RUSH: Just a couple of other things I want to focus on here before we get to those other items. A reminder here from Dr. Spencer, our official climatologist: "Practical Energy Sources." See, this is the thing: "Practical." It's such an important word, and it is so absent. Practicality takes a long vacation during an event like this. Here we are in the middle of a major news event, and the news cannot be relied on for clear thinking and facts. That's the basic problem -- and that's why, ladies and gentlemen, I am endeavoring to deal with this as I am. I can't tell you any more about the tsunami, I can't show you anything in addition to what you've seen video-wise, but I can be relied on for clear thinking and facts.
That's what we do here: We make the complex understandable. We bring common sense when it is in such short supply. This is Dr. Spencer, our official climatologist. Dr. Roy Spencer, University of Alabama-Huntsville points out, 'Practical energy sources are inherently risky. There is risk associated with virtually everything, particularly in energy production -- and the reason is is that we need so much of it. There's no way to provide it without using concentrated forms of it. Petroleum, natural gas, coal, nuclear, those are all concentrated." Think of concentrated frozen orange juice in your can and the way you make it is you dump that into a pitcher of water and you stir it.
Our energy sources, before we refine them and prepare them for practical use, are really concentrated in their power. A barrel of oil, natural gas, coal, what have you. "Solar and wind never compete because they produce so little energy. When you look at it, say, per acre of land required it's just not practical. We get less than 1% of our nation's energy from solar and wind, even now. Thirty percent in this country comes from nuclear. The rest, sorry to tell you, is fossil fuel. Oil, natural gas, and all the derivatives -- and we have an appetite for it. And we better be producing it to meet our demand and growth. Otherwise our economy is going to stagnate. We cannot have a growing economy and stagnating energy production at the same time. It cannot happen.
We cannot grow an economy with wind energy or solar. It isn't practical. There is no concentrated form of it. You can't even guarantee it. The wind will stop blowing; the sun will be obscured by the clouds. So all of our energy sources, all of our options have dangers, have risks inherent to their existence. Look at the deaths due to coal mine disasters. That's all in the name of fulfilling our energy needs. Natural gas explosions? Even the occasional oil rig explosion, the occasional oil tanker springing a leak. In the context of all this, nuclear really is our safest option in the long term, especially with newer technologies.
These Japanese reactors were over 40 years old, and they didn't fail because of them being inherently flawed. I'll tell you something else the Japanese are doing to illustrate their genuine concern for humanity. These are boiling water reactors, for the most part. They're destroying them. You throw saltwater into these things with boron, boric acid, and you're destroying the nuclear power plant. It's history. They'll never produce another kilowatt of energy after this. But they have to do this in order to protect the population and limit any further damage, danger, destruction from any fallout, what have you. You start throwing saltwater in there to cool the core...
They still don't know with some of these explosions, they don't know if these explosions are being maintained inside the containment buildings or not. The explosions are happening. They think some fuel rods have been totally exposed and are melting, but they're not sure. But regardless they're taking steps to limit the damage, and in the process they're wiping out these nuke plants. They'll never produce again. So my point is you can't get rid of the risk. So to me, being adult about this, being mature, juxtapose this with the media panic that we're getting, which is to say, "Nuclear is now not even an option. Why, look at this! Nuclear is awful."
The China Syndrome movie, it's a never-ending panic. Anti-nuclear energy is as much a part of the leftist agenda as public sector unions are. Stopping them, being opposed to nuclear power plants, they are as adamantly opposed as they are in favor of public sector unions -- or anything else in their agenda. And I'm sorry, folks, when there's a political agenda attached to anything, "Hello, El Rushbo?" That's when we get into gear, because these people (media, leftists, whoever) want to try to hide behind the notion they have no agenda, that they're just reporting the news; and they're just concerned about people, just concerned about public safety.
Yeah, just like they were with the War on Poverty and the Great Society, all these wonderful things that are going to help people, have done just the opposite. So, yeah, I have a bias. My bias is based on intelligence guided by experience. Liberalism fails. I don't care what these people are for or against, take the opposite side. It's so simple that it seems complex. There are three separate and distinct issues facing Japan. The earthquake was one (one of the worst in history) followed by the tsunami (one of the worst in history), and then and only then, the third crisis: The nuclear problems. The nuclear problems are not number one and two.
The nuclear problems result from the earthquake and the tsunami, neither of which (I don't care what anybody says) we have anything to do with. We can't stop 'em and we can't cause 'em. We simply have to deal with them. There have been earthquakes, tsunamis since the beginning of time -- and when the destruction results in no destruction, it's no big deal. But when there are houses and cars and boats and planes and so forth in the way, "Oh, look how horrible this is!" But when a valley of nothing, vegetation gets swamped, "Wow, it's really cool." So the perspective is damage happens 'cause we chose to put things there, but the earth is the earth and the earth does what it does, and there are tsunamis and there are earthquakes.
Everything associated with life is two things: Risk and compromise. People who build houses on the beach in Hurricane Alley, knowingly take a risk. It happens. People say it's worth the risk 'cause it's beautiful to live there, but it's an absolute risk. It's not the earth's fault if houses happen to get destroyed when these things happen 'cause the earth is what it is. A tiger is a tiger. These things happen. It's terrible, it's tragic, but you can't take the risk out of human life. You can't take the risk out of anything anyone does. It's not possible. And so much of liberalism is fabricated on a false pretense that they can create a utopia that is risk-free; that there is never, ever going to be anything horrible that happens.
There won't even be a risk to the risk if you just leave it to them. Everything will be pristine and beautiful as it was intended to be, before humanity came along and started tampering with things. I said earlier on in this program: Fear kills. We cannot develop a hysterical fear of nuclear power because of the risk of an accident. We will. We're gonna do that. We're going to develop a hysterical fear of nuclear power because of the risk of an accident. Now, the Japanese more than any other nation know the dangers of nuclear power in any number of ways. They also realize that we have to harness it. They have no alternative. They don't have any oil. They don't have any natural gas.
You talk about dependence on foreign oil? They are a hundred percent dependent unless they go nuke. Japan has, as I mentioned three crises: The earthquake, the tsunami, nuclear problems. They got a fourth one now. They have the highest debt of any country in the world: 200% of GDP. And one of the reasons they have got 200% of GDP debt is because they tried what we're trying now: Endless "stimulation." Endless stimulus, quantitative easing, printing money, what have you -- and that's gonna cause a lot of problems when they have to rebuild in a crisis like this, 'cause they are going to have to rebuild. That, ladies and gentlemen, is the real lesson Obama should learn from this: That we cannot run up debt for idiotic reasons.
We cannot go into tremendous, incalculable debt spending on idiotic programs, because someday we are gonna have to need that money when we have a real crisis. Something like this... Well, we've had our Northridge quakes, we've had our quakes, we've had 9/11, we've had Katrina. We're gonna have another one. Japan is a socialist country: 200% of their GDP is debt. Better stated, the debt is 200% of GDP. That is the better way to put that. So many major events are in the news, from Wisconsin, to Tokyo, to Tripoli. I made a command decision this weekend, for you: I gave up playing golf this weekend. Show prep trumps golf. That's the Golden Rule here at the Golden Microphone, and you know how much I love golf. (interruption) What do you mean am I serious? Yes, I'm serious, but I also know that the president of the United States did not give up his weekend golf game.
Who was his caddy, by the way?
Was it Chris Matthews or Nancy Pelosi?
Does anybody know?
RUSH: Mount Hope, New York, Keith. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hello, sir.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. It's great to talk to you. Thank you, sir, for the work that you and those like you do.
RUSH: There is no one like me. But I appreciate your sentiment nevertheless.
CALLER: Yeah, concerning this fracking. I'm sure I saw an article a few weeks ago on the Fox website. I thought it was Arkansas, I don't quite remember. They were fracking for I think natural gas somewhere, and they had some earth tremors and the scientists were already wondering if that had to do with the fracking. So this was something that they're already working on.
RUSH: Yeah, it's exactly right. I saw that, too. Like you, I don't recall if it's Arkansas or wherever, but it is something that's routine now.
CALLER: Well, I know. This is the buildup. This is how it starts. Of course I don't have to tell you this. I'm actually writing a novel on how it's gonna be in another 50 or 75 years if things keep going the way they are.
RUSH: Look, it gets back, folks, to what I was talking about mere moments ago regarding risk. The left would have you believe that there are risk-free ways to eat; there are risk-free ways to produce energy; there are risk-free ways to live; there are risk-free ways to build a house, all this, whatever it is, if you just let them be in charge of it. I don't think people think this way. They're too busy leading their lives. I've often thought about the people we've never met, the people that we've never heard of who make this country work. The production of so much of what we need -- forget our wants and desires, sybaritic pursuits -- just the production of things that we need. The amounts involved are unimaginable. The human brain is not capable of calculating it all. We hear how many barrels of oil a day that we use. I dare say none of us can picture it. Just one day. Imagine uninterrupted for as long as you live, you go to the gas station, it's gonna be there. You adjust your thermostat, it's gonna matter.
Whatever it is, where energy is concerned, or any other need, it's there in this country. You don't even question it until it isn't there or until the price goes up so high that having it there is a choice that you have to make. But with all those factors, nevertheless it has to be made available, it has to be produced, it has to be found. In many cases, it has to be refined, then it has to be distributed. This boggles my mind. The people that do this, the people who take the risk at finding the stuff, talking about fracking for oil or natural gas. Let me stay focused on that. There is no mistaking our need. Whether we're talking about American citizens and their desires and their expectations for comfort, their desires and expectations of security, their desires and expectations of economic affordability, producing all of this requires risk. Add to this the political force known as the left trying as best they can at every point to stop this, to make it more difficult, for whatever their reason, it's destroying the planet, it's too expensive, it's not fairly distributed, whatever. You got an entire political force trying to stop those who do this production, who take these risks. It is an amount of energy that we cannot humanly fathom. Yet it's met every day and it is met every day with the expectation it's gonna be there tomorrow.
We have people today designing aircraft that will not go into production for ten years that are assuming there will be jet fuel ten years from now. Why design and manufacture something that will never get off the ground because we're gonna run out of the fuel? They are expecting it. Plus I think they happen to know that it's there and will be there. So here we have some people who have come along and found deposits of oil and natural gas in places that five years ago, ten years ago, fifteen years ago we had no hope of getting, we didn't have the technology to do so, and at the early stages of the invention of said technology it was still so expensive it made no practical sense, if it cost $150 a barrel to get it via fracking, and the price a barrel's 80 bucks, why? Makes no economic sense, you're not gonna do it. Well, you sit around, you get your patents and permits, and you wait. Market forces eventually make it profitable to go get the stuff. Ergo here we are. We're going out there now because there is this demand and there is this expectation, and not just here, the Europeans have it, the Chinese are starting to have it, the Indians are starting to have it, expecting it to be there every day. Just as turning on the tap there's gonna be water coming out, they expect it. Somebody has to produce it. Some evil corporation, some group of people, somebody has to transport it.
So now amidst all this talk of running out, there's a finite life supply of oil and natural gas, oh, no, that's why we gotta go green and all that rotgut where there is no concentrated form of it, there is no market for it, it doesn't exist yet as a viable source of any perceptible energy need or desire, it just isn't there. And we got a regime totally pushing it at the expense of these other things. Ergo, here come these guys, these companies, whoever they are, come up with this fracking to get more natural gas, to meet these expectations, more oil to meet these demands. And now what do we have? We have a bunch of pantywaists who couldn't produce a damn thing for themselves if they have to trying to stop it by claiming it's causing earth tremors, which could lead to earthquakes. Panic mode in full tilt. Economists, TV today, 46% chance San Andreas fault blows in 30 years. Forty-six percent chance. Well, there's risk with everything, and these guys that are trying to stand in the way of the production, the discovery, and transport of all of this stuff that you and I expect, demand on a daily basis are gonna try to shut it down. They're gonna try to stop it and shut it down using fear, innuendo.
And here we are, isn't the timing wonderful? So we had an earthquake over in Japan. Guess what? Fracking might have caused it. So we have enemies, enemies of our energy needs. And they happen to have their friends and allies in the Democrat Party. Yet they say people, Tea Party, we're a bunch of fearmongers. We're not fearmongers. The fearmongers among us are found on the American left and the worldwide left. It's gotten to the point where you expect the gasoline to be there at an affordable price. You expect a thermostat to make a difference when you change it. You want it hotter or colder in your house, apartment, whatever, you expect it to happen. The people who make that possible are portrayed as your enemies -- Big Oil, Big Retail, Big Gas -- by the people who are promising you that they can provide these wants and needs and desires for you risk-free if you just listen to 'em. They also want to ban toilet paper, have you start using leaves, and I'm not making it up.
Look, we have serious choices here, and as a rational human being you cannot expect that human life, even in as an advanced country as ours to be without risk. You just can't expect it. Disasters, horrible unfortunate things are going to happen. Just like beautiful, wonderful, unbelievable things happen. It's a mix. But this desire, or this hope, whatever, to take the risk out of things because it is the risk that is threatening people's lives, and threatening their happiness, it's the exact opposite. It is the risk that leads to the reward. And in our case it's the highest standard of living in the history of civilization. And when you understand that, United States, the highest standard of living in 250 years of existence -- other civilizations have been around thousands of years -- 250 or less for us, highest standard of living in human history, however the hell long it is, and we have enemies on our own shores, in our own country we have people who are trying to bring that aspect of life in America to a screeching halt, for whatever convoluted, sick reasons. They're feeling guilty, it's unfair that we should live as well as we do when others around the world don't, when that's not our doing. In fact, to the extent that standards of living around the world have risen, it's because of us, because of the risk-taking and the ingenuity, the freedom to be that has existed in this country.
So there's an economic terrorism going on. These people now on this anti-fracking business, just to use an example, same thing with the anti-nuclear business, what have you, they're just using scare tactics trying to stop progress. And that's really what it boils down to. You have a group of people trying to tell us that progress is deadly, progress kills. I don't know about you, just offends my sensibilities profoundly. These are not the kind of people I would want to depend on in any aspect for anything in my life, for two reasons: One, I just wouldn't want to depend. I see 'em, I hear 'em, I listen to 'em, I know that they're not capable, and two, their track record. Whenever they've been in charge, particularly unfettered, you have poverty, disaster, tyranny, totalitarianism, dungeons, political prisons, what have you, when they are in charge. Because of course theirs is a false promise. There is no utopia. There is no risk-free existence. And people who are originally befuddled and taken in by this promise of theirs soon enough realize that it's phony and they want out. So these people portraying themselves as our saviors build walls to keep people in who want to leave, dungeons and prisons. It's the history of the world. We are that exception.