Green Energy

Also Why Green Energy Won't Work

And windpowerfacts.info

H/T to the boys at Talk Polywell

Cross Posted at Classical Values

$Green Jobs

The government has a plan.

A green jobs program in one of America's greenest cities is being called a bust 16 months after a $20 million federal grant to weatherize homes in Seattle ended up putting just 14 people to work in mostly administrative jobs and upgrading only three homes in the area.

Let us run the numbers: $20 million/14 = over $1.4 million per job. And how about houses? So $20 million/3 = about $6.7 million per house weatherized. In today's market (well any market with $1 million dollar homes) that could have bought 20 $1 million dollar homes.

The Government obviously is getting screwed. As are the people who pay the taxes that support this insanity.

You Can't Make This Stuff Up

Vanderleun has the story:

The Green Gym will be the first of its kind. Nowhere else in the country have such innovations been implemented for the benefit of homeless citizens. In addition to standard fitness equipment such as two weight machines, boxing bags, and a treadmill, 10 Green Revolution Technology enabled stationary bikes will generate electricity to be redirected into Cass' power grid. Over one year of four daily classes, a full class of 10 at the Green Gym can generate enough power to light 36 homes for a month, or three homes for a year!

So 40 people exercising for what?, one hour or two hours a day can support 3 houses. So if we can get 13 people living in each house (one will have to rotate), they will be self sufficient in electricity.

Well they are Green Jobs. Let us run the numbers. The US Department of Energy says the average US home use 908 KWh per month. Let us be extremely generous and say that electricity is worth 25¢ a KWh. That is $227 worth of electricity per month. Made by 13 1/3 people. That is about $17.03 per month per person in electrical production. A little over 50¢ a day.

Green Jobs!

Cross Posted at Classical Values

The Convesrion Of David Mamet

In an interview of David Mamet the interviewer is discussing David's reading habits when it comes to economics. As an aside the reviewer notes:

Later in our conversation, I ask whether he had read any economics before and he says not—he typically gets absorbed in a collection of books relating to his current play for two years at a time before moving on. I wonder what might have happened if he had picked up John Maynard Keynes instead of Friedman.

We do know what happened - 9 to 20% unemployment (depending on how you count) and a double dip recession. The economic multiplier effect for government spending is probably on the order of .5 (Spanish spending on $Green Energy) to .8 (US Government spending on WW2). So government spending REDUCES economic output.

It is good that Mamet was not overly influenced by Keynes.

But he is influenced by Sarah Palin.

So who would he prefer as president? He replies that he is "not current" with the Republican contenders until I mention Sarah Palin. "I am crazy about her," he answers immediately. "Would she make a good candidate for president? I don't know but she seems to have succeeded at everything she put her hand to."

Mamet compares Palin to a late friend in Cabot, Vt., where he owns a "little cabin in the woods ... I like to hunt. I like to fish. Cross-country ski. It's in the middle of absolute nowhere. A dirt-track road, a 200-year-old post-and-beam house. Gorgeous." His friend, he continues, was "a hardworking guy, a man of honor who was looking out for the town's interests. I thought of him when I saw Sarah Palin. She started with the PTA and then became the mayor and then governor [of Alaska]. I thought, well, OK. That's someone who knows how to work."

Well I like Sarah too. And the fact that my old friend likes her is just a plus.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

End ALL Energy Subsidies

Sarah Palin says:

"I think that all of our energy subsidies need to be relooked at today and eliminated," Palin told Real Clear Politics at a coffee shop in Dillsburg, Pa. "And we need to make sure that we're investing and allowing our businesses to invest in reliable energy products right now that aren't going to necessitate subsidies because, bottom line, we can't afford it."

The Great Mittens Romney - the next Republican Nominee For President - supports ethanol subsidies.

"I support the subsidy of ethanol," Romney told a potential voter after an event here was cut short by a fire alarm. "I believe ethanol is an important part of our energy solution in this country."

If it requires a subsidy it is not a solution. It could be a prototype. It could be an engineering test. It could be a market test. But it is not a solution. Solutions are profitable without subsidies.

