The problem with “Green Energy” that nobody talks about.

Karl Denninger talks about the one thing greens do not want to acknowledge,  Green Energy will not be able to produce energy 24/7 on its own.  Either it needs batteries or some kind of storage system system for when..not if the green energy doesn’t produce.  Nuclear or fossil fuels are much more reliable and cost effective.  The selling back of electricity that is nothing more than a gov’t subsidy are being phased out further reducing the competitiveness of “Green Energy”.

We keep hearing about carbon taxes, “renewable” or “green” energy and similar.

Folks, it’s time to cut the crap — well, actually, it’s far beyond that point.

Let’s take a base cost, which is reasonably conservative (in other words, too low) of about 8 cents/kwh for wind power.  Costs vary widely at the consumer level across the country, but that starting figure sounds pretty reasonable from the published data when it comes to actual cost of wind generation.

The problem is that it is a false paradigm unless you are willing to accept limitations nobody will in today’s world.

A fossil fuel or nuclear plant will produce power except during either (1) planned shutdowns for maintenance or (2) unplanned shutdowns (e.g. emergencies, unanticipated failures requiring a shutdown to correct them, etc) during its design life.  There is no such guarantee for either solar or wind because both rely on something you cannot control.

Our expectation as a society is that whenever we wish to flip the switch and have the lights come on they will.  We can only achieve the “claimed” cost figures for “green energy” if we are willing to violate that expectation; that is, if there is no wind or solar at that time, when you flip the switch nothing happens because the power is in fact off due to lack of supply.

In order to prevent that from happening we can add on the following options either singly or in combination:

  • We can build much more capacity than required and store some of it.  So, for example, let’s say that we need 1,000MWe (1 Gigawatt of electrical power) for a given area.  We can generate more than that much during the time the wind is blowing and store some of it.  However, the laws of thermodynamics tell us that all energy conversions have loss; that is, not only is there no such thing as a free lunch but you can’t break even either.  If we convert the energy to potential energy (e.g. pump water up a hill) and then when we need it use that water to power a turbine (generating electricity just as we do with a dam) a highly aggressive target would suggest that we might achieve 80% efficiency from each of those two steps.  Arithmetic tell us that this comes out to 0.8 * 0.8 = 0.64, or 64% of the energy we put in will be returned.  This means that if we are absolutely certain (p = 0.995, or 1 in 1,000 odds that we’re wrong) that the wind will blow at a sufficient velocity to generate the energy we want 2/3rds of the time in a given location we must in fact produce 1 + (0.33 / 0.64) = 150% of the energy we wish to consume (that is, install 50% more windmills) and we must also install (and pay for) the pumped storage and generation system.  Note that this immediately takes that 8 cents/kwh to 12c plus the cost of the storage and generation system and the people to run it. 
  • We can build a fossil fuel plant to back up the windmills and staff that too.  Given the above figures, since we’re not storing anything, we must now build a 1,000MWe fossil plant and keep it both maintained and ready to be put online as required so as to provide any percentage of the shortfall up to and including 100% (if there is no wind.)  However, you must add the cost of said plant, its staffing and the fuel to run it when its operating to the wind power cost!  While the fossil plant is competitive with wind power on the operating cost that assumes its depreciation is on a 100% use basis.  It’s not; in the above case where the statistical data says that 1/3rd of the time the wind will not blow at a sufficient rate to provide the power we are in fact tripling the deprecation rate assigned to the fossil plant when it is running because the depreciation must be spread over the whole, not just when the fossil plant is “on.”  This makes the backup source cost skyrocket, and thus we no longer are anywhere near competitive.

Solar has the same problem, for the same basic reason — you cannot control when the sun shines at a sufficient flux to generate the power required.  Yes, there are places in the United States where the sun is likely to shine on an unobscured basis far more often than in other places, and transmission via HVDC lines (rather than AC) has materially less loss over long distances (and is convenient for solar since a solar cell generates DC power in the first place; as such it requires only one conversion, to AC at the receiving end, if HVDC transmission is used.)  But again, unless we are willing to be blacked out when we’re wrong we must cover the solar production the same way we cover wind!

Nobody is running the numbers in this regard on an honest basis when they talk about “green energy.”  The fact of the matter is that the claims of the proponents are, in essentially every case, understated by 50% or more, as the above shows.  This means your electric bill, in such a system, will either rise by at least 50% or you must be willing to make the trade-off that when the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining you have no electricity available at all.

Let’s debate the actual issues with actual costs — not pie-in-the-sky intentional lies put forward by the so-called “green energy” folks and their political “partners.”

The irony of Californias water crisis

Now get this..California cities are now going to build massive desalination plants for watering their desert abodes.  The power for these?  “Carbon Pollution” emitting Natural gas electricity plants.  Anyone unable to see the duplicity here?

