Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Barbara Lifton Wants to Ban New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure!

Climate Witch Trials - Jim Willis reports

Jim Willis
Editor & Publisher, Marcellus Drilling News (MDN)


Barbara Lifton, and 21 other NY lawmakers, ask Gov. Cuomo to ban on all new fossil fuel infrastructure; a move that would send NY back to the stone ages.

Barbara Lifton is a dangerously stupid person. Dangerous because she happens to be an elected member of the New York State Assembly. She is representing the ultra-liberal bastion of Ithaca, NY. In fact, Lifton has long opposed shale drilling in the state. Her hatred of shale drilling has now spilled over and metastasized into a full-blown, irrational hatred of all fossil fuels.

Lifton and 21 other energy no-nothings in the NY state legislature sent a signed letter to Gov. Andrew “man-child” Cuomo. They are asking him to halt all state approvals of pipelines, compressor stations, power plants, and gas storage facilities. In other words, stop any more development of energy that comes from fossil fuels. Even though, last year 81.5% of all energy used in this country (and NY) came from fossil fuels. That’s the stupid part.

barbara lifton

Barbara Lifton and her cronies are advocating that we dump the source of 81.5% of our energy. Let’s play a “what if?” game. In fact, if we stopped using fossil fuels in New York State, we would be instantly transported back to the Stone Ages, complete with mass death and disease. Ninety percent or more of the population would either have to move, or die.

Here’s the humorous part: The letter Lifton signed requesting an energy holocaust was produced on a computer made from plastics (i.e. fossil fuels) and was powered with electricity from fossil fuels. The clothes she wore at a rally in Binghamton to announce this lunacy were made from plastic fibers (i.e. fossil fuels). She got to the rally from Ithaca in a vehicle powered by fossil fuels, riding in a vehicle and on tires made from fossil fuels. You get our drift. Pure insanity.

Barbara Lifton

Click to read the Letter from 22 New York State Legislators Asking Gov. Cuomo to Enact a Moratorium on “Fossil Fuel Infrastructure”

Here’s a report about the letter, the rally, and the dangerously stupid Barbara Lifton.

Stop further fossil fuel development in New York, say 22 state legislators who are asking Gov. Andrew Cuomo to halt New York’s reliance on “highly polluting” energy sources.

On Thursday, Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton, D-Ithaca, unveiled a campaign to convince Cuomo to “adopt a moratorium on state approvals for new pipelines, compressor stations, power plants, gas storage facilities” and other fossil fuel-related development.

She introduced the proposal during a press conference in front of the Binghamton State Office Building, accompanied by Walter Hang, an Ithaca-based environmental activist who led a successful effort in New York to ban natural gas drilling using hydraulic fracturing.

Lifton’s request comes as the New York Independent System Operator, which operates the state’s electric grid and coordinates the distribution of adequate electric supplies from Montauk to Niagara Falls, expresses concern about the adequacy of the state’s natural gas infrastructure.

The member of the Assembly majority called on Cuomo to shape an aggressive energy conservation program to drastically reduce usage in a strategy to cut carbon emissions. She called projections that New York will soon rely on natural gas for 70 percent of its electric generation capacity “very bad news for global warming.”

An initiative to place a moratorium on fossil fuel infrastructure build-out met a swift and bitter reaction from the New York State Business Council, which called the plan “unworkable.”

“Climate change occurs on a global scale, not on a local scale,” said Darren Suarez, director of government affairs for the Business Council. “This could put every industrial expansion plan in jeopardy.”

Today, 57 percent of all proposed generating capacity use natural gas, according to a report from NYISO. In the coming years, reliance on natural gas for electric generation will only rise before sufficient supplies of renewable energy sources come on line, gas transmission line operators said.

“The growing demand for natural gas by power generators, coupled with the uncertainty over the likelihood of future natural gas infrastructure expansion, raises strategic concerns over the gas system’s ability to keep pace with the needs of natural gas utilities serving residential, commercial and industrial customers,” NYISO said in its recently released report on power needs in New York…

New York is the largest consumer of natural gas east of Louisiana, accounting for 5 percent of the nation’s consumption.

Lifton could offer no estimate for the cost of a “demand-side” energy management program, saying she is still fleshing out the details of the proposal. Keys to the effort include conservation through weatherization and a comprehensive plan to increase the energy efficiency of every utility customer class.

Editor’s Note: Jim seldom understates his case, but, in this instance, he just may have. Barbara Lifton isn’t that stupid; she’s simply craven.

Barbara Lifton is a new class of politician who knows no bounds when it comes to demagoguery. She understands full well the facts Jim cites and has zero expectation her proposed policies will be enacted. It’s all for the cameras and microphones; to make it appear she and her band of radicals are leaders in bringing about a new evolving reality.

Barbara Lifton is playing the system to maximize her appeal with the condescending academic and trust-funder know-nothing class that populates places such as Ithaca. She’s depending on others to make sure her office is warm, her home air conditioning works, her car can be fueled and the like while she takes a free ride on the fast train to limousine leftist stardom. Her Ithaca office, just like Walter Hang’s and the Park Foundation’s is served with natural gas. She’s a user; a parasite politician willing to sell her soul for the sake of her 15 minutes of fame.

Worse, Lifton is partnering with Walter Hang, who, she surely realizes, is on the payroll of the Park and Rockefeller families, having received over $2 million from them to pull off just these sorts of stunts. She is a tool of the gentry class in making a wilderness of Upstate New York for their enjoyment

For more great articles on natural gas development every single day, subscribe to Marcellus Drilling News using this convenient link.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

13 thoughts on “Barbara Lifton Wants to Ban New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure!

  1. Barbara Lifton, and 21 other NY lawmakers, ask Gov. Cuomo to ban on all new fossil fuel infrastructure; a move that would send NY back to the stone ages.

    I’m all for it as long as they start in in Rip Van Cuomo’s almamater, New York City.

  2. Clueless. How frightening she has a voice as the media so willingly show up like sheep to these staged press events.

  3. What is a sure sign that politicians signing or writing a letter are either catering to or under the influence of the antifracking pipeline resistance movement? Well for one thing they speak the talking points of the antifracking pipeline and all infrackstructure resistance movement.

    Another telltale sign is that the letter may not make a lot of sense or demonstrate a command of the actual subject the letter is about.. The one below actually has more politicians signed on and demonstrates that the writers and signers were so confused about the topic they were writing a letter about that they included evidence that they had bought into a. Conspiracy theory on the port Ambrose LNG import project that had been created by fractivists and others influencing them.



  4. You give Ms. Lifton far too much credit. Rather than over-hype a tiny and brief press conference about a trivial letter, read between the lines and see the weakness in their position.

    1. There are 150 Assembly districts in NY State. She managed to get 22 signatures, including her own; this is an underwhelming endorsement.

    2. Why does the governor need a letter to tell him to do what he wants to do. I’m pretty sure the Park Foundation has a direct line to his office if they need a favor or find his performance lacking.

    3. There is no mention of nuclear power, which the governor, in his recent Clean Energy Plan, declared it a clean transitional energy source because it produces no greenhouse gases and proposes “Zero Emission Credits” to help fund them. This could be a real wedge issue for us. Imagine asking someone in they preferred natural gas or nuclear and then truthfully telling them the governor thinks nuclear is “green” and will use their tax money to prop up plants the operators want to close.

    4. She papers over the failure of wind and solar to do anything meaningful “due to high costs and technical hurdles”, admits it will be “extremely challenging” (spin talk for “damn near impossible”) to meet the 2030 goals of 50% renewable energy. Then she (and/or the Park Foundation) suggests cutting energy demand through aggressive conservation, far beyond the governor’s already ambitious plan, is the way to go. But, even with Walter Hang standing beside her, there are no numbers for the plan, not even an estimate.

    5. I’m pretty sure she is a true believer their cause, glad to take suggestions/orders from people she agrees with and who sent her to the Assembly. As one of Terry Pratchett’s characters said “It can’t be wrong if *we* are doing it; we are the good ones!”

