Revered conservative author Russell Kirk once wrote in an op-ed, “Nothing is more conservative than conservation.” He was right. What could possibly be more conservative than safeguarding the air, water, land, wildlife and natural systems that sustain and enhance life on earth? Responsible stewardship, whether it be to protect our fiscal health, our traditions and values, or the environment, has always been a hallmark of genuine conservatism.Theodore Roosevelt’s great accomplishments in land and wildlife conservation, Nixon’s efforts to reign in air and water pollution, and President Reagan’s leadership in repairing the earth’s ozone layer, were all born out of a strong stewardship ethic. We need for that same ethic to be much more prevalent in the hearts and minds of our leaders today–especially those who profess to be conservative. Recently Congressman Chris Gibson and ten other Republican lawmakers introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives calling for conservative engagement on climate change. Passing that resolution would be a good start. Here is a video introduction to the conservative ideas about natural resource stewardship that CRS champions. Join our movement to put the conserve back in conservatism. CRS_Conservative 1 from David Jenkins on...
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) recently released a report showing that wind and solar power generation outpaced coal and gas in 2014. Wind generation increased by more than any other power source and solar generation more than doubled. Equally impressive, wind energy is dominating new power generation going forward. Out of 20 gigawatts in electricity generating capacity utilities expect to add to the grid in 2015, wind energy will account for 9.8 gigawatts–more than any other energy source. Natural gas comes in second with 6.3 gigawatts and solar third with 2.2 gigawatts. Those three sources combined account for 91 percent of the added capacity. Perhaps this explains the current “war on renewables” being waged by groups like Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and the American Energy Alliance. These groups, which have close ties to the fossil fuel conglomerate Koch Industries, are in print and on the airwaves constantly demonizing wind and solar. Even worse, they do this under the pretense of championing conservatism and defending the free-market—not as the special interests shills they really are. Their attacks often center on the premise that wind and solar are somehow inferior to fossil fuels and that these energy sources only exist because they are being propped up by government subsidies. Nothing could be further from the truth. As the EIA data shows, utilities are more and more choosing wind and solar over coal and gas. Why? Because diversifying their fuel mix with wind and solar helps keep their fuel costs down and their electricity rates more stable. Fossil fuel prices are very volatile—as anyone who drives a car or truck can attest. They can...
Those living in much of the Eastern and Central U.S. would likely be surprised to hear NOAA’s recent announcement that July 2014 was one of the hottest Julys on record. For many Americans, this has been one of the most comfortable summers in recent memory—no sweltering heat waves and triple digit heat indexes that are often the summer norm. In fact, twenty-five states saw a cooler than average July and a few experienced record low temperatures. Does this mean NOAA is wrong? No it doesn’t. While a few areas of the globe were cooler than average, most were warmer. July brought record heat to the U.S. West Coast, Norway and parts of Africa. The contradiction between the temperature in one place and the global average is an example of how weather systems and climate intersect. Weather systems will always influence what we experience at any given time and place. Sometimes that will align with global averages and trends, sometimes it won’t. This underscores why it is unwise to make assumptions about climate change based on localized and short-term weather conditions. Prudence dictates that we look at the big picture, which includes average global temperatures and long-term trends. The map below provides a good visual overview of how July temperatures, worldwide, compared to long-term...
Forty years ago the Endangered Species Act passed with overwhelming bipartisan majorities in Congress and was signed into law by President Nixon. Both its enactment and longevity stand as a shining examples of good stewardship and as a testament to our ability to come together to act in the best interest of what President Reagan called “this magical planet of ours.” What many people—on both the political right and left—may not recognize is that the Act is a very conservative law. The fathers of traditional conservative thought—including British statesman Edmund Burke, American political theorist Russell Kirk, and conservative philosopher Richard Weaver—emphasized that prudent forethought, humility, a spirit of piety, and responsible stewardship are core conservative principles. Just a few years before the Endangered Species Act was signed into law, Kirk pointed out that “nothing is more conservative than conservation.” Years earlier, Weaver lamented humankind’s tendency to disregard nature in the name of progress. He warned that “Triumphs against the natural order of living exact unforeseen payments,” and astutely pointed out: “…man is not the lord of creation, with an omnipotent will, but a part of creation, with limitations, who ought to observe a decent humility in the face of the inscrutable.” Conservative poet T.S. Eliot put it more succinctly when he observed that “A wrong attitude towards nature implies, somewhere, a wrong attitude towards God.” From the deliberate and cruel efforts to eradicate wolves and grizzly bears, to the more inadvertent actions that drove the bald eagle—our national symbol—to the brink of extinction, history is full of examples of humankind’s intolerance of wildlife and ignorance of its needs. Too...
