Beyond the Cusp

June 15, 2017

Coming Failure of Paris Accords With or Without United States

 

There has been a huge amount of clamoring since President Trump pulled the United States from the Paris Climate Accord. Claims that this will guarantee it will fail are farcical at best and sheer straight-faced lies at worst. The Paris Climate Accord will stand or fail on its own merits. The reason for the commotion is due to the loss of being able to point an accusatory finger at the United States and excusing every other nation failing on the fact that the United States also failed and apparently their failure was worse than these other failing nations thus giving them room for excuses. Here is a little secret which is seldom if ever stated, anybody can easily predict which nations will fail and which will actually reach or exceed their Paris Accord numbers and it is easy. Simply determine whether each nation has a growing or declining economy. Those nations with a growing economic output will fail to reach their set goals and those whose economic indicators are in decline, they will be able to reach their set goals. The reason for this being the indicator is with a higher economic output a nation will require increasing energy while a declining economic outlook will lead to their lessening their energy needs. It really is that easy.

 

So, now you ask if there would be some way of taking this into consideration. The truth is that it would be very easy and could be done by altering the means by which the carbon output is calculated. Instead of simply measuring the total carbon footprint and simply using that gross output without taking anything else into consideration, the measurement should be measured against GDP and population. The solution is to take this total output and divide the number by some version of GDP or other economic measure such that you end up with carbon footprint per unit of economic production. This is the true measure of the advance or lack of addressing pollution and its controls on a scale, which is fair and places everybody on an equal measuring basis. But this is not the reason for these ecology agreements like the Paris Accord or the Kyoto Protocols. They have little concern when it comes to bringing pollution and carbon footprints into order and lessening the actual pollution; otherwise, there would be stiffer demands made of countries such as Brazil, India and China. Taking China as an example, it has been found that China is estimated to have released nearly twice the carbon emissions as the United States and around two and a half times the European Union. Yet China is usually given a pass or an inflated target which allows them to continue at their higher levels without embarrassment. The real reason for these climate change and impact treaties is to force the industrialized world to transfer their manufacturing output and production to the third world and thus transfer a large percentage of the new wealth from the industrialized world to the third world. There are a number of problems with this concept and much of it has to do with actually cleaning the environment, something such a transfer would increase the carbon emissions by many fold, potentially as high as a ten-fold increase.

 

Perhaps it is time to inspect many of these undesirable effects such as a transfer of production from the developed world to the developing world would produce. While many nations in the industrialized world have decreasing carbon emissions per unit of economic output, the developing nations would have a steady and unchanging or slightly increasing carbon emissions per unit of economic output as they would continue using coal fired plants and many of the new ones they would require in order to facilitate increased industrialization would be hastily built coal burning plants with little if any sanitizing of the output and transferring carbon emissions straight and untreated into the atmosphere and any other pollutant the new manufacturing would produce would potentially end up in the land or waters also untreated plus the increases of other pollutants such as nitrates and phosphates and other dangerous gasses and water pollutants. Much of this is because these nations do not have the necessary infrastructure to treat and control such forms of pollution and currently do not have the current infrastructure and technology. Due to lack of capital these undeveloped nations have largely agricultural economies and thus depend mostly on coal fired electric generation as this is the least expensive to construct and also the least expensive to operate thus the most production for the least outlay. These nations being forcibly pressed into increasing manufacturing capability over a short period of time rather than gradually allowing for increasing capital paralleling the increasing manufacturing forces them to have to use the least expensive power generation systems to meet the large increase in electrical demand. On the other hand, if allowed to slowly and naturally, then there would be a general increase in revenue as the initial manufacturing is built allowing for any new power generation to be implemented with carbon suppressing equipment such as scrubbers. Then as industrial output increases, the nation can handle it in stages with better planning. Slow and steady is better than forced feeding.

 

For some reality about the United States, we can realize that if every nation could match the United States going forward, then we would have progress in reduction of carbon emissions in a real sense, measured emissions per unit of economic output. This is best displayed using graphs. This graph depicts the carbon emissions per person from energy production from 1960 through 2012. There is one fact which bears keeping in mind exactly what this graph depicts. This is actually two graphs in one, the 1960 through around 1985 and then 1985 through 2012. The end period of both segments shows dropping per capita carbon emissions released in the energy generation industries. There was a reason that the per capita increase after about 1985 was due to the general use of air conditioning plus the movement of people from the north into the south as there was a general migration as airconditioning became less expensive. Additionally, with the end of the 1980’s began the computer revolution and the electronics revolution. The per capita energy use began to explode as the per household electrical demands took off with entertainment systems replacing small televisions and often two such systems in an average upper middle class home. Add in two, three, four or more computers per household and more kitchen appliances and more and more electronics and the power consumption kept climbing yet the increase in carbon emissions was finally reduced to a point where despite each household used four, five, six or possibly ten times the electrical use per household compared to the usage in 1960 and the carbon emissions increased by less than one-tenth. Despite this phenomenal increase in electrical demand there was very little increased in actual carbon emissions release per person. This is one means of making the total carbon emissions make more sense by measuring it against something that also represents demand, which represents actual people and their usage is what is being measured.

 

United States per Person Carbon Emissions from Energy Production

 

Another means for measuring and giving it more meaning rather than simple gross carbon emissions alone is to measure total greenhouse emissions per person, against GDP and with showing populations and GDP from 1990 through 2014. While both populations and GDP increase, both greenhouse emissions measured per person and per unit of GDP decreased from 1990 through 2014, which is impressive. All of this and the different measures of the United States is all well and good, but is what the United States has accomplished at all impressive? That is an excellent question which is also best answered with more graphs.

 

United States Total Greenhouse Emissions Per Capita and Per GDP with Population and GDP

 

Let us now see how China, the European Union and the United States compare in total carbon dioxide emissions with projections into the next decade plus. The comparison is stark and also reveals what we spoke about earlier, if the world were really serious about greenhouse emissions, they would be less concerned with President Trump pulling the United States out of an agreement which is more about transferring wealth from the developed world to the third world and the developing world, in particular China, India, central and southern Africa, South America and much of Asia.

 

Total Carbon Dioxide Emissions for China Compared to European Union and United States

Total Carbon Dioxide Emissions for China Compared to European Union and United States

 

The reality is the global emissions accords have worked in sending many hundreds if not thousands of manufacturers to build their plants in China to the point that China was building more than one large coal fired generating plant per month with some estimates putting it at one such plant per week. Such a rate of production of generating plants does not leave much room for building more than the generation plant and little as far as carbon suppression or mitigation equipment. When China sponsored the Olympics in Beijing, it was necessary to all but close shop on all the local manufacturing and request that residents not use air conditioning and other unnecessary electronic equipment and devices. These steps were taken so that the power company could shut down the majority of their power plants starting with those closest to the Olympic camp only restarting some to power the Olympic park and events themselves. This did manage to improve the air quality in Beijing such that the athletes would not be adversely affected due to competing in the Olympics. As a side benefit, the people of Beijing were treated to almost six weeks of clean air which was probably their greater joy and probably had them wishing they could sponsor the Olympics constantly.

 

The Truth About the Air in Beijing and Breathing Masks

The Truth About the Air in Beijing and Breathing Masks

 

The above picture shows two young women and one of the Red Guards stationed outside the Forbidden City in Beijing on the right and a breakdown of some of the chemicals that are found in the air in the city. It also tells of the history and how horrific the air quality can reach when the winds die and the pollution accumulates. Having driven into Denver in August when there are often temperature inversions and a reddish-brown bowl sat over the city in the late 1970’s and having read in the late 1960’s how people were safer to breathe through an unlit cigarette (some even claimed a lit cigarette) rather than breathing the air straight as the pollution was making air quality so horrible. I was in Cleveland in late June of 1969 when the Cuyahoga River caught fire, yes, the river caught fire, and burned for quite a distance (see video below). During that time period, Lake Erie was so filled with nitrates and phosphates that the plant life literally made the lake impossible for supporting fish. These were the days when the United States had its worst pollution and industry began to clean up their acts. Power plants installed scrubbers and manufacturers began filtering and treating their wastewater before permitting them to flow into rivers and streams. What people will claim is that government forced them to clean up their acts with the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. The truth is fortunately different. The American public began demanding that Congress do something about the problem and by the time they finally agreed upon what legislation to pass, industry had surpassed their legislated levels by a fair margin with some specific, and often too spectacular, exceptions, which did need persuading. This was the reality; industry even began using their efforts in their advertising in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. So, once again we had Congress passing legislation to close the barn door after the horses had escaped, been rounded up, returned to the paddock and the barn door closed and locked. Then the Congressional representatives ran for reelection bragging about how they saved America from becoming a polluted wasteland. The truth is all too often Congress passes legislation addressing a problem after the problem has passed and then claim they fixed it for the next decade or two.

 

 

There is pollution in the world and some of it is dangerous. In Brazil, farmers will burn down square miles of rainforest in order to make farmland they can work, as that is cheaper than trying to buy existing lands. China we have talked about but India is not that far behind them and the Ganges River, which many Indians wash themselves in because the waters are presumed to be blessed and sacred, are instead actually dangerous. The danger levels of the water increase ever mile that one gets closer to its exit into the Indian Ocean. The world would be better served if the third world and developing world were first introduced to modern farming techniques so they could increase yields and feed their people at a lesser cost. By increasing their agricultural output, their economic situation would improve. There should also be work to improve their governance such that they become rule by law and not by man. The laws must apply equally to all including the rulers as other than the Queen and Queen’s Mother in England, nobody is above the law (actually neither are the royals in England though they probably are in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and so forth). Once they have an improved agricultural economy then they can begin to improve their industrial base and with assistance in building clean energy plants, they can do this with minimal decrease, if any, in air and water quality. This is something that should be done properly and in stages and with each nation brought forward only once they have good governance.

 

The age where dictators and their cronies are made wealthy charging for food and other relief sent by the developed world while the people remain hungry, ill, lacking medical care, and impoverished while Big Cheese Who Cares reaps in millions of dollars. Probably the prime example of this is in Gaza with Hamas and with the Palestinian Authority and Mahmoud Abbas and his gang of merry terrorists. Yes, the developed world has a responsibility to lead and to do so properly and with respect and dignity given to all people. Further, the developed world has a responsibility to share their knowledge and experience in governance to improve the world and spread the rule by laws over other systems which keep people impoverished while their governing classes drive Mercedes on the nations’ dirt roads. Finally, the United Nations has proven completely incapable of performing these tasks and perhaps a new international group of developed democratic nations which can lead and assist the developing and third world nations and provide a message and example through which these nations will desire to learn and progress and have their development made in such a manner that their environment remains clean and their progress performed in proper and planned stages bringing them forward at a pace which matches their ability to develop clean power and their education systems produce a working class capable of the technologies as they are introduced. We believe here at BTC through examples of how such programs have been completed successfully in agricultural development such as this one in Kenya, Ethiopia and elsewhere, medical progress such as providing training and equipment for hospitals to perform surgeries on children with heart problems and other similar programs that these things done properly are doable if only people and nations are willing to make the efforts. Please do check these last links as they depict what is possible and is being accomplished through efforts of people who care for all people.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

November 18, 2016

Trump Transition and the Usual Blame Game

 

The long knives are being unsheathed at both ends of the elitist political scene, both Democrat and Republican establishment players, all in efforts to protect their critically threatened turfs. Those who have long suspected in a means of collusions between the duly entrenched of the two parties to defend their mutual interests are about to watch as the proof will be represented by the allied and mutual attack front put forth from both camps. Their target will be every last appointee and proffered candidate to fill out the cabinet and others in the thousands of positions President Elect Trump will be needing to fill by the time he takes the oath of office. We have already seen some of the attacks coming from the political spectrum presumably from both ends. There have been assaults on the suitability of John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani where remarkably they were both accused of warmongering and of displaying poor quality in their choices in previous positions they held. The proof was their unwavering support for Israel which was translated into attacking nations solely because they threatened Israel and not due to any threat they might pose against the United States. Oddly enough the nation given as the example was not the usual Iraq War but the support for bombing the nuclear sites of Iran as such only is a threat to Israel. I guess Iranians chanting every Friday “Death to America. Death to Israel,” and their referring to the United States as the Great Satan and Israel merely the Little Satan is evidence of their not being a threat to the United States but solely a threat to Israel. The inclusion of Rudy Giuliani was due to his having attended the 2012 Paris rally of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian dissident group that was on the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations. Well sure, that makes him a neocon warmonger if ever there was one. Anyone caring to read Rachel Marsden’s reasoning can find it in this article titled, Trump Shouldn’t Choose a Neocon as Secretary of State. Needless to point out, she would likely also be against either of these solid conservatives from holding any appointment under a President Trump.

 

A group of Democrats have already called for an investigation and possible grand jury to look into members of President Elect Trump’s transition team as having broken campaign laws for having worked towards the election of Donald Trump should now forbid their working on his transition. Who, one might ask, would these people expect to work for the President elect’s transition team. Probably Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank would pass inspection but surely not any supporters of Donald Trump. Another group had come out against Trump calling into service anybody from Wall Street or who have held high office in any of the Fortune 500 Companies because of their ties to big business. These people solely want tried and true political appointees who are simply retