The virtue signaling myth of ‘green’ energy
What’s green about Congolese children mining in Africa for rare earth minerals? What’s green about China’s coal-fired factories churning out solar panels? What’s green about wind turbines that scar landscapes, slaughter birds, and rely even more on critical minerals from China? The answer is simple: nothing. President Donald Trump’s reentry into the White House will unlock affordable and reliable energy avenues, all while bulldozing the previous administration’s faulty “green” narrative.
The term “green” has been weaponized as a branding tool to push a radical energy transition that is anything but clean, sustainable, or just. Former Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm recently wrote in the New York Times about America’s so-called “green” economy, touting government-subsidized battery and solar plants as a new industrial renaissance. But what she fails to mention is that this vision of a “clean” future is built on exploitation, environmental destruction, and economic instability.
Take cobalt, a key mineral in electric vehicle batteries and energy storage. The Democratic Republic of the Congo produces over 70% of the world’s cobalt, much of it extracted in dangerous, inhumane conditions. Thousands of children labor in hazardous mines, inhaling toxic dust and risking deadly cave-ins, all so Western countries can feel virtuous driving electric vehicles. How is that “green”?
Lithium, another essential battery component, is no better. Extracting it requires massive amounts of water, depleting scarce resources in places such as Chile’s Atacama Desert, leaving behind toxic waste. Solar panels, which rely on polysilicon largely produced in China, are often manufactured in coal-heavy regions, negating much of their purported climate benefits. And wind turbines? Their blades, made from fiberglass, cannot be recycled and end up in landfills, while their production depends on rare earth elements mined in devastating conditions.
www.washingtonexaminer.com
What’s green about Congolese children mining in Africa for rare earth minerals? What’s green about China’s coal-fired factories churning out solar panels? What’s green about wind turbines that scar landscapes, slaughter birds, and rely even more on critical minerals from China? The answer is simple: nothing. President Donald Trump’s reentry into the White House will unlock affordable and reliable energy avenues, all while bulldozing the previous administration’s faulty “green” narrative.
The term “green” has been weaponized as a branding tool to push a radical energy transition that is anything but clean, sustainable, or just. Former Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm recently wrote in the New York Times about America’s so-called “green” economy, touting government-subsidized battery and solar plants as a new industrial renaissance. But what she fails to mention is that this vision of a “clean” future is built on exploitation, environmental destruction, and economic instability.
Take cobalt, a key mineral in electric vehicle batteries and energy storage. The Democratic Republic of the Congo produces over 70% of the world’s cobalt, much of it extracted in dangerous, inhumane conditions. Thousands of children labor in hazardous mines, inhaling toxic dust and risking deadly cave-ins, all so Western countries can feel virtuous driving electric vehicles. How is that “green”?
Lithium, another essential battery component, is no better. Extracting it requires massive amounts of water, depleting scarce resources in places such as Chile’s Atacama Desert, leaving behind toxic waste. Solar panels, which rely on polysilicon largely produced in China, are often manufactured in coal-heavy regions, negating much of their purported climate benefits. And wind turbines? Their blades, made from fiberglass, cannot be recycled and end up in landfills, while their production depends on rare earth elements mined in devastating conditions.
The virtue signaling myth of ‘green’ energy - Washington Examiner
Let’s stop pretending these policies are “green” when they make us weaker, poorer, and more dependent on foreign adversaries.
www.washingtonexaminer.com