I thought Romney was the smart business guy who would apply his business knowledge to government? I guess he went to the "Oligarch's School of Business Management." And what do they teach there? "Good businessmen can always make a profit with government money. It is all about buying the right lawmakers. And they go for very cheap."

There is an added advantage. All those "$Green Companies" will no longer be donating to their favorite political party.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Public Stimulation

Think about all this the next time the Government subsidized $Green Jobs man comes on the telly promising a glorious future from electricity that costs 4X the price of current sources and is intermittent to boot. You down with 8 hours a day of refrigeration?

H/T Jccarlton at Talk Polywell

Wishful Thinking

Scotland is in danger of going dark.

THE "lights could go out" over Scotland unless new power stations are built in the next two years to ward off a looming electricity crisis, the head of one of Scotland's most successful companies has warned Alex Salmond.

Rupert Soames, chief executive of power supply firm Aggreko, told the First Minister that the National Grid will lose a third of its capacity by 2018 as a string of nuclear, gas and oil-fired power stations across the UK are retired - including several in Scotland.

Mr Soames claimed that no other industrialised country in the world is at risk of losing so much of its energy supply at the same time - and without a realistic back-up plan.

He urged both the Scottish and UK governments to postpone green energy targets by a decade. Unless "the concrete is poured" on a new fleet of power stations within the next two years, Mr Soames warned, "we will be in serious danger of the lights going out".

As usual the geniuses in charge of government are behind the move.

Mr Soames, the boss of the FTSE 100 firm - which has supplied energy for events including the World Cup and the Beijing Olympics, accused Scottish ministers of "wishful thinking" on renewable energy targets, which are among the most ambitious in the world.

You know guys if you want a reliable electrical supply it might be a good idea to put engineers in charge rather than lawyers and politicians.

It's The Carbon Footprint

In response to the moral panic over CO2 production I was inspired to say a few words:

Even if every one in the US committed mass suicide it would make very little difference to the global CO2 burden if we don’t get the Chinese aboard.

If it weren’t for the carbon footprint I’d suggest a war to bomb them back into the stone age. To save the planet.

H/T Instapundit

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Purity Of Essence

Purity of Essence has morphed into Purity of Earth.

Inspired by this bit on $Green Jobs at Hot Air.

H/T Instapundit

Cross Posted at Classical Values

$Green Christmas

From 1958. Advertising themes have changed some since then. The spirit is the same.

Chamber Of Horrors

The US Chamber of Commerce is giving in to the global warming hysteria.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute responded today to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s announcement that it will now support energy-rationing legislation by calling on small businesses to drop their Chamber membership and join CEI in fighting this catastrophic legislation.

In a November 3 letter to Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the Chairman and Ranking Member, respectively, of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, the Chamber announced that it would now support legislation based on a recent New York Times op-ed by Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

“It appears that the Chamber has caved under enormous pressure from some of its biggest member companies. They have reluctantly enlisted in the effort to reward these big special interests with gigantic windfall profits at the expense of consumers and small businesses,” said Myron Ebell, CEI Director of Energy and Global Warming Policy.

“We invite small businesses whose interests are no longer being well-represented by the Chamber on this critical issue to drop their membership in the U.S. Chamber and join us at CEI in fighting against all energy-rationing legislation, even so-called compromises that only partly wreck the economy. We welcome their support. We will not capitulate,” said Ebell.

So I guess they are not actually giving in. More like bought off after some big guys left the Chamber because the Chamber would not support raising taxes on energy.

They have a better idea in Oregon. Tax breaks. But Oregon tax breaks to support $Green Energy are not working out quite as well as expected.

The latest news is that the Green Tax breaks aren’t what they were promised to be and taxpayers are getting hosed for a cost 40 times what was voted on:

State lowballed cost of green tax breaks

State officials deliberately underestimated the cost of Gov. Ted Kulongoski’s plan to lure green energy companies to Oregon with big taxpayer subsidies, resulting in a program that cost 40 times more than unsuspecting lawmakers were told, an investigation by The Oregonian shows.

It gets worse. Now tax breaks are being sold in Oregon for less than they are worth.

And we have a list of some of those doing the selling. And who is doing the buying.

* Peak Sun Silicon, of Millersburg, sold a $3.25 million tax credit to US Bank for $2.18 million.
* Peak Sun also sold a $5.85 million tax credit to two companies: Nordstrom for $2.85 million and Standard Insurance for $2 million.
* Solaicx, of Portland, sold a $9.04 million tax credit to US Bank for $6.05 million.
* SolarWorld, of Hillsboro, sold an $11 million tax credit to Wal-Mart for $7.37 million.
* SolarWorld also sold a $10.96 million tax credit to Flir Systems, of Portland, for $7.34 million.

Hey. In a down economy companies need to raise money any way they can. There is absolutely nothing wrong with stealing from taxpayers. Governments do it all the time.

Saving The Planet

If we want to save the planet we will need to put it in a bank.

If we want to invest the planet we will have to get an army of space aliens to surround it.

Another possibility is setting up a series of artificial banks often referred to as dikes. If we can get the dikes and the space aliens together perhaps we can get compound growth and eventually withdraw more than we put in.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Out Go The Lights

Britain may soon have an electricity problem according to The Economist.

In the frigid opening days of 2009, Britain’s electricity demand peaked at 59 gigawatts (GW). Just over 45% of that came from power plants fuelled by gas from the North Sea. A further 35% or so came from coal, less than 15% from nuclear power and the rest from a hotch-potch of other sources. By 2015, assuming that modest economic growth resumes, a reasonable guess is that Britain will need around 64GW to cope with similar conditions. Where will that come from?

North Sea gas has served Britain well, but supply peaked in 1999. Since then the flow has fallen by half; by 2015 it will have dropped by two-thirds. By 2015 four of Britain’s ten nuclear stations will have shut and no new ones could be ready for years after that. As for coal, it is fiendishly dirty: Britain will be breaking just about every green promise it has ever made if it is using anything like as much as it does today. Renewable energy sources will help, but even if the wind and waves can be harnessed (and Britain has plenty of both), these on-off forces cannot easily replace more predictable gas, nuclear and coal power. There will be a shortfall—perhaps of as much as 20GW—which, if nothing radical is done, will have to be met from imported gas. A large chunk of it may come from Vladimir Putin’s deeply unreliable and corrupt Russia.

Many of Britain’s neighbours may find this rather amusing. Britain, the only big west European country that could have joined the oil producers’ club OPEC, the country that used to lecture the world about energy liberalisation, is heading towards South African-style power cuts, with homes and factories plunged intermittently into third-world darkness.

American Greens have a similar plan for this country if we let them get away with it.

The Economist thinks energy taxes are the way to go.

...carbon must be taxed if firms are to invest in long-term, expensive, technology-heavy projects such as nuclear plants, cleaning up coal and taming renewable sources of power. Carbon is already assigned a price through the European cap-and-trade mechanism, but the system is focused on the short term, vulnerable to gaming and plagued by hugely fluctuating prices. A tax on carbon is hardly going to stop the lights going out in a few years, but it would provide a floor price for power, giving investors a clearer sense of likely profits. In the meantime you know who to blame.

A political solution subject to gaming? I'm shocked. And then there is the carbon tax idea. That may sell to the Brits but in America I recall we had a Tea Party about some relatively modest British Tea taxes. And to this day we are not fond of paying taxes to any government.

If Brits are going to stay warm at night I think that soon they are going to have to find extras to sleep with. Maybe some one like Louisa Lockhart who is rumored to sleep well with others.

On another note: I typed in "Green Electricity Swindle" into Amazon and this is what came up:

Chill: A Reassessment of Global Warming Theory, Does Climate Change Mean the World Is Cooling, and If So What Should We Do About It?

Further: You can listen (while you still have electricity) to more Pat Travers on this CD:

Live! Go for What You Know

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Occasionally I Sign Petitions

Here is one petition I like: Stop Cap and Trade.

If you sign, don't worry about your e-mail. It will not be displayed.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Mark Kirk Is No Traitor

John Kaduk says Mark Kirk (R - Illinois 10th Dist.) is a traitor for voting for the tax and shred bill.

Pat yourself on the back Nancy. You too Waxman. And let’s not forget Mark Kirk. You successfully hid behind Michael Jackson’s death and the country’s mourning to push through your garbage bill that could permanently kill the U.S. economy.

And that may be very well true. But Mark Kirk is no traitor. Mark Kirk is an idiot.

He is also behind the recent idiocy of calling for more draconian penalties to stem the flow of marijuana in this country. At a time when California is thinking about legalization and soccer moms are toking up? I don't think so. Mark Kirk is an idiot.

Let us hope that by 3 November 2010 he is a retired (from the House) idiot. I'll do my part.

Green Power: Black Death

Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death
The author of this book is Paul Driessen. And just who is Paul Driessen?

Driessen received his bachelor's degree in geology and field ecology from Lawrence University, JD from the University of Denver College of Law, and accreditation in public relations from the Public Relations Society of America.

Driessen is currently a senior policy advisor for the Congress of Racial Equality and a senior fellow with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise and the Atlas Economic Research Foundation.

During a 25 year career, that included staff tenures with the Department of the Interior and an energy trade association, he has spoken and written frequently on energy and environmental policy, global climate change, corporate social responsibility and other topics. He has also written articles and professional papers on marine life associated with oil platforms off the coasts of California and Louisiana – and produced a video documentary on the subject.

A geologist interested in climate change? What will they think of next?

Paul has some interesting friends. One of them, Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace has this to say about the book.

“The environmental movement I helped found has lost its objectivity, morality and humanity. The pain and suffering it is inflicting on families in developing countries must no longer be tolerated. This is the first book I’ve seen that tells the truth and lays it on the line. It’s a must-read for anyone who cares about people, progress and our planet.”

Another Friend of Paul is Niger Innis. Who is Niger Innis?

Niger Innis currently serves as the National Spokesman for the Congress of Racial Equality. He works closely with the National Chairman and represents CORE across the country. He is a MSNBC contributor on the 24-hour news network providing insight and analysis on the day's news events.

And what does Niger have to say about the war on the poor waged by "back to the stone age" environmentalists?

Liberal politicians and environmental activists continue to say we must switch to “green” energy. Oil, gas, coal and nuclear must go, they insist.

Informed voters support conservation and alternative energy. But they know fossil and nuclear fuels created health and living standards unprecedented in history.

Over two-thirds of American voters support increased onshore and offshore drilling. They know world energy demand is surging, while US production is prohibited and declining. They realize anti-drilling policies don’t just cause unemployment and cost us trillions in lost lease bonus, royalty and tax revenues.

Those policies also wage an immoral war on poor families. They destroy jobs, erode civil rights gains, and force minority and elderly households to choose between food, fuel, rent and medicine.

Since 2006, the cost of driving a 25-mpg car 10,000 miles has risen $600. Heating and air-conditioning costs – and the price of everything we eat, wear and do – continue to soar. While higher income families spend a nickel of every dollar on energy, families at the bottom of our economic scale spend up to half of their incomes on gasoline, heating and cooling.

This is intolerable and unnecessary. We have centuries’ worth of oil, gas, oil shale, coal and uranium – and we can develop them without harming the environment.

But environmental radicals in and out of Congress refuse to let us do so. They want to force us to switch to renewables, even though there is a yawning chasm between 0.5% of US energy produced by wind and solar power – and 93% produced with hydrocarbon and nuclear power.

The eventual switch to alternative energy is obviously decades away. Meanwhile, we are sending up to $700 billion a year to Russia , Iran , Venezuela , Saudi Arabia and other countries – in the midst of our worst economic crisis in memory.

People are justifiably angry that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to allow a debate or vote on ending congressional drilling bans. The only “energy” bills she supports would open few areas, while adding more taxes, regulations, lawsuits, delays, price hikes, and renewable-energy mandates and subsidies. They will produce little or no new energy.

Here is a review of the book by A Customer on the Amazon page linked above.

Before reading this exceptional primer on the negative effects of modern environmentalism, I was clueless of the far-reaching costs that group's policies have had on the Third World. Driesen documents at length the effect radical environmentalism has had on Africa's struggling poor, who want nothing more than to benefit from the same energy sources and standard of living the First World takes for granted. He shows how DDT saved thousands of lives in Africa by protecting families from malaria, while radical Greens fought to eliminate the benign chemical because of a theoretical risk it posed to birds. When families were restricted from using the chemical on their huts in Africa, malaria deaths shot through the roof. Driesen lays the blame for those thousands of deaths at the doorstep of the Sierra Club and other like-minded groups who would rather maintain a politically correct notion of what good environmentalism is rather than save actual lives.

Driesen goes on to show how environmentalists keep the Third World populations in poverty by fighting against the use of traditional, affordable sources of energy like coal and fossil fuels. Instead, Greens think other sources like wind and solar should be the only option for these people, disregarding the fact that the technology is no where near advanced enough to provide the energy needs these populations need to pull themselves out of poverty. Ironically, it would take over 10,000 acres of windmills to generate the same amount of electricity a 2-3 acre fossil fuel plant produces. So much for "saving the land."

Driesen does not endorse using fossil fuels forever and ever amen. In fact, he wants nothing more than for the world to develop and invest in alternative energy because he knows as well as everyone else the day will come when we have no other choice. He simply believes (and rightly so) that, in the mean time, the problems of the Third World are real and not theoretical like so many Green "concerns", and that First World governments should not be intimidated by radical Greens and NGOs in their efforts to employ free-trade and responsible investment in these areas. One of the books biggest themes is how unfair it is that NGOs are not held to the same standards of accountability and transparency they constantly demand from for-profit corporations.

Paul and Willie Soon have written a piece with a publication date of June 7, 2009.

Sub-Saharan Africa remains one of Earth's most impoverished regions. Over 90% of its people still lack electricity, running water, proper sanitation and decent housing. Malaria, malnutrition, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and intestinal diseases kill millions every year. Life expectancy is appalling, and falling.

And yet UN officials, European politicians, environmentalist groups and even African authorities insist that global warming is the gravest threat facing the continent. They claim there is no longer any debate over human-caused global warming - but ignore thousands of scientists who say human CO2 emissions are not the primary cause of climate changes, there is no evidence that future warming will be catastrophic, and computer models do not provide valid projections or "scenarios" for the future.

[Global] Warming alarmists use the "specter of climate change" to justify inhumane policies and shift the blame for problems that could be solved with the very technologies they oppose.

Past colonialism sought to develop mining, forestry and agriculture, and bring better government and healthcare practices to Africa . Eco-colonialism keeps Africans "traditional" and "indigenous," by insisting that modern technologies are harmful and not "sustainable" in Africa.

Let me see if I get this? A healthy prosperous Africa is unsustainable, but millions of African children dying every year can be continued indefinitely. You know, if the Austrian Corporal had proposed such a thing we would call these policies genocidal. But wrap it all it green swaddling and it is "saving the earth". You have to wonder what the greenies have against the poor and people of color? Is it possible they are practicers of covert racism?

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Alternative Energy Plan

Turn toe clippings into rocket fuel.

$Green Jobs!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!

==

Found some where on the i'net.

If Only We Had Done Nothing

We have added at least a trillion dollars to our national debt and the accomplishments for that spending are worse than if we had done nothing. Where is the Do Nothing Congress and the Do Nothing Presidency when you need them? If only they had put the effort into raising the price of electricity while lowering the reliability of supplies. Well they are doing that. And what else are they doing? They are going to spiff up Public housing

Vice President Joe Biden and two Cabinet secretaries unveiled a national program Tuesday to train workers for "green jobs" that will make public housing more energy-efficient.

Biden, Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis announced the plan in Denver at a meeting of President Barack Obama's task force on the middle class.

Donovan said some of the $4 billion from Obama's $787 billion economic stimulus plan that was budgeted to renovate public housing will be spent to create jobs for making the dwellings more energy efficient.

Solis, another task force member, said $500 million will be distributed as grants for training workers. That sum includes $50 million for communities battered by job losses and restructuring in the auto industry.

Investing in public housing will improve its quality, reduce energy costs for residents and the government and create jobs for people who live in the units and their neighbors, Donovan said. Some of the stimulus money also will be used for basic repairs and maintenance.

Hmm. I wonder if the Obama Administration has a plan for us and is getting our accommodations prepared.?

H/T Judith Weiss on Facebook

Cross Posted at Classical Values

They Are Coming After Your Refrigerator

The Obama Administration has a brilliant new idea. Ban HFCs.

UNITED NATIONS -- The Obama administration, in a major environmental policy shift, is leaning toward asking 195 nations that ratified the U.N. ozone treaty to enact mandatory reductions in hydrofluorocarbons, according to U.S. officials and documents obtained by The Associated Press.

"We're considering this as an option," Environmental Protection Agency spokeswoman Adora Andy said Wednesday, emphasizing that while a final decision has not been made it was accurate to describe this as the administration's "preferred option."

The change -- the first U.S.-proposed mandatory global cut in greenhouse gases -- would transform the ozone treaty into a strong tool for fighting global warming.

"Now it's going to be a climate treaty, with no ozone-depleting materials, if this goes forward," an EPA technical expert said Wednesday, speaking on condition of anonymity because a final decision is pending.

The expert said the 21-year-old ozone treaty known as the Montreal Protocol created virtually the entire market for hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, so including them in the treaty would take care of a problem of its own making.

How nice. Can he get Congress to ratify the treaty? We shall see.

So what are HFCs used for?

HFCs are used in air conditioning and refrigeration systems throughout the world. HFC systems conserve energy, and therefore reduce global warming gas emissions at electric power facilities. This is more significant when they replace older, less-energy-efficient systems.

And guess what else HFCs are good for?

HFCs offer solutions to global-warming...

I guess they haven't got the word. The HFCs are no longer in favor.

And who had a prominent role in getting CFCs (the predecessors of HFCs) banned?

DuPont, the world's dominant CFC producer, played a key role in the development of the Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting Substances.

Well of course. Its patents on CFCs were running out and CFCs were cheaper to make than HFCs. They were also somewhat more efficient as refrigerants.

So my question is: are the patents on HFCs running out? Has DuPont invented a replacement? Are they behind this new move?

Is this another example of the $Green Economy? I'd bet on it.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

It Is All About Being Green

It looks like GE is going to make a fortune when energy restrictions hit America. And they are working very hard with their government (they paid for it) to get what they want.

One last point, MSNBC is owned by General Electric. GE is already making money off the issue with their Carbon Credit Master Card (link from “Treehugger”, no less).

Here’s CNN’s story on the new credit card. Interesting note: In the fourth quarter of 2008 as GE/NBC stock fell 30 percent, GE spent $4.26 million on lobbying — that’s $46,304 each day, including weekends, Thanksgiving and Christmas. In 2008, the company spent a grand total of $18.66 million on lobbying.” Reviewing their lobbying filings, GE’s specific lobbying issues included the “Climate Stewardship Act,” “Electric Utility Cap and Trade Act,” “Global Warming Reduction Act,” “Federal Government Greenhouse Gas Registry Act,” “Low Carbon Economy Act,” and “Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act.” Do you think this “big business” is just concerned about the environment?

Well, check out this column from the Politico, which says: “Several of the companies would gain a commercial advantage after a cap and trade was established. General Electric has an “ecoimagination” line of green appliances and equipment. Robert Stavins, a professor of business and government at Harvard University, said a cap and trade program would be fantastic for GE and other companies that sell products that consume power. He said that if energy costs go up as a result of the regulation — something he believes is likely — a wide array of products from appliances to power plants would become prematurely obsolete and need to be replaced with greener models.” That would mean big money for GE (parent company of NBC and MSNBC). Take a moment and read my previous post on polar ice…check out the graphs and charts…they speak for themselves.

I especially like the misnamed "Climate Security Act". It should be the GE Security Act.

But you know. It was never about the trees. It was always about the Benjamins. There is green and then there is $Green. If you would like to contact your Congress Critter about this may I suggest:

House of Representatives
The Senate
The President

It never hurts to let them know you are keeping an eye on them. And while you are at it - it might not hurt to keep an eye on the enviros. This will help: Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Ruin Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them.

Cross Posted at Classical Values