, he then figured out that the expanding world economies would completely drain all of the oil world’s oil supply.
          Maybe Ehrlich will branch out into predicting the day, year, or decade of the Second Coming.
          He might have a better chance of making an accurate forecast in that field, and it’s not like he could damage his track record.

      2. Bill and Melinda Gates must think their kids are being educated to run the wind turbines. It explains why they want the kids of people who are actually productive-contributing to GDP, to abandon their schools for schools like those the Gates’ kids attend….wait…the schools of the Gates’ kids’ reject the Gates’ education plot.
        Those for-profit schools-in-a-box, that thars sum learnin’

        1. Hmmm…story is about oil. Bill Gates isn’t an oil man. Neither are kids in schools. Or wind turbines. What did you say an ochlocrat was again Linda? Hint, it isn’t another name for a Russian bot!

        2. I’m not against wind turbines, per se, but why put those up when you can go nuclear and produce a sustainable load? Plus, electricity can not entirely replace what fossil fuels permit. Try reading The Long Emergency by J H Kunstler. He’s a Democrat, more or less, sooo you won’t get cooties.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

  2. You’ll forgive our skepticism after Al Gore proclaimed to us that unless we took “drastic measures” to reduce greenhouse gasses, the world would reach a “point of no return” in a mere ten years. He called it a “true planetary emergency.” (Inconvenient Truth)

    That was 2006 and the Earth has arguably cooled since then:

    I’m not saying that climate change isn’t real; I’m saying those assembled in Davos — with the exception of Trump — look a lot more like Chicken Littles with their eyes on US dollars than benevolent guardians of the planet.

  3. Turley, you’re gutless. Yes, it’s your blog. You set the rules. But you’re still gutless.
    “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of CHALLENGE AND CONTROVERSY.”

  4. It is true that clean, renewable energy will one day replace fossil fuels. I am glad.

    It is also true that fossil fuels have improved the quality of life for billions of people. This is not controversial. Without fossil fuels, people around the globe would have to walk or ride to get anywhere. Fossil fuels allowed global travel, including air travel. There are no electric commercial or cargo planes. Literally. How do people think that they get that beautiful produce, in winter, at their Whole Foods? Fossil fuels shipped it. People could get to hospitals. Jobs. Fossil fuels and their cousins heat their homes, whether by natural gas or propane. Crude oil and natural gas are ingredients for plastics. How many medical procedures and devices could you not have without plastics?

    This is the problem with extremism or True Believers.

    I can be quite pleased with the advance of alternative energy, while at the same time acknowledge that fossil fuels created a better quality of life for billions of people. It was an improvement on simply dying, rather than receiving a blood transfusion transported in plastic bags and transmitted by plastic tubing, all made out of fossil fuels, for example. I can also predict that we will one day completely replace fossil fuels. It is a limited natural resource, and it pollutes.

    We have not yet replaced fossil fuels and all of its related products. We will one day.

    We are still in the beta test stage of renewable energy. We have been diligently working on improvements. Right now, alternative energy cannot carry the entire energy infrastructure. Clicking our heels together with wishful thinking will not change this. It might emotionally feel better to say down with fossil fuels, as we enjoy fossil fuels in myriad ways in our own life. That’s gratifying. It’s not reality.

    In the meantime, it is quite clear that we should continue our efforts to make fossil fuels cleaner, and to harvest them with care for the environment. At the same time, we should continue to work on its replacement.

    Remove emotion from the equation.

    1. Did you know that computers are made from petrochemicals? So are sterile gloves, medications, syringes, tubing, and CT scanners.

      Stainless steel is a favorite of the nontoxic food storage set, of which I am a member. Stainless steel uses fossil fuels in its manufacture.

      Asphalt comes from fossil fuels.

      Pens, polyester, acrylic, spandex, pantyhose, car battery cases, synthetic hair dye (just say no to chemical hair dye!), balloons, sunglasses, soft contact lenses, cameras, iPhones, fan belts, ammonia, shaving cream, razors, toilet seats, mops, oil filters, refrigerators, golf balls, skis, and TVs are all made from petrochemicals.

      And that is not an exhaustive list.

      To those who claim that Perry is out of his mind, I say, you are not informed.

      What can one say about people who wear their gym clothes, sending a podcast on their iPhone, drinking water out of their stainless steel bottle, wearing sunglasses, with a clean shaven face, after having used a toilet, who cried out against fossil fuels? Who says that they should be banned now? I’d say, they are unaware that they stand upon a pile of hypocrisy.

      People react this way to Rick Perry because they are uneducated about what fossil fuels really does, besides fuel gas powered commuter vehicles. They should learn more about it.

      Yes, each of these components will one day be replaced. That’s going to take a while. It’s exciting to see the changes. It’s not heresy to claim that fossil fuels have done, and continue to do, a lot of good in the world. Nor is it heresy to acknowledge pollution. It’s reality.

      1. If you wear leather, you are an evil predator of animals that leads to global warming. If you wear synthetics, or anything with elastic, then you are supporting evil fossil fuels that lead to global warming.

        Now, I’m going to go ride in my spandex cotton blend breaches with leather knee patches, leather paddock boots, and leather half chaps, after I brush my horse with brushes made from petrochemicals, out of my brush box made from petrochemicals, in my arena fenced with steel made with petrochemicals. Afterwards, I will pick up my son in a truck fueled by petrochemicals, because electric vehicle aren’t strong enough for trucks yet, while driving on a road made from petrochemicals.

        I may be a lot of things, but in this matter, I’m no hypocrite. I like natural products. I interact with petrochemicals all day long.

    2. “Remove emotion from the equation.” -Karen S.

      Now wouldn’t that be refreshing.

  5. Smart people who understand energy have shown that solar and wind do not scale well (i.e., they can’t handle peak loads … recent proof was cold snap in New England). Countries and utilities that brag about “sustainable” sources often include high amounts of a source called “biomass” which is burning garbage or peat or animal droppings. None of these sources is necessarily good for the environment. We don’t hear much about it, but wind mills kill thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of birds a year, and solar panel are a blight on the landscape destroying land that farmers or animals would otherwise use. If climate models predicting global cooling are correct (and yes there is evidence for that), then that land would be better used for crops. And burning garbage, well …

    1. I would like to add that the US now ships, using petrochemicals, large amounts of wood pellets for the UK to burn as renewable energy. The forests we cut down for their “green energy”, after all, is a renewable resource. Granted, this creates more pollution in the form of smoke than cleaner fossil fuels, but it does seem to make people feel better.

  6. Apparently those denouncing the message from Secretary Perry never bothered to actually read the message. Here is part of it from the link JT’s provided:

    Perry, meanwhile, boasted that the U.S. is pursuing reductions in emissions of carbon dioxide, despite intending to leave the Paris climate change agreement that all other nations are a part of.

    “The United States is leading the world in reduction of emissions,” Perry said. “You can have economic growth, improved quality of life, and at the same time drive down emissions. The driving force is the transition from old, inefficient power plants to cleaner burning natural gas. That is what we want to be a part of, and what the fossil fuel industry wants to be a part of.”

    But Perry also expressed support for technologies that could displace fossil fuels, such as electric vehicles and battery storage, which can hold excess renewable energy when the sun isn’t shining, and wind is not blowing.

    “Are electric cars a good thing, and will you see lot of focus on the development of them?” Perry said. “Absolutely. Certainly, the U.S. will be deeply involved in the development of electric.”

    “Battery storage to me is the most intriguing [innovation] to me,” Perry added. “It is truly the holy grail here.”

      1. 🙂 Thanks Karen. Apparently JT does not hold the intellectual curiosity of the participants in his blog in high regard. Many of them simply accepted his conclusion without bothering to read the link provided. The professor speaks and his students passively consume. Seems like self-incurred tutelage to me.

        1. Olly, your argument is invalid because you relied on the source material, rather than only the information that Professor Turley gave you. This is blatantly unfair. In the future discussions, please apply only the premise and information that the Professor gives you. This is why courts routinely tell juries not to do any independent investigations and to rely solely on the facts presented in court. You have introduced facts and evidence that Professor Turley has implicitly asked you not to look at.

          Oddly, though, in one of the best of the liberal movies courtroom/jury movies, the character played by Henry Fonda in the great classic “Twelve Angry Men” did do his own investigation of the facts of the case, going outside the four corners of the testimony given:

          So, comically enough, Olly, you’ve pulled a “Henry Fonda,” emulating the actions of the character played by one of the leading liberal actors of the day. 🙂

    1. I have always said that people who argue solar panels and windmills don’t understand the real issue. It is always about the storage and until that is solved it will never compete. I am somewhat surprised a politician seems to know this.

      1. As Perry said, solving the battery problem for solar will be a game changer.

        I see the grid as going away at some point.

        1. Karen,

          “I see the grid as going away at some point.”

          Not necessarily. When I worked as a combustion engineer for the power turbine industry my boss had a side investment he was looking into that was trying to make megawatt battery storage. Think of them as being distributed like you see sub stations. It was based on using iron since it is cheap. But that being said, it still wasn’t cheap enough. My boss told me in our discussion that the target cost for the technology was around $100 but needed to be around $50 before if would make sense to do.

  7. It could have been worse; they could have sent in their top scientist, Jim Inhofe. Jim could have thrown a snowball at the crowd and then performed his ice cube trick. Yup, Yup, Yup and you voted for this nonsense. The smell of pollution is just the smell of success. It’s not liberals, communists, and other extremists that cause revolutions. It’s idiots like Trump, Perry, and those that believe their nonsense. Sometimes people who can actually think, just decide not to take it anymore. Vote this idiocy out of office. Take the Senate, then the Congress, then send the turnip packing. Even Clinton would not have been this bad.

    1. To heck with Canadians! You are vile and sneaky creatures! On SiriusXM, you Canadians labeled a station, “Ici Musique”, which is French for “icky music. But it is NOT “icky music” at all!!! It is a very good station which you don’t even have to know French to appreciate!!!

      CANADIANS would rather climb a tree and lie, than stand on the ground and tell the truth!!!

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  8. Billions upon billions of tons of carbon emissions, yearly, have no effect apparently.

    The oxygen all of you breathe derives from ancient Cyanobacteria. If such organisms can alter the atmosphere and thus the planet, why can’t we?

    (Well of course we can, considering we impact negatively every single ecosystem we enter.)

    The US uses ~25 million barrels of oil a day. A day. If we extracted every bit of oil this country supposedly has, we could be self-sustaining for how long at such a rate? Six years? Ten?

    Myopic morons.

  9. Even with his glasses on he’s as dumb as dirt. We are running toward a future in the 19th century while every one is moving forward. But I guess that doesn’t matter because the “people” who do matter to this administration are the oil companies and the lobbyists.

  10. I can’t wait until the next ice age. There is more to climate change than man-made CO2 emissions. You might look into Svensmark to get some perspective on what really may be driving climate. A good sign that the popular position may be overrated is that people with alternate explanations and assessments are vehemently called “Deniers”. That reeks of emotion, not science.

    1. It’s a religion. That’s why they use terms like “believers” and “deniers”.
      And China?? AYFKM?????? China is our role model???

      1. Deny God. Create your own god. Force everyone to assimilate. Make money doing so.

  11. Another example of Trump hiring the best people, I’m just surprised Perry didn’t say he wanted to bring back the whale oil jobs. Oh hell, I just gave them a idea.

    1. And you’ve never, ever had a brain cramp yourself, right? Did you ever listen to your messiah stutter when he didn’t have his teleprompter? He sounds like Porky Pig.

  12. We are going to build many more solar panels in America and thence plant them in our fields. America will be great. The tariff on foreign solar panels is good. Dog is good, dog is great. Barkin Dogs are best.

  13. We haven’t built a nuclear plant in years. Why should we not use up the vast resources we have?

  14. The Koch’s are in charge, and they’ve made the nation’s leadership into an embarrassment. The Russians capitalized on the discontent that resulted from wage stagnation, caused by the Koch’s ALEC. The money of the Russian people, used in the U.S., to undermine the country was effective because global corporations had taken away the opportunity for Americans to be productive and to have the associated good-paying jobs. That is owned by the GOP.

    1. Da Koch’s live in Aspen atop all da foul air they and Trump leave da rest of us to breath.T rump and Stormy enjoyed da breezes of da ocean at Miralago.

  15. The best individuals to decide this issue in the U.S. are the voters and the consumers. Relying on politicians to save anything is folly.

  16. With much of the world desperately trying to rid itself of fossil fuels to avoid disaster from climate change, the Trump Administration at times seems to be on a different planet.

    Of course they are. They won’t need fossil fuels once their immigration policy moves them back to the Stone Age.

    1. “With much of the world desperately trying to rid itself of fossil fuels to avoid disaster from climate change…”

      omg, Turley, are you one of THEM?

      Maybe George can talk some sense into you.

      1. omg, Turley, are you one of THEM?

        🙂 This is the one subject JT seems to be the most emotional about. He of course is passionate about the law, but when it comes to anything to do with the environment, the law will come in a distant second.

        1. He doesn’t want his kids to smell air that smells like skunk. You should start a dads for pollution club.

          1. He doesn’t want his kids to smell air that smells like skunk. You should start a dads for pollution club.

            And of course the logical conclusion is anyone that objects to the man-made climate change mantra must want our environment to be polluted. Shouldn’t you be focusing on your times tables and your spelling test?

              1. And yet another logical conclusion? I guess I should counter that with you are no friend to kids without asthma? Your turn.

      2. Yes TMP44, our esteemed professor is one of them. For such a seemingly intelligent fellow, he has missed all the evidence that man-made climate change is a fraudulent scam.

        My position is that when the MMCC screamers start living as if it is truly an issue, then I might start believing them.

Comments are closed.

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks
%d bloggers like this: