As potential re-election looms for California Governor Newsom, he avoids tough questions – OpEd – Eurasia Review
With California’s electricity and fuel costs being among the highest in the country, Newsom is doing everything possible to further increase energy costs for residents and shift (or “leak”) emissions production to developing countries. development. His actions are relentless as he avoids conversations to justify his bizarre energy policies.
- Newsom continues to cut oil production in California.
California, the fifth largest economy in the world, is the ONLY state in contiguous America that imports oil to meet state demands. This dependence has grown from 5% in 1995 to over 58% today and Newsom continues to decrease production in the state, which would further increase our dependence on unstable foreign governments.
At the current crude oil price of around $90 a barrel, imported crude oil is costing California more than $150 million a day, yes, every day, being paid to oil-rich foreign countries, depriving Californians of jobs and business opportunities, and drivers to pay high fuel prices.
First question for a conversation: Why is Newsom continually seeking to further reduce production in the state which will place greater reliance on foreign countries, now at 58% and growing. Why leak more emissions to countries with far fewer environmental controls than California, and increase California’s growing dependence on foreign countries, which poses a national security risk to the entire country?
- Newsom has not banned any sales of internal combustion engine vehicles after 2035.
For an ethical and unethical supply chain needed to build electric vehicle batteries, it’s obvious that Newson has yet to read the Pulitzer Prize-nominated book “Clean Energy Exploits,” which offers transparency on the environmental degradation and human atrocities that occur in developing countries that mine these exotic minerals and metals to support the “green” movement. Subsidies for the purchase of electric vehicles are financial incentives to encourage new exploitations of residents with yellow, brown and black skin in developing countries.
Second question for a conversation: Why does Newsom support subsidies for the purchase of electric vehicles when these subsidies provide financial incentives to developing countries that mine these exotic minerals and metals to support the ‘green’ movement to continue environmental degradation in their local landscapes and impose human atrocities on citizens yellow, brown and black skinned workers exploited for the green movement?
- Newsom supports electric vehicles that do not contribute funds to maintain California’s highway system.
Newsom seems unable to acknowledge that California’s nearly 400,000 miles of roads are heavily dependent on road fuel taxes that contribute more than $8.8 billion a year, the same tax base that also funds environmental programs that will decrease in the decades to come..
Third question for a conversation: How does Newsom plan to replace the $7 billion in gas tax revenue to maintain the state’s 400,000 miles of roads as the state migrates to more electric vehicles that do nothing to help road maintenance and repairs?
- Newsom supports ridding California of oil.
Without a contingency plan for the replacement of more than 6,000 products and petroleum-based fuels, and the petroleum-based fuels that power more than 50,000 jets and more than 50,000 merchant ships, its efforts to end the use of crude oil could be the greatest threat to the civilization, not climate change, leading to billions of deaths from disease, malnutrition and weather-related deaths.
Fourth question for a conversation: Why does Newsom support wind and solar which only generate intermittent electricity, but cannot manufacture anything for society? How does it replace petroleum derivatives which are the basis of more than 6,000 products and fuels for our various transport infrastructures and the economy?
- Newsom supports more electric vehicles without power grid to support massive charging.
In the UK, new home and workplace chargers now automatically switch off at peak times to avoid potential breakdowns. The new UK chargers are preset to not run for 9 hours of peak loads, 8am-11am (3 hours) and 4pm-10pm (6 hours).
In addition, all home-installed electric vehicle chargers in the UK must be metered separately and send this information to a smart meter data communication network. Potentially, this UK legislation allows electricity used to charge electric vehicles to be charged and taxed at a higher rate than household electricity. Clearly, EV electricity users are the ones who will pay to upgrade and maintain the grid.
Fifth question for a conversation: Why doesn’t Newsom support an EV charging policy similar to the UK, where EV chargers don’t run 9 hours a day during peak grid charging, and have those chargers on separate meters to help stabilize the network and establish a convenient method of charging the user for rebuilding the network?
California voters had a chance to recall Newsom in 2021, but chose to support his bizarre and costly energy policies. Following the failed recall, Newsom remains overconfident that his reelection is assured and that voters are willing to accept the highest energy costs in America and support his avoidance of addressing these difficult energy policy issues that could expose its limited energy literacy.