alternative (2)

The was an article published that explained even 60% + of republicans wanted alternative energy and knew that the global warming was happening, etc.,.  I disagreed and this is my response and thoughts below:


I wonder how the questions were structured and where the survey was taken. There are several reports out that state the global temps are down for the last 10 years and a Russian report that states they expect global temps to be lower for 250 years at least.


I think the carbon trading scheme is more like a Ponzi scheme and will enrich the owners of the exchanges, which include Al Gore, Soros and others. I do agree that we should use our 200 to 300 hundred years supply of coal, natural gas, oil to be energy independent ASAP. The US is now the largest producer of oil, passing Russia and we could produce much more that current levels, as our increases have been from private lands and not federal lands. Obama essentially shut down our shale oil production sites, as he reduced them by 2/3tds. We should allow the market place to develop alternative sources without federal tax subsidies, which was NINE billion USD for ethanol alone in 2013. The EPA went around Congress declaring CO2 a pollutant so that they could regulate almost every aspect of our life. The new MACT, Utility Standards which included social costs for the first time and was based on 20 year old data have made new coal fired plants nearly impossible. Obama explained it as saying you can open a new coal fired plant but it will bankrupt you. The EPA is also working to fulfill Obama's promise that under his policies energy prices will necessarily sky rocket. High energy prices hit the poorest the hardest and also cost jobs.    Germany electric rates have gone from $.06 a kilowatt to over .20 a kilowatt as they went more green and into the carbon credit scheme. This has prompted the industry in Germany to warn that he rates are affecting businesses and future growth. Spain went broke going green and it makes no sense until it does make sense, which means we should let industry develop it as needed and allow research at universities with very limited Federal grants.


of course, there are economical green energy like hydro and other low emissions like natural gas and nuclear that we should use now. W should not shut down coal plants and allow incremental improvements vs. all or nothing EPA approach under Obama. 


I requested EPA information under  FOIA relating to the new Utility Standards, but the new standards are out there that include the new social costs. This new formula is like the old accountant joke, when asked what is the answer they shut the door and ask," What do you want it to be"?  This is how many of Obama's czars and agencies answer questions or make regulations. It is ideology not solid science , it is a religion of global climate change, not settled science as Ozone AL likes to often state. People that dissent should not be silenced or punished, as Al Gore has stated. All evidence should be reviewed and so should where the money flows. Investigate Al's and Soros ownership of exchanges, it is estimated as a trillion dollar business! The CO2, which until last year was a useful gas that plants must use to produce O2.


CO2 levels and temps were much higher millions of years ago and there was no man made pollution.


Sea levels have been 300 feet lower recently, geologically speaking during the last ice age where ice was 6 miles deep over much of the present day US land mass. 


Sea Ice is 60% larger this year, as temps drop globally.


Man does contribute .05% to 1 % of the total emissions and much of the pollution control efforts make tiny impacts, but can cost billions while re-distributing the wealth of the west. Obama favors this re-distribution.


Often, only the foreign press will report about this almost religious issue in the west , global climate cooling/warming/change. Those Crazy Russians also reported that they may can explain why so much natural gas is available and seems to continue to grow. They think it is given off by the Earth's mantel , which would mean an essentially endless supply until the Earth's mantel cools off when the planet dies in several billon years.


Maybe some, ( GORE,SOROS and OTHERS) do not want a cheap, clean source of energy? Before just attacking my position, investigate the issue yourself.

Read more…


            Let us pray, for First Solar, Inc., may it prove to be the grand exception that truly tests (proves) the rule!
Accounting for only 1.3% of all energy provision in America, “Obama-approved” sources will never in the foreseeable future replace fossil fuels.  Of course, besides huge new fields (the Bakken Deposit) of oil and immense troves of natural gas . . . the United States has the world’s largest concentrations of Keragen (“oil shale”) with enough in Western Colorado, Utah and Wyoming to provide all the world’s energy needs for the next six and a half centuries. It goes without saying that petroleum, natural gas and keragen are all EVIL FOSSIL FUELS not to be considered by Barak the Bird-Brain.
#1 Detriment to Viable Alternatives
 for U.S. Energy? Expensive Unions!
            After forty-four years of unending subsidies and false starts, solar energy is not much further along than it was when Jimmy Carter first did the alternative energy foreplay routine on all his progressive friends. After all that time it’s getting harder and harder to build up their orgiastic excitement to the crescendo that used to bring progressives such a thrill back in the day . . . in short, like most of today’s alternative energy options, solar power is largely impotent when compared to the sheer power and virility that is petroleum, natural gas and coal which combined with nuclear and hydro-electric power yield 96.8% of America’s total energy. At present, no single alternative energy source produces more than the 1.6% of total energy provided by burning wood; and all of the documented alternatives taken together fail to match the 5.6% of total energy provided by hydro-electric power (which produces 20% of the world’s energy and 88% of the world’s renewable energy at present).
            When both transportation needs and home and industrial electricity are combined, the following information holds true:
RAE (Renewable “Alternative” Energy) –
            After all the hype and all the monetary drain, these sources (solar; wind; geo-thermal; tidal; waves; mirror) only amount to 1.3% of the nation’s total energy. The most ancient (and therefore NOT “alternative”) of our renewable energy sources, water-power and wood-burning 7.2% combined, still account for 84.7% of all renewable energy power usage in America in 2011. For the record, only water-power generation of electricity (hydro-electric power) among all the renewable forms is viable for large energy production. Also for the record, battery-powered cars get 47% of their electrical charges from coal furnaces . . .
Coal, which provides nearly half -- 47.3% -- of the power providing the nation’s electricity, accounts for 22.6% of all energy (91% of all coal is used for electricity) expenditure.
Hydro-electric Power
Is presently our major viable renewable energy source and accounts for 5.6% of all energy use in the country. Hydro-electricity is relatively new, (only 120 years old) but water-power for mills has been used for at least the last three thousand years. The failure of the other “alternative energy” ideas to catch on is graphically understood when you consider that 86% of all renewable energy comes from hydro-electric generating stations in dams and burning wood . . . and that the United States has one of the least expansive hydro-electric systems in the entire world.
Natural Gas
Provides 23.8% of all energy used in the country.
Nuclear (electric) Power  --
Only provides 8.5% of America’s energy.
36.6% of our total energy comes from oil; 71% of petroleum is used for transportation and 23% for industrial purposes.
Wood Burning
            Still accounts for 1.6% of all American energy and a larger share of our energy use than any single “renewable energy source” except, of course hydro-electric power.  Only wood-burning and hydro-electric power are viable renewable energy sources at present.
            Solar energy has proved to be a huge disappointment and its future is very much in the dark. Wind power has also left our sails slack, while geo-thermal has left its proponents cold.  Accounting for only 1.3% of all energy provision in America, “Obama-approved” sources will never in the foreseeable future replace fossil fuels.  Of course, besides huge new fields (the Bakken Deposit) of oil and immense troves of natural gas . . . the United States has the world’s largest concentrations of Keragen (“oil shale”) with enough in Western Colorado, Utah and Wyoming to provide all the world’s energy needs for the next six and a half centuries. It goes without saying that petroleum, natural gas and keragen are all EVIL FOSSIL FUELS not to be considered as viable alternatives by Barak the Bird-Brain. 
Progressives in Washington, D.C. have destroyed the economy with the thirty-four year old plague of CRA ’77 on the one hand creating the sub-prime lending crisis and our ongoing financial meltdown; and on the other hand with deliberate and malicious energy-blockage (no new refinery has been built in this country since 1974) bankrupting the country. Until they put us back to the dark ages (literally!!) they will not be happy. The contradictions of the green-energy fanatics stand out clearly in this next little item . . . .
            At present all “independent” American solar panel manufacturers have failed save one: First Solar, Inc.  First Solar, an unsubsidized firm unlike 99.8% of its still viable competitors, has disappointed investors again as net income for the last quarter fell 33% in the face of strong Chinese competition. The Chinese, of course, are able to put cheaper labor in their shops, something not possible in a country whose wage structure is driven by union demands. In short, the fault presumably lies NOT with First Solar, but with the economic conditions that progressives have handcuffed us with over the last six decades.
There may still be hope -- First Solar has gone directly against the grain (shades of “Rearden Metal,” Mr. Galt!) and sacrificed energy production capability thus far in the interest of lighter weight, production- cost savings and versatility. The company specializes in bendable thin-film solar panels which capture sunlight and convert it to electricity. First Solar’s film is only able to capture around 11% of the sunlight shining on the panel which is less efficient than wafer-style solar panels, which can capture anywhere from 20 to 25 percent of the sunlight shining on the panel. The wafer-style panels meanwhile are all being manufactured in this country by firms heavily-subsidized by the Obama government. In its favor, First Solar was the first company to bring cost-per-watt of solar energy below $1 . . . a huge, indeed the critical, step in making solar energy more competitive with traditional energy sources from fossil fuels. 
In short, First Solar is the first nearly viable solar energy manufacturer in America, it’s innovative and even intransigent (refusing to follow the herd and trusting in their own vision) and thanks to First Solar, there really has been a breakthrough in solar energy viability.  While other companies have concentrated on solar energy, First Solar has concentrated on cost-viability so that its products while only about as efficient as the panels installed in 1980 . . . now cost about 1.25% as much as they did back then. In other words, except for the influence of the unions on wages, First Solar might already be the world’s leader in providing solar energy. As it stands, however, they’re probably going to need to triple their efficiency past the wafer-companies in order to compete with the Chinese. 
Then there’s the matter of patent infringement, we can expect the Chinese, if First Solar ever does make it . . . to just steal the process (none of these niceties of paying patent royalties) and again put the American economy between the sword and the wall.   Let us pray, for First Solar, Inc. Its Chinese competitors like SunTech and JA Solar are the main rivals. Sun Tech had been the last U.S. independent solar panel manufacturer other than First Solar but now the Chinese and French own it. The long-term viability of First Solar is at stake and reportedly the rats are leaving the sinking ship (huge amounts of insider sales and departure of many of these insiders). Meanwhile besides the Chinese, First Solar must compete against heavily-subsidized but less efficient American firms. These firms (which would have all gone bankrupt by now) are still alive and still fighting to keep First Solar’s share of the solar panel market low. Much as the federal auto-bailout has threatened Ford’s survival, federal solar subsidies are now threatening the only viable American solar panel manufacturer. Let us pray, for First Solar, Inc., may it prove to be the grand exception that truly tests the rule! 
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Read more…