Energy Secretary Granholm Says U.S. Military Can Go 'All-Electric' By 2030

P. Gardner Goldsmith | April 30, 2023
Text Audio
00:00 00:00
Font Size


Is it nostalgia? Perhaps a whimsical yearning for 1990 and the delight of dancing the “Electric Slide”? Is it a call-out to Hollywood, to hire her for a film that might be titled, “Granholm 2: Electric Boogaloo”?

Or is it hubristic flippancy and profligacy, crass central planning, exhibited by an oft-snarky bureaucrat, occupying a Constitution-insulting office that bleeds us and directs our taxes into fanciful and farcical command-and-control plans completely unhinged from the real world?

Obviously, it’s the latter, but in recently throwing her absurd “EV” claims in our faces, Biden “Energy Secretary” Jennifer Granholm actually gives us a chance to do more than groan and grimace at her offense. She lets us remember a key economic lesson, and apply it on a larger level.

Kristina Wong reports for Breitbart on Granholm’s absurd Wednesday claim in front of the House Armed Services Committee that the U.S. military could run its entire non-vehicle fleet on electricity within seven years.

“When asked by Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) if she supported doing that, Granholm responded, ‘I do, and I think we can get there as well.’”



And Granholm made sure to sprinkle her Tooth-Fairy testimony with a hearty dash of our DC oppressors’ favorite seasoning. That, of course, is their insulting and ahistorical narrative that “energy problems" in the US are caused by "volatility" from outside, not by strangling central government exploration prohibitions, cost-prohibitive refining restrictions, fuel-mix mandates, import restrictions, pipeline prohibitions, and constitutionally dubious environmental edicts…

Wong offers us confirmation of the Granholm attempt to shift blame and continue the “it’s not DC” narrative:

“She added, ‘And I do think that reducing our reliance on the volatility of globally-traded fossil fuels where we know that global events, such as the war in Ukraine, can jack up prices for people back home – it does not contribute to energy security.”

Oh, Ms. Granholm, if only we had memories… If only we could recall that U.S. energy prices began shooting skyward long BEFORE the Russia-Ukraine war. If only we could remember the Biden Administration attacks on oil and natural gas exploration, recovery, delivery, and refining, the Bidenista hatred of coal plants and mines, and the Biden Administration love of directing our money into absurd, economically inefficient “green” schemes that steal our right to decide for ourselves where to spend our money on our own energy needs.

If only we could recall…

Said Granholm on Wednesday:

“I think energy security is achieved when we have homegrown, clean energy that is abundant, like you see in Iowa. We think we can be a leader globally in how we have become energy-independent.”

Ahh, the signals, the lingo – the political dance. It’s electric!

Related: Climate Nuts Target Priceless Sculpture In DC's National Gallery of Art

We really ought to get up-to-speed with Granholm’s genius.

See, energy “security” now is defined not by you and your peaceful engagement with someone who might want to find and supply you with coal-based, or natural gas-based, or oil-based, etc., power or fuel. It’s based on THEIR BUREAUCRATIC DC DIKTATS. It’s controlled from on-high, in a spirit and manner no different than the Soviet apparatchiks who headed their command-and-control “economy” for decades, caused unfathomable suffering, and drove the Soviet economy to ruin.

In fact, to call it an “economy” is insulting – as insulting as Granholm’s pie-in-the-sky idea that the U.S. military can do the Electric Boogaloo.

Writes Wong:

“Ernst has been a staunch critic of the Biden administration’s push for electric vehicles, which she says require lithium and cobalt, which are often mined and processed with slave labor in China or child labor in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Last year, Ernst — a combat veteran and retired Iowa National Guard colonel — succeeded in including a provision in the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act prohibiting electric vehicle component sourcing from any entity that uses child or slave labor.”

A closer look at that aspect of the EV problem is revealing.

Even IF one were to imagine that EVs could be more cost-effective and reliable than vehicles that run on petrochemical fuel, one also could observe that US central planners restrict access to domestic stores of cobalt and lithium, forcing the already inefficient EV market to go to foreign sources – environmentally destructive sources directly or indirectly tied to child labor – for the battery-components.

And this only peeks at the energy-sourcing level of the problem. The EVs themselves are fraught with problems, ranging from the vastly lower portability and storage capacity compared to liquid or gas fuels, to the environmental threats like cold weather that sap battery capacity, to the lengthy amount of recharge time, to the expense and impossibility of creating a charging infrastructure to handle demands of a moveable military fleet, and on and on.

Wong observes:

“Granholm’s testimony stirred pushback on social media.

A retired Army colonel tweeted:

‘.@SecGranholm knows zero about battlefield realities. There’s zero chance of our military forces being able to field an all EV fleet in a mere 7 years. More importantly such an effort would make the military almost completely dependent on China for its source of fuel.’”


“A retired Air Force officer tweeted:

Asinine. As a former military member and Pentagon officer, this is what you get when you have political appointees appointed into these [senior civil service] positions – someone brain dead in charge of things but they are only in the position because they/family donated; fill a DEI quota; or related to a politician.”

A good friend of mine observed that this Granholm nonsense is not only bereft of any understanding of military needs and EV problems, it misses the point that creating a vast electric grid for the readiness of the armed forces makes them even more susceptible to a few well-placed electromagnetic pulses (EMPs). Because of their partial need for electric-magneto-based components (and, increasingly, because of federal mandates that have pushed electronics into cars), internal combustion engines also can be vulnerable to EMPs. But they can more easily be shielded and repaired.

This Granholm, Biden Administration absurdity is clear, and it is getting justified pushback. But the key, beyond one’s immediate outrage, is that in this flame-up about the push to tell the military it should use ELECTRIC vehicles, one can see a microcosm of how command-and-control edicts not only are affronts to local analysis of need and resource utilization, but how much broader the problem is when we see their EV edicts foist on all civilians in the formerly free market.

If politicians readily recognize Granholm’s dumb, Climate Cultist idea for the threat to military-readiness that it is, then they can apply those lessons beyond the government-run military and see how her kinds of command-and-control diktats not only have the same effect on our lives, but how they have a vastly more detrimental effect on our lives.

If part of the role of soldiers is to destroy the military readiness and capacity of the opponent, Granholm is pushing an idea that any so-called adversary of the US might love. But she also is pushing those kinds of edicts on us, which is a form of central government warfare against every American. We should not have to answer to "Energy Policy" at all.

That’s an “electric slide” into tyranny.

Follow MRCTV on Twitter!