 

The irony is inescapable: In reaction to the historic drought that has transformed the California dream into California dust, the state is now embarking on the construction of a wave of desalination plants that will turn ocean water into fresh water. Tragically, these power-hungry desalination plants will be running primarily on fossil fuel-generated electricity, meaning that California residents will have to commit global warming crimes (i.e. producing carbon dioxide) every time they flush their toilets or take a shower.Fresh water, in other words, is about to have a “fossil fuel consumption equivalent” across the state. Every gallon of water consumed will have a calculable CO2 emission profile and mercury pollution factor, meaning that a person will not be able to live in California without being a global warming sinner.California, of course, is the state that prides itself on being progressive and environmentally conscious. Yes its non-sustainable lifestyle consumed the region’s limited fossil water supplies to the point of near-collapse. Now, it must become America’s worst carbon dioxide producer just to provide basic water supplies to its people. And where will all the natural gas and coal come from that powers these desalination plants? The very same energy-producing states that Californians typically condemn for producing fossil fuels.

via Energy-hungry desalination plants will turn all California residents into global warming sinners and destroyers of life – NaturalNews.com.

Energy Secretary Chu Admits Administration OK with High Gas Prices – Yahoo! News

COMMENTARY | President Barack Obama’s Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu uttered the kind of Washington gaffe that consists of telling the truth when inconvenient. According to Politico, Chu admitted to a House committee that the administration is not interested in lowering gas prices.

Chu, along with the Obama administration, regards the spike in gas prices as a feature rather than a bug. High gas prices provide an incentive for alternate energy technology, a priority for the White House, and a decrease in reliance on oil for energy.

The Heritage Foundation points out that hammering the American consumer with high gas prices to make electric and hybrid cars more appealing is consistent with Obama administration policy and Chu’s philosophy. That explains the refusal to allow the building of the Keystone XL pipeline and to allow drilling in wide areas of the U.S. and offshore areas.

The consequences of the policy are not likely to be of benefit to the Obama administration. The Republican National Committee has already issued a video highlighting the spike in gas prices and the failure of the administration to address the issue.

Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has issued a half-hour video touting an energy plan he claims would result in $2.50 a gallon gasoline. The plan is based on unfettered drilling for oil and gas instead of a reliance on green energy. Gingrich has also savaged Obama’s touting of algae based biofuel as “weird.”

Chu has likely highlighted an issue Republicans are going to pick up and run with. Americans are not going to be appreciative of schemes to hit them in the wallet so the American economy can shift to green energy. Besides American traditional adherence to the free market, the idea of being fleeced by a deliberate government policy is likely to be greeted with anger.

Add into the mix green energy fiascos like Solyndra, and Chu might well have kindled a full blown scandal.

How the Obama administration reacts to the expected firestorm is open to question. Green energy is as part of its fundamental religion as is universal health care, another unpopular Obama policy. If it tries to bull ahead, the electorate will likely punish Obama and the Democrats. If it tries to backtrack, Obama looks weak and facilitating, and likely will still not appease gas strapped Americans experiencing price shock at the gas pump.

via Energy Secretary Chu Admits Administration OK with High Gas Prices – Yahoo! News.

Grab your incandescents while you can at this mega sale

He is selling the incandescents for $50 a case, or 42 cents a bulb. A case contains 120 bulbs

“Several people are going together to buy them,” Stumpf said.

When Stumpf went on vacation June 10, the business had sold about 12,000 to 13,000 bulbs. By Tuesday, almost 30,000 bulbs had been sold, Stumpf said.

The bulbs have brass bases, which means they won’t corrode in aluminum lamp sockets. The bulbs are available in 100, 75 and 60 watts.

With the demand, Stumpf said he was fortunate to find a supplier who could bring in the cases he needed.

“I’m only doing prepaid orders,” Stumpf said. His office is already crowded with cases of bulbs, he said.

“I’m getting orders from Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia,” Stumpf said.

 

 

Company offers light bulbs at cost to benefit charity – The Frederick News-Post Online.

Something else i get to “de-educate” my daughters on

Now i have to de-propagandize my daughters about the environazi agenda.

 

Under the graduation requirement, public schools will be required to infuse core subjects with lessons on conservation, smart growth and other environmental topics. School systems will be able to shape their programs, but they must align with state standards.

via Md. approves environmental education requirement – The Frederick News-Post Online.

The Obama Energy Terrorism Plans Unfold

NO need for rate hikes when you can manipulate the market to artificially jack up the prices.

“The EIA Energy Information Administration predicts plants with 7.7 gigawatts of capacity will close by 2018. Cambridge, Massachusetts-based The Brattle Group, a consulting firm, said in December that 50 to 65 gigawatts of capacity may be closed by 2020 because of environmental regulations. Analysts at Zurich-based bank Credit Suisse Group AG said in September that about 60 gigawatts of coal capacity may be retired,” reports Newsmax.“We’re going to see massive retirements within the next five, eight years,” Chu said at a renewable-energy conference in Washington yesterday.“Smaller, older units” that burn coal “won’t be economic under new clean air standards,” said Luke Popovich, a spokesman for the Washington-based National Mining Association.This means that the larger transnational energy companies with close Obama administration ties like General Electric, who have been given waivers for the EPA carbon restrictions, will see their competition eliminated and be given free reign to jack up prices even further by creating artificial scarcity.Americans will be made to foot the bill as part of Obama’s publicly stated agenda to bankrupt the coal industry in the move towards a “green economy,” which has little to do with the environment and everything to do with hollowing out America’s industrial base so that the country may be more easily swallowed up by the “post-industrial revolution” that remains the goal of the global elite.

via » Obama Energy Secretary Promises “Massive” Coal Plant Closures Alex Jones Infowars: Theres a war on for your mind!.

Obama issues global warming rules in January, gives GE an exemption in February | Timothy P. Carney | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

Last month, the Obama EPA began enforcing new rules regulating the greenhouse gas emissions from any new or expanded power plants.

This week, the EPA issued its first exemption, Environment & Energy News reports:

The Obama administration will spare a stalled power plant project in California from the newest federal limits on greenhouse gases and conventional air pollution, U.S. EPA says in a new court filing that marks a policy shift in the face of industry groups and Republicans accusing the agency of holding up construction of large industrial facilities.

According to a declaration by air chief Gina McCarthy, officials reviewed EPA policies and decided it was appropriate to “grandfather” projects such as the Avenal Power Center, a proposed 600-megawatt power plant in the San Joaquin Valley, so they are exempted from rules such as new air quality standards for smog-forming nitrogen dioxide (NO2).

There’s something interesting about the Avenal Power Center:

The proposed Avenal Energy project will be a combined-cycle generating plant consisting of two natural gas-fired General Electric 7FA Gas Turbines with Heat Recovery Steam Generators (HRSG) and one General Electric Steam Turbine.

Maybe GE CEO Jeff Immelt’s closeness to President Obama, and his broad support for Obama’s agenda, had nothing to do with this exemption. But we have no way of knowing that, and given the administration’s record of regularly misleading Americans regarding lobbyists, frankly, I wouldn’t trust the White House if they told me there was no connection.

On the upside, at least Job Czar Immelt is creating jobs!

via Obama issues global warming rules in January, gives GE an exemption in February | Timothy P. Carney | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner.

Texas Gets Punished for Asserting it’s Rights.

The inability of power companies to meet demand is almost exclusively a consequence of the Obama administration’s publicly stated goal to bankrupt the coal industry and in turn ram through the de-industrialization of America under the guise of the phony global warming mantra.

Even as China and Mexico are allowed to build dozens of new power plants every year, the United States is barely permitted to construct a handful, as the Environmental Protection Agency takes control of refineries and power plants under the completely fraudulent pretext of preventing global warming even as the country experiences some of the coldest weather seen for decades.

Texas has been the epicenter in a battle over the Obama administration’s drive to have the EPA regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Texas is the only state that has refused to implement a permit process.

“Austin said it would not establish such a scheme for greenhouse gas emissions because the US Environmental Protection Agency had no authority to regulate them as of January 2,” reported the Financial Times.

“Twelve other states are mounting a legal challenge to the federal government’s authority but they, unlike Texas, are implementing the new measures while the dispute makes its way through the courts.”

Local environmental officials in Texas were again involved in a fight with the EPA after the, “Texas Commission on Environmental Quality last week approved an air permit for the $3.2 billion Las Brisas Energy Center despite a formal EPA request that the commission delay issuing the permit until EPA’s concerns about the plant’s emissions impacts are fully addressed.”

via Obama’s Blocking Of New Power Plants Triggers Nationwide Blackouts.

What’s the cause of the “energy shortages”

Global warming.  the Obama EPA is now ordering these rolling blackouts to curb “green house gases” and “global warming”.  Wake up america.

What might the motivation for these blackouts be? I hope you are sitting down. In an effort to curb CO2 emissions linked to the discredited and castrated theory of global warming, the imposition of rolling blackouts was an effort to keep the state of Texas from breeching the new carbon quotas now enforced by the EPA. Unbeknownst by most people, the EPA had a court issued stay lifted from them implementing their plans on January 19,2011. According to powermag.com…

“A federal court last week lifted an emergency stay that had prevented the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from proceeding with a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting of greenhouse gas sources in Texas while it considered legal challenges against the agency’s authority. The court’s decision means that EPA-issued regulations can curb greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other large stationary sources in that state.”

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

Therein is the real purpose for the rolling blackouts. In order to keep Texans from breeching a bureaucratic quota whose goal is to save humanity from an imaginary threat, we must all freeze. Remember that we must all sacrifice if we are to defeat global warming, and the real enemy of humanity is of course itself.

via » Rolling Blackouts Fraud: ERCOT Admits Overcapacity Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!.

So Much for This Forecast eh?

Britain’s winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.

Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain’s culture, as warmer winters – which scientists are attributing to global climate change – produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries.

The first two months of 2000 were virtually free of significant snowfall in much of lowland Britain, and December brought only moderate snowfall in the South-east. It is the continuation of a trend that has been increasingly visible in the past 15 years: in the south of England, for instance, from 1970 to 1995 snow and sleet fell for an average of 3.7 days, while from 1988 to 1995 the average was 0.7 days. London’s last substantial snowfall was in February 1991.

Global warming, the heating of the atmosphere by increased amounts of industrial gases, is now accepted as a reality by the international community. Average temperatures in Britain were nearly 0.6°C higher in the Nineties than in 1960-90, and it is estimated that they will increase by 0.2C every decade over the coming century. Eight of the 10 hottest years on record occurred in the Nineties.

via Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past – Environment – The Independent.

Practice Your Mercury Escape Plan

These CFL bulbs(and any fluorescent bulb) contain more than 300 times the legal EPA limit for mercury.  You break one of these in your house and you effectively have turned your home into a highly toxic, unlivable area until you have special cleanup companies com in.  Start hoarding incandescents folks.  I’m doing that right now…and hoping the upcoming wave of LED lights don’t have this mercury problem.  Of course this only one of many ways being “green” is actually killing us.

But far more importantly, CFLs are loaded with deadly mercury, one of the most toxic elements on Earth. In fact, all CFL bulbs contain – at least – four to five milligrams of mercury, about 200 times the amount of mercury in a flu vaccine shot. There is enough mercury in each CFL bulb to contaminate 6,000 gallons of clean water. To break one of these CFL bulbs is to risk ruining the health of one’s entire family, or office staff, with enough released atmospheric mercury to best require the expensive, professional services of a Haz/Mat Removal Team.

Believe not the “clean-up” methods for broken CFL bulbs offered by those in the mainstream media, which tell us to open a window, then leave the area of the broken bulb for 15 minutes; then return with duct tape to pick-up the broken glass.

Then what is one to do? Put the broken glass and duct tape into a glass jar and screw on a tight lid.

What is one to do with the glass jar? Take it to a special toxic dump.

Where are such dumps? Check your local listings.

All of the above, of course, is sheer nonsense. Want proof? Ask your dentist about the Haz/Mat teams that come into their offices to remove their old, used collection of mercury-laden dental amalgams, which dentists keep in little lead lined boxes.

All Americans will be well advised to practice a “mercury escape plan” in the case of an accidental breakage of one of these CFL bulbs: Grab your cell phone, babies, dogs, cats, and parakeets (if they aren’t already dead), and get well away from your house. Call a Haz/Mat company to completely clean your house before re-entering it. Such are the serious dangers of mercury.

via Practice Your Mercury Escape Plan.

Paul McCartney Shows his Intelligence..lack of it.

The Beatles legend said: “Sadly we need disasters like this to show people. Some people don’t believe in climate warming – like those who don’t believe there was a Holocaust.

“But the facts indicate that there’s something going on and we’ve got to be aware of it if we want our kids to inherit a decent world, not a complete nightmare of a planet – clean, renewable energy is for starters.”

via Exclusive Paul McCartney chat | The Sun |Features.

Mirant carbon tax gets initial approval

Here’s several excerpts from this article.  Of course the enviro-nazis have these politiboobs totally gamed.  It’s been shown over and over that global warming/climate change is a scam yet as usual so many folks simply refuse to think for themselves.

“I would like to thank Mirant for finding the climate change deniers who are here in the audience today,” said Councilman George L. Leventhal (D-At large) of Takoma Park.

Berliner (D-Dist. 1) of Potomac has said his bill could raise as much as $15 million from Mirant by imposing a $5 tax for each ton of carbon dioxide it produces.

Robert Gaudette, vice president at Mirant Mid-Atlantic, testified during Tuesday’s work session that Berliner’s proposed tax actually would harm the environment and drive up energy costs.

If the tax is imposed, Mirant would reduce energy production at its Dickerson plant. That would cause Maryland residents to get more of their energy from out-of-state companies that are not as heavily regulated as those in Maryland, he said.

Those companies also are charging more for their energy, Gaudette said.

He estimated that because his company would lower production at its Dickerson plant, Mirant would pay $7.5 million as a result of the tax.

Berliner said he was not taking advice on the environment from Mirant, but rather from environmental leaders.

Gaudette referred to Berliner’s bill as “more sound bite than substance.” Berliner said the comment offended him.

via Mirant carbon tax gets initial approval.

Global Warming Doublespeak: Snowmageddon Blizzards Are Part Of Heating Trend

The warming lobby is now claiming that global cooling is a part of global warming, and that we must still lower our living standards and pay carbon taxes, while all the real environmental problems are ignored or actively made worse by the same power brokers demanding that we make sacrifices in the name of fighting a non-existent threat.

via Global Warming Doublespeak: Snowmageddon Blizzards Are Part Of Heating Trend.

I have not comment.  Global warming just simply defies logic.  there’s no way to think otherwise unless you are intentionally denying reality.

A Decade of Self Delusion? NOT

Greetings to all,

I just had to comment on this. To find the story, here is the link: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35018#c1

I think I know the direction that Mr Buchanan was heading for. The problem is, I never agreed with his whiny words and policies. Even now, people are still blaming “W” for their woes. You want to know the true reason why for our decline? The fact is, the US has been pointing fingers at others for over 30 years. JB tries to make this point, but it is lost after recital of rhetoric garbage. The way the US can get out of this is for all of us to ‘take ownership’, stop the blame game, and do what needs to be done.

But here is the crux: what is it that needs to be done. You will hear “we have so many problems..”, “the issues are numerous and vast..”, “there isn’t a simple solution or steps of solutions..”. Dont you believe them. In order to figure out what the problems are, we need to figure out who we, as a people and nation, are.

So, what is the United States of America? Now, you may be thinking “Gawd, not another history lesson..”. Well, too bad. The reason why schools push for 12 years of history is two fold: to rewrite history for selfish malicious use, and to get people sick of history to forget about it. It is like navigating a ship, driving a car, or even just walking from point A to point B: if you don’t know where you are at and how you got there, how can you plot where you are going to go?

Anyways, what were our American ancestors? Here is a link describing “American Colonists” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_colonists . While I will not recite the whole page, I would like to copy the first paragraph: The term colonial history of the United States refers to the history of the land from the start of European settlement to the time of independence from Europe, and especially to the history of the thirteen colonies of Britain which declared themselves independent in 1776.[1] Starting in the late 16th century, the English, Scottish, French, Swedes, Germans and the Dutch began to colonize eastern North America.[2][3] Many early attempts—notably the Lost Colony of Roanoke—ended in failure, but successful colonies were soon established. The colonists who came to the New World were from a variety of different social and religious groups who settled in different locations on the seaboard. The Dutch of New Netherland, the Swedes and Finns of New Sweden, the Quakers of Pennsylvania, the Puritans of New England, the English settlers of Jamestown, and the “worthy poor” of Georgia, and others—each group came to the new continent for different reasons and created colonies with distinct social, religious, political and economic structures.[4]

Now, there is something very very wrong with this summary. Can you tell what it is? Is it incorrect? No. Are there any wrong references? No. The problem with this summary is that it is watered down. It does not have the heart and soul of what was done and accomplished. Let me explain.

Imagine yourself a colonist. You board a ship, overcrowded with people, a ship that is maybe 80 ft in length and you are lucky if 12ft in width. You travel from one continent to another, that is, over 3000 miles of water that at any point, you could drown. Sickness was always rampant. If you were a woman, you always had to worry about rape. You were lucky you would eat once a day. You finally come over to America. You have very little with you, because of no space on the ship, or, you were poor and had very little to begin with. You are on a land that you have no familiarity with. You are melded into a society of people you do not know about. You have very little to no money, and if you had money, you could buy very little. There were homes with no heat save a fireplace, no air conditioning, very few clothes you could wear. And why would anyone put themselves through this? Because, for the chance. The chance of being free, free of clergy persecution, free of corrupt government officials, free of unfair tax levies, free of social miscreants and fools, etc etc. The concept of freedom. The thought of freedom, but derived from pure sacrifice, devotion, belief, and faith.

Do you see the difference between the two summaries of American colonists? Which one has the heart? Which one excites the senses, the fears, the digust, the joy of hope? The first is definition through society’s acceptance of language. Mine, is a definition of the heart and soul. And, there is the basic problem/solution that we need in this country. Do you think the colonists pointed fingers at others for their problems? (well, in a way they did..hence why they were colonists..but other than that). Do you think they looked for handouts? Did they expect to be clothed, fed, sheltered, given money, health services, financial pensions, 3 cars in the driveway, cell phone for every family member, laptop and LCD plasma TV for each person, twittering their facebooks, worried about keeping up with the neighbors, going green while finance going red, etc etc? I know, I put in ‘modern everyday concerns’ with that of old. But I did this with purpose. Do you see what the average ‘joe’ now worries about vs even just 100 years ago? 100 years. That is simply 4 generations? Maybe 3?

Ok, enough of the history lesson. I did mention that the steps to turn things around are simple. And they truly are: that is, IF you keep what our founding fathers/mothers went through.

1: Only if you are a citizen, or going through the path of legal citizenship, STOP all entitlements. This means, no health care, no welfare, no government handouts of any type. These services have been paid for by citizens and soon to be citizens. We have over 12 million illegals in this country. If each one is given $10,000 of various handouts, that is $1.2 trillion dollars handed out.

2: Those that are citizens and on welfare, cut out the fat. How many times has each one of us saw some woman with 2 or 3 kids, in a grocery store, with more gold bling on her body, looking like she just came out of a salon, driving a nicer car than you own, pay for groceries with food stamps? It is said that 1 out of 12 adults are receiving food stamps. If only 1% of them are cheating, that is still over 83,000 adults. Average amount of food stamps is $250 a month. That is almost 21 million a month, nearly $250 million a year.

3: Hand the bill to the country for every illegal we transport back to them. It is estimated that it costs over $80,000 per illegal we catch and transport back to their country of origin. This, is a service. If we merely catch and transport 25,000 illegals, that is $2 billion a year. The actually number is much higher, closer to a million. But think about that. If 25,000 brings in invoices over 2 billion, then a million would be over $80 billion dollars. Let us just invoice Mexico alone at 25,000 illegals. You know they would enforce and beef up their own border patrols just to prevent this!

4: Invoice other nations. What do I mean? Invoice every other country that asked us for help on a military level since 1963. Every military base we have overseas, every military action we performed at the host country’s request, etc etc. Then, take these ‘bills’ to the UN and tell the UN to shove it up its arse, proving “we are doing the job you sworn to do”. Now, reality is, they won’t do a thing. But, show to others that we have been the ones shouldering the load with an ungrateful lot. But lets say payments do come through. Take every dime of those payments and pay to the veterans, current military personnel, and those survived by the military personnel that died performing their duty and love to this country.

5: Present each bill/law on the table of House, Senate, and Presidency that is no more than 50 pages in length AND it can only contain material directly related to the bill. Too much pork in each bill, too much bureaucracy. Take again, military pay increase. That should be its own bill. A good subtopic is increasing the payments of veterans who have severe medical disabilities. That, would be a valid sub topic. Trying to get a grant for a farm in San Francisco area for 33 million dollars to grow soybeans and peanuts have nothing to do with this bill. It should be its own seperate issue. To enforce this, allow the people in each house and senate district to do a ‘recall’ of the person they elected every 6 months if 25% of the citizens agreed it is within bounds for review. What do I mean? If a senator is going crazy, not listening to their constituents, and causing severe distress and embarassment to their representative community, then, hold a vote and a meeting to see if that person should be removed from office. This would force elected officials to be more honest and stop wasting our taxpayer monies for their salaries and their personal agendas.

6: Now, when it comes to voting, I personally feel that there should be a compentcy test passed. Not anything specific about the candidates or anything like that, but a test on basic government structure and process. So many people who are voting are ignorant of the jobs, dutites, and responsibilities for each branch of local, state, and federal government. So, an example of just 10 questions each about the local, state, and federal government, with a 70% success rate to pass would allow you to vote. People may say that this goes against the Bill of Rights. I say, the blatant stupidity among the public of not knowing their own government, party, and candidates that they are voting on is against my right as a US citizen. Example: The day of the presidential election 2008, a reporter asked 513 confirmed Obama voters simple questions that pertained to Obama, Biden, and top Congressional democrats. 12 questions were asked of each person (the same 12 questions). 0.5% got all 12 questions right. The other percentages of questions/answers were staggering. However, when asked about questions of McCain and Palin, and the questions asked had lies as answers, each one of these people answered those questions “correctly”. They were also asked about Sarah Palin seeing Russia from her backyard and I think 85% said that Palin did say that (it was actually Tina Fey in her famous SNL skit, Sarah Palin never ever said that). What this test showed, is that the general public, ignorant of their own electoral system, can be programmed of how to vote. This video does exist, a little bit of searching can find it. I went through the trouble and found the Zogby poll link for everyone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9htwW21K8s . Bill of Rights. I believe in it with all my heart. I just don’t believe in the people generally anymore. Not until this trend turns around.

I could go onward with other points, and I shall in another post. At the moment, this is enough for everyone to digest all this information properly. Until then, take care.

W/R

Hause.

Another way being “green” can kill you

Energy-efficient traffic lights can’t melt snow – Yahoo! News.

Energy-efficient traffic lights can’t melt snow

MILWAUKEE – Cities around the country that have installed energy-efficient traffic lights are discovering a hazardous downside: The bulbs don’t burn hot enough to melt snow and can become crusted over in a storm — a problem blamed for dozens of accidents and at least one death.

“I’ve never had to put up with this in the past,” said Duane Kassens, a driver from West Bend who got into a fender-bender recently because he couldn’t see the lights. “The police officer told me the new lights weren’t melting the snow. How is that safe?”

Many communities have switched to LED bulbs in their traffic lights because they use 90 percent less energy than the old incandescent variety, last far longer and save money. Their great advantage is also their drawback: They do not waste energy by producing heat.

Authorities in several states are testing possible solutions, including installing weather shields, adding heating elements like those used in airport runway lights, or coating the lights with water-repellent substances.

Short of some kind of technological fix, “as far as I’m aware, all that can be done is to have crews clean off the snow by hand,” said Green Bay, Wis., police Lt. Jim Runge. “It’s a bit labor-intensive.”

In St. Paul, Minn., for example, city crews use air compressors to blow snow and ice off blocked lights.

Some communities began installing cool-burning LEDs more than a decade ago, and it wasn’t long before drivers started complaining about the problem.

Illinois authorities said that during a storm in April, 34-year-old Lisa Richter could see she had a green light and began making a left turn. A driver coming from the opposite direction did not realize the stoplight was obscured by snow and plowed into Richter’s vehicle, killing her.

“Would the accident have occurred if the lights had been clear? I would be willing to bet not,” Oswego police Detective Rob Sherwood said.

Authorities said dozens of similar collisions have been reported in other cold-weather states, including Iowa and Minnesota.

Not every storm causes snow to stick to the lights, but when the wind is right and the snow is wet, drivers should beware, said Gary Fox, a traffic engineer for the city of Des Moines, Iowa.

Exactly how much a technological fix will cost is unclear, but it will surely cut into the savings and the energy efficiency many cities are enjoying.

Wisconsin, which has put LED bulbs at hundreds of intersections, saves about $750,000 per year in energy costs, said Dave Vieth of the state Transportation Department. LEDs installed seven years ago are still burning, while most incandescent bulbs have to be replaced every 12 to 18 months, he said.

“With LEDs we have energy savings in excess of 80 percent, and we don’t have to have crews replacing them as often,” Vieth said. “So it’s clear the overall savings are pretty significant.”

In Minnesota, where authorities have upgraded hundreds of traffic lights to LEDs, the Transportation Department occasionally gets reports of an obstructed light. But by the time a highway crew arrives, the wind has often knocked out the snow and ice, said traffic systems specialist Jerry Kotzenmacher. Minnesota is experimenting with weather shields.

One reason there have been so few deaths is that drivers know they should treat a traffic signal with obstructed lights as a stop sign, traffic experts say.

“It’s the same as if the power is out,” said Dave Hansen, a traffic engineer with the Green Bay Department of Public Works. “If there’s any question, you err on the side of caution.”

___

Associated Press writers Patrick Condon in Minneapolis and Melanie Welte in Des Moines, Iowa, contributed to this report.

obama Decidees to go Around CON-gress on the GW Farce

The Environmental Protection Agency took a major step Monday toward regulating greenhouses gases, concluding that climate changing pollution threatens the public health and the environment.

The announcement came as the Obama administration looked to boost its arguments at an international climate conference that the United States is aggressively taking actions to combat global warming, even though Congress has yet to act on climate legislation. The conference opened Monday in Copenhagen

via EPA: Greenhouse gases are harmful – Climate Change- msnbc.com.

(I Just Have to Leave the Title) Carbonhagen: World Leaders Drive to Climate Summit in Gas-Guzzling Luxury Fleet – International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News – FOXNews.com

Now CO2 is NOT a danger to life it sustains it.  This however is waaaay to ironic.

Carbonhagen: World Leaders Drive to Climate Summit in Gas-Guzzling Luxury Fleet – International News | News of the World | Middle East Noews | Europe News – FOXNews.com.

Carbonhagen: World Leaders Drive to Climate Summit in Gas-Guzzling Luxury Fleet

Monday , December 07, 2009

FC1

ADVERTISEMENT

World leaders and VIPs began pouring into Copenhagen Monday morning for the city’s long-awaited climate summit, arriving in style in a fleet of gas-guzzling limos and luxury cars.

Most delegates to the climate change conference haven’t exactly been hoofing their way to Denmark’s capital, swarming the city’s airport with 140 private jets, 1,200 hired limousines and a carbon footprint the size of a small country.

Video shot on the scene Monday shows squads of new arrivals at the green gathering pulling up in BMWs, Mercedes Benzes, sleek Volvos and plush Jaguars. A bus reserved for the delegates rode along empty outside the conference center.

Click here to see the video from Americans for Prosperity.

The head of Copenhagen’s biggest limo company says her business usually has a dozen cars on the road. But during the conference — which has been billed as the last best chance to save the environment — she’ll have 200 vehicles churning out fumes, the Daily Telegraph reported.

“We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention,” Majken Friss Jorgensen told the newspaper. “But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report.”

France alone has ordered 42 vehicles, she said, and the auto supply in Denmark is very quickly drying up. To make up for shortages, Jorgensen and her competitors are bringing in lines of limos from as far away as Germany and Sweden.

“We haven’t got enough limos in the country to fulfill the demand,” she said, adding that just five cars in her fleet will be environmentally friendly hybrid vehicles, which are almost impossible to procure in tax-heavy Denmark.

Once the estimated 30,000 delegates, activists, protesters and members of the press arrive this week and next, they’ll find a sumptuous and steeply priced spread awaiting them.

Expensive hotels are sold out, and the conference organizers have been busy laying 560 miles of computer cable and 50,000 square miles of carpet, according to the Times of London.

The conference center hosting the meetings has set up four “climate kitchens” to cook healthy, organic meals for attendees, but they aren’t coming cheap.

Visitors ordering the regular meal will get finger sandwiches, a quiche, some cheese and dessert, but those going “deluxe” get a mini croissant, canape with smoked salmon, mini pizzas, fancy cheese and some pineapple in chocolate — all for an estimated $40 a person.

The whole conference rings up at just under $215 million, according to a report from the U.K.-based Taxpayers’ Alliance, which argued that even though delegates to the climate conference don’t expect to emerge with any signed commitments, they’re still doing potential damage by making their two-week visit.

Conference organizers have gone the whole nine yards seeking to offset the Copenhagen carbon crunch (the U.N. estimates an output of 41,000 tons of gas), using energy-efficient lights, powering the proceedings with a giant wind turbine, and offering visitors recycled materials instead of wasteful plastic water bottles. They’ve also purchased carbon offsets to help manage the output from their 12-day affair.

But Matthew Sinclair, the research director for the Taxpayers’ Alliance, said their presence means that “a huge amount of money is going to be spent on the summit, and thousands of tons of carbon dioxide emitted to get there, just to give the delegates a good photo opportunity.”

EPA Poised to Continue to Try to Further the Global Warming Scam

Salisbury News: EPA Poised To Declare CO2 A Public Danger, With Or Without Legislation.

This is a total act of desperation by the usama obama camp.  Obama has shown he can’t tow his own city much less the country.  Of course it’s hard to tow the country when you are busy bowing in submission to other despots and monarchs.  Never mind that we and all life on earth is…wait a second..ready for this one?  CARBON BASED!

Climate Conference Hypocrisy

Talk about your global warming . . . When an estimated 16,500 delegates, activists and reporters descend upon Copenhagen Monday for the United Nations Climate Change Conference, a lot of hot air will follow.

The U.N. estimates the 12-day conference will create 40,584 tons of carbon dioxide equivalents, roughly the same amount as the carbon emissions of Morocco in 2006.

Those greenhouse gas emissions are comprised of two parts: international travel and local emissions from hotels and transportation venues. Organizers will also reportedly lay 900 kilometers of computer cable and 50,000 square miles of carpet, along with more than 200,000 meals to be served and 200,000 cups of coffee.

via Copenhagen Climate Conference to Create ‘Huge’ Carbon Footprint – United Nations – FOXNews.com.

One word:

gotomeeting

Al Gore Says the Earth is a Star

CONAN O'BRIEN, HOST: Now, what about … you talk in the book about geothermal energy…

AL GORE, NOBEL LAUREATE: Yeah, yeah.

O'BRIEN: …and that is, as I understand it, using the heat that's generated from the core of the earth …

GORE: Yeah.

O'BRIEN: …to create energy, and it sounds to me like an evil plan by Lex Luthor to defeat Superman. Can you, can you tell me, is this a viable solution, geothermal energy?

GORE: It definitely is, and it's a relatively new one. People think about geothermal energy – when they think about it at all – in terms of the hot water bubbling up in some places, but two kilometers or so down in most places there are these incredibly hot rocks, 'cause the interior of the earth is extremely hot, several million degrees, and the crust of the earth is hot …

Further in the article:

On Tuesday, National Review’s John Derbyshire noted:

The geothermal gradient is usually quoted as 25-50 degrees Celsius per mile of depth in normal terrain (not, e.g., in the crater of Kilauea). Two kilometers down, therefore, (that’s a mile and a quarter if you’re not as science-y as Al) you’ll have an average gain of 30-60 degrees – exploitable for things like home heating, though not hot enough to make a nice pot of tea. The temperature at the earth’s core, 4,000 miles down, is usually quoted as 5,000 degrees Celsius, though these guys claim it’s much less, while some contrarian geophysicists have posted claims up to 9,000 degrees. The temperature at the surface of the Sun is around 6,000 degrees Celsius, while at the center, where nuclear fusion is going on bigtime, things get up over 10 million degrees.

If the temperature anywhere inside the earth was “several million degrees,” we’d be a star.

via Al Gore: Earth’s Interior ‘Extremely Hot, Several Million Degrees’ | NewsBusters.org.

THe Global Warming Scam Revealed….FOIA Files Here TOO *UPDATED*

THIS IS A TOTAL BLOGSTORM.

“Global Warming” SCAM – Hack/Leak FLASH – The Market Ticker.

Oh man this absolutely trashes any kind of intelligent legitimacy to global warming aka climate change..etc etc.  I have the zip file and it’s right here. There’s tons of other places to go as well like here, here, and here(it’s getting hammered right now).  That’ll get you started but read all 161 megs of files..all the documents and e-mails.  They have been confirmed authentic.  I am pouring through them now and just with the small amount i have been through the global warming science isn’t science..it’s a total scam..i have posted about this over and over here, here, here, here, here, here.  As i find more details and more links I’ll update this post.

UPDATE:  Folks are popping up after reading the documents:

here

here

WND posts

Climate depot is all over this including a searchable database of the documents

The air vent has information as well.

*UPDATE 2* links to follow:

here

here

here

here

here

here

here

The Telegraph accurately points out the downplaying and non reporting on the media co-conspirators.