If we had really objective media,

we'd be hearing a lot more about the effects of environmentalist lobbying and lawsuits on our ability to search for, develop and distribute energy our economy needs. People are hopping mad about gas prices, but they blame it on oil and gas companies, instead of where it belongs. An editorial in the Wall St. Journal today points out how, as the demand for natural gas increases (it burns cleaner than oil or coal) our ability to meet that demand is shackled by green groups blocking importation of liquified natural gas (LNG) and developing off-shore reserves. The most telling example of what's wrong occurred in a PBS special that examined the global warming phenomenon. At one point the producers asked a representative from Green Peace about options for generating power without releasing CO2, such as hydroelectric or nuclear. Of course, she was opposed to any proven technology, but supported windmills and solar power. Nothing further was said about the costs and engineering challenges these idea present, such as the fact that hydrogen must be manufactured by electrolyis and is far less energy-dense than hydrocarbon fuels, or that water vapor, by far the most important greenhouse gas, is the exhaust product of burning hydrogen.

Nobody has mentioned the effect that increased use of natural gas to generate electricity will have on the cost of home heating. I expect to see a lot more use of wood burning stoves, until the green police clamp down.

For their parts, the green groups keeping appealing to blue sky promises of fuel cells, solar energy, wind and hydrogen, none of which is capable of meeting our needs in the foreseeable future. Of course, any technology will grow if it doesn't have to compete in the free market. The only thing keeping these groups from being rejected roundly by the American people is the cover they get from supportive media which seldom go into sufficient depth or ask questions about the rosy claims for new technologies.