Economy
Why Democrats Make Energy Expensive (And Dirty)
Progressives say they care more about working people and climate change than Republicans and moderate Democrats. Why, then, do they advocate policies that make energy expensive and dirty?
 |
Progressive Democrats including Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the head of the House progressive caucus, have sent a letter demanding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) investigate whether “market manipulation” is causing natural gas prices to rise 30 percent on average for consumers over last winter, an astonishing $746 per household.
But the main reason natural gas prices are rising is because progressives have been so successful in restricting natural gas production. Sanders, Jayapal, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), as individuals and as part of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, have successful fought to restrict natural gas production through fracking and to block natural gas pipelines, including the Atlantic Coast pipeline.
In 2020, Sanders celebrated efforts by progressives to cancel the Atlantic Coast pipeline. Today, New England is facing rolling blackouts and importing natural gas from Russia. “Getting [natural] gas to [progressive Senators Ed] Markey and [Elizabeth] Warren’s Massachusetts is so difficult,” reports The Wall Street Journal, “that sometimes it comes into Boston Harbor on a tanker from Russia.”
Bernie Sanders @SenSandersThis is a major victory for the millions-strong climate justice movement, which fought for years to stop this pipeline. Together, we will secure clean air and good jobs building a renewable-energy economy that protects the only planet we have. 
Energy companies cancel construction of Atlantic Coast PipelineDominion Energy and Duke Energy have canceled their Atlantic Coast Pipeline project, a natural gas pipeline that was to stretch hundreds of miles across West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina, citing “legal uncertainty.”cnn.com
July 6th 2020
1,033 Retweets5,760 Likes
Democrats aren’t the only reason the United States isn’t producing enough natural gas to keep prices at the same low levels they’ve been at for the past decade. There is higher demand as the economy emerges from covid. There is greater demand for natural gas internationally due to a bad year for wind energy in Europe. And President Joe Biden, for his part, has resisted many progressive demands to restrict oil and gas production.
But the main reason there isn’t enough natural gas production is because of successful progressive Democratic efforts to restrict natural gas production in the United States, Europe, and other parts of the world in the name of fighting climate change, as I was one of the first to report last fall. Sanders and Jayapal talk about “market manipulation” and “profiteering” but to the extent there is any of either it’s because of inadequate supplies of natural gas and the pipelines to transport it.
Successful shareholder activism, known in the industry as “ESG” for environmental, social, and governance issues, resulted in less investment in oil and gas production, and more weather-dependent renewables, which result in higher prices everywhere they are deployed at scale. Even ESG champions including Financial Times, Goldman Sachs, and Bloomberg all now acknowledge that it was climate activist shareholder efforts that restricted oil and gas investment.
Such efforts also directly led to increasing carbon emissions. Last year saw a whopping 17 percent increase in coal-fired electricity, which resulted in a six percent increase in greenhouse gas emissions. It was the first annual increase in coal use since 2014. The reason for it was because of the scarcity and higher price of natural gas, coal’s direct replacement, not just in the U.S. but globally, since the US exports a significant quantity of natural gas.
 |
The other reason the U.S. used more coal in 2021 is because progressive Democrats are shutting down nuclear plants. “When a nuclear plant is closed, it’s closed forever,” noted Mark Nelson of Radiant Energy Fund, an energy analytics firm, “whereas coal plants can afford to operate at relatively low levels of capacity, like just 30 to 50 percent operation, and thus wait for natural gas prices, and thus demand for coal, to rise.”
Progressives like Sanders, Jayapal, and AOC claim to care more about poor people, working people, and climate change than either Republicans or moderate Democrats, who they defeat in Democratic primary elections. Why, then, do they advocate policies that make energy expensive and dirty?
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOCOctober 8th 2020
81,570 Retweets648,545 Likes
Strategic Ignorance
 |
A big part of the reason progressives make energy expensive appears to be that they just don’t know very much about energy. The fact that they are demanding that FERC investigate higher prices suggests they want to keep energy prices low. But it could also mean that their letter is just public relations cover so they are not blamed for raising energy prices.
Indeed, it would be naive to think that Sanders and other progressives didn’t realize that blocking pipelines, opposing fracking, and subsidizing renewables would make energy expensive, given that making energy expensive has been the highest goal of their main climate advisor, Bill McKibben, who subscribes to the Malthusian view that there are too many humans and we must restrict energy and development.
If renewables were cheaper than the status quo then the policies they advocate — no permitting of pipelines, restrictions on fracking, and subsidies for renewables — would not be necessary. Besides, mainstream energy experts and journalists today admit that weather-dependent renewables make electricity expensive…
Subscribe to Michael Shellenberger to read the rest.
Become a paying subscriber of Michael Shellenberger to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content.
A subscription gets you:
 |
Subscriber-only posts and full archive |
|
Post comments and join the community |
The population drops for the first time in years, exposing an economy built on temporary residents, tuition cash, and government debt rather than real productivity
Canadians have been told for years that population decline was unthinkable, that it was an economic death spiral, that only mass immigration could save us. That was the line. Now the numbers are in, and suddenly the people who said that are very quiet.
Statistics Canada reports that between July 1 and October 1, 2025, Canada’s population fell by 76,068 people, a decline of 0.2 percent, bringing the total population to 41,575,585. This is not a rounding error. It is not a model projection. It is an official quarterly population loss, outside the COVID period, confirmed by the federal government’s own data
The reason matters. This did not happen because Canadians suddenly stopped having children or because of a natural disaster. It happened because the number of non‑permanent residents dropped by 176,479 people in a single quarter, the largest quarterly decline since comparable records began in 1971. Permit expirations outpaced new permits by more than two to one. Outflows totaled 339,505, while inflows were just 163,026
That is the so‑called growth engine shutting down.
Permanent immigration continued at roughly the same pace as before. Canada admitted 102,867 permanent immigrants in the quarter, consistent with recent levels. Births minus deaths added another 17,600 people. None of that was enough to offset the collapse in temporary residency. Net international migration overall was negative, at minus 93,668
And here’s the part you’re not supposed to say out loud. For the Liberal‑NDP government, this is bad news. Their entire economic story has rested on population‑driven GDP growth, not productivity. Add more people, claim the economy is growing, borrow more money, and run the national credit card a little harder. When population growth reverses, that illusion collapses. GDP per capita does not magically improve. Housing shortages do not disappear. The math just stops working.
The regional numbers make that clear. Ontario’s population fell by 0.4 percent in the quarter. British Columbia fell by 0.3 percent. Every province and territory lost population except Alberta and Nunavut, and even Alberta’s growth was just 0.2 percent, its weakest since the border‑closure period of 2021
Now watch who starts complaining first. Universities are already bracing for it. Study permit holders alone fell by 73,682 people in three months, with Ontario losing 47,511 and British Columbia losing 14,291. These are the provinces with the largest university systems and the highest dependence on international tuition revenue
You’re going to hear administrators and activists say this is a crisis. What they mean is that fewer students are paying international tuition to subsidize bloated campuses and programs that produce no measurable economic value. When the pool of non‑permanent residents shrinks, departments that exist purely because enrollment was artificially inflated start to disappear. That’s not mysterious. That’s arithmetic.
For years, Canadians were told that any slowdown in population growth was dangerous. The truth is more uncomfortable. What’s dangerous is building a national economic model on temporary residents, borrowed money, and headline GDP numbers while productivity stagnates. The latest StatsCan release doesn’t just show a population decline. It shows how fragile the story really was, and how quickly it unravels when the numbers stop being padded.
Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight
The White House on Thursday declared a decisive turn in the inflation fight, pointing to new data showing core inflation has fallen to its lowest level in nearly five years — a milestone the administration says validates President Donald Trump’s economic reset after inheriting what it calls a historic cost-of-living crisis from the Biden era. In a statement accompanying the report, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said inflation “came in far lower than market expectations,” drawing a sharp contrast with the 9 percent peak under President Joe Biden and arguing the numbers reflect sustained relief for American households. “Core inflation is at a new multi-year low, as prices for groceries, medicine, gas, airfare, car rentals, and hotels keep falling,” Leavitt said, adding that lower prices and rising paychecks are expected to continue into the new year.
According to the White House, core inflation — widely viewed by economists as the most reliable gauge because it strips out volatile food and energy costs — is now down roughly 70 percent from its Biden-era high. Officials noted that if inflation continues at the pace of the last two months, it would be running at an annualized rate of about 1.2 percent, well below the Federal Reserve’s 2 percent target. The report also highlighted broad-based price moderation across consumer staples and services, with declines in groceries, dairy, fruits and vegetables, prescription drugs, clothing, airfares, natural gas, car and truck rentals, and hotel prices. Average gas prices have fallen to multi-year lows, while rent inflation has dropped to its lowest level since October 2021, a shift the administration attributes in part to tougher enforcement against illegal immigration and reduced pressure on housing demand.
Wages, the White House says, are rising alongside easing prices. Private-sector workers are on track to see real wages increase by about $1,300 in President Trump’s first full year back in office, clawing back purchasing power lost during the inflation surge of the previous administration. Gains are strongest among blue-collar workers, with annualized real earnings up roughly $1,800 for construction workers and $1,600 for manufacturing employees. Administration officials also took aim at critics who warned Trump’s tariff policies would reignite inflation, arguing the data shows no demonstrable inflationary impact despite repeated predictions from Wall Street and academic economists.
NEC Director Kevin Hassett on the latest inflation report: "It was just an absolute blockbuster report… We looked at 61 forecasts, and this number came in better than every single one of them." 🔥 pic.twitter.com/rBJpkmjuNa
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) December 18, 2025
Even commentators across the media spectrum acknowledged the strength of the report. CNBC’s Steve Liesman called it “a very good number,” while CNN’s Matt Egan said it was “another step in the right direction.” Harvard economist Ken Rogoff described the reading as “a better number than anyone was expecting,” adding, “There’s no other way to spin it.” Bloomberg’s Chris Anstey noted the figure came in two-tenths below the lowest estimate in a survey of 62 economists, calling it “remarkable,” while The Washington Post’s Andrew Ackerman wrote that inflation “cooled unexpectedly,” easing pressure on household budgets.
For the White House, the message was blunt: the inflation era is over. Officials framed Thursday’s report as proof that Trump has followed through on his promise to defeat the cost-of-living crisis he inherited, laying what they called the groundwork for a strong year ahead. As the president told the nation this week, the administration insists the progress is real — and that, in his words, the best is yet to come.
Trump DOJ seeks to quash Pfizer whistleblower’s lawsuit over COVID shots
Alberta introducing three “all-season resort areas” to provide more summer activities in Alberta’s mountain parks
Trump admin wants to help Canadian woman rethink euthanasia, Glenn Beck says
Growing Alberta’s fresh food future
-
International2 days agoBondi Beach Shows Why Self-Defense Is a Vital Right
-
Business2 days agoOttawa Pretends To Pivot But Keeps Spending Like Trudeau
-
Energy2 days agoLiberals Twisted Themselves Into Pretzels Over Their Own Pipeline MOU
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoHow Wikipedia Got Captured: Leftist Editors & Foreign Influence On Internet’s Biggest Source of Info
-
Crime1 day agoBondi Beach Survivor Says Cops Prevented Her From Fighting Back Against Terrorists
-
Automotive1 day agoFord’s EV Fiasco Fallout Hits Hard
-
Crime2 days agoThe Uncomfortable Demographics of Islamist Bloodshed—and Why “Islamophobia” Deflection Increases the Threat
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy17 hours agoCanada Lets Child-Porn Offenders Off Easy While Targeting Bible Believers