    • Here is what I would ask mark. Who is the “you” giving Ms.Lifton too much credit? Is it the reporter who covered the press release and letter for example because the letter made news right? So someone made the decision that the letter was newsworthy and then also if as you say it only showcases the failure of Lifton to garner more support, then the reporter also left out context.

      Re: nuclear. One can find a letter also covered in the news with environmental groups, certainly some were same groups opposed to fracking and/or natural gas pipeline projects or all infrackstructure, as well.

      And again there were more elected officials in ny signed on to a letter about vetoing an LNG import project which stated the import project could lead to more regional fracking. To this day there isn’t a reporter in nyc or state willing to write that antifracking activists and others created an export conspiracy theory on the port Ambrose LNG import project even though plenty of reporters in more than one stated covered the export claims.

      • I think Mr. Willis give her and her message too much importance. The reporter did a good job of trying to get some facts and numbers out of her, but because she had none ready means it was just PR stunt. His editor probably sent the guy because he got a call from Loftin’s office that something was going to happen downtown.

        Many environmental groups are only united by there hate for fossil fuels. The idea that gas is infinitely better than coal is lost on many of them, who can’t or won’t accept any role for gas of a longer time frame to reach their goal. I get e-mails from wind and solar groups asking me to write to Congress to protect each one’s particular tax break at the expense of the others. Solar seems to get all the breaks while wind produces more power. River groups hate dams and hydro and everybody hates nukes. Still Cuomo can’t even get close to his 2030 goal without the 25% of NY’s power produced by them.

        The anti’s are desperate not to lose what business people call the “first mover” advantage; the first one in a new field often controls it and investment in it. The renewable timetable is way behind schedule and they can’t compete on price (at least in the short term) so they must do anything to stop or delay new natural gas development to protect the temporary political advantage Cuomo has given them. Existing infrastructure isn’t messed with because they can’t replace that energy or risk losing support with homeowners saddled with shortages or high prices traced back to them.

        From their point of view, our immediate good solution is the enemy of their long off supposedly perfect one. They will do everything they can to prevent gas from being the “first mover” in the new energy economy, especially if they can’t deliver for another 5 or 10 years.

        • http://www.lohud.com/story/tech/science/environment/2016/07/11/algonquin-pipeline-opponents/86929658/

          Mark I agree with you one some things. One is many environmental groups are against lots of things including wind and then hydro, at least historically and also even today. From what I have seen it is only recently because of the fracking controversy that many environmental groups now have lost the ability to see, say or even determine that natural gas is better than coal. Only a few years ago that was not the case.

          Do most people know that many environmental groups are so unreasonable or if you asked me not very truthful though? Above is a link to a news story about a protest against a natural gas pipeline. Spectra aim. Obviously this made news as the link is to news. Does it seem like the reporter knows that Susan Van Dolsen a source used in the article is completely not credible? She made a documentary video which featured a conspiracy theory on the port Ambrose import project among other nonsense years ago.

  5. Best idea in a long time. We need to break the lock that fossil fuels and oversea’s interests have on our economy and our sovereignty. Renewables are the 21st century source of energy and American greatness–not big oil and gas. This is the way to do it. Good for Barbara.

    • Unless you mean NYSEG, which is a subsidiary of a Spanish conglomerate, what overseas interests? The natural gas we are talking about here is from NY and PA and we want to use it to replace coal and imported oil.

      As I has shown above and other places on this site, there is not a chance of building enough wind or solar in NY to meet any of intermediate renewable goals. Lifton said as much in her letter when she shifted the emphasis to an impossibly optimistic goal retrofitting millions of house and businesses for energy efficiency. Do you have a plan “B” in case things don’t work out? After all we are only talking about the economy of New England and the Middle Atlantic states.

      You’ve had years to plan, so tell me, exactly where are the 4,000 plus terrestrial wind turbines needed just for NY state going to go. Can you tell me how you plan to build 12,000 more in the open ocean in the next 5300 days (the 15 years until 2040). Or do you just blather on about glittering generalities?

  6. Pingback: WNBF Protects Fractivist Organizer Walter Hang

  7. Pingback: Planet Ithaca Fractivists Keep Themselves in Coal Country

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 Powered by Max Banner Ads