Today, January, 2012, we now know those Spanish projections were outrageously positive for the President’s green energy programs. The real results have been much, much worse according to the liberal Washington Post.
$5 Million for One
Obama Green-Tech Job
In 2007-2008, candidate Barack Obama threatened “to create 5 million new green-tech jobs.” Based upon green-energy experience in Spain where Europe’s strongest 1997 economy with only 4% unemployment became today’s second-weakest (Greece worst) with roughly 22% unemployment: green-tech is 150 years ahead of its time: just not practical. Based upon Spain’s example expect 5 million subsidized green jobs to eliminate 11 million real jobs created by American free markets. But only 10% of Spanish green jobs proved permanent meaning those 11 million real jobs would be lost for only 500,000 permanent green jobs paying $10-$14 per hour. Spain’s permanent green jobs cost $676,000 each.
Today, January, 2012, we now know that those projections were outrageously positive for the President’s green energy programs. The real results have been much, much worse according to the liberal Washington Post, of all surprising news sources: after Solyndra’s bankruptcy resulted in the loss of all 1,100 jobs at the heavily subsidized plant the scoreboard reads: a mere 3,545 (so-far) permanent green jobs created at a cost of nearly $19.5 billion or roughly $5 million per permanent green job created.
Green research continues but it’s probably a dead end. Fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) which Obama hates (his EPA is now closing down coal-powered plants) still account for 82.1% of all American energy (coal 46%). Nuclear energy accounts for roughly 10.2%. Hydro-electric plants yield 2.8%, all renewable and clean, but environmentalist want to remove most to benefit fish spawning. The next largest renewable energy is about 2.7% from burning wood. All the rest of green energy put together still accounts for less than wood-burning. In 2013, a G.H.W. Bush-era uranium deal with Russia expires potentially driving nuclear electricity costs sky high. Russia’s not eager to renew; environmentalists strongly oppose nuclear energy.
Obama, of course,
1) has refused to approve the Keystone Pipeline
2) has refused to develop the Bakken Field oil fields in the Northern Missouri River Valley area. With them the United States has larger oil resources than Saudi Arabia. Thank God, some of that oil is beneath North Dakota Indian reservations. The Native Americans don't have to follow Obama's stupid drilling moratoriums and they aren't.
3) Still has a Gulf Drilling moratorium and a ban on Alaska's Anwar area
4) Refuses to expand natural gas use (we have the largest deposits in the world)
5) Refuses to consider use of marlstone a.k.a. "oil shale". The Colorado, Utah and Wyoming deposits would yield enough gasoline to provide the entire world's needs for 600 years at present consumption levels.
6) Refuses to quit his wasteful green-tech loan programs and will spend another $19.3 Billion in 2012 and 2013
7) Listens to his environmental contingent and they want dams removed and their hydro-electricity with them; and oppose all nuclear-powered electricity generation.
Ya'all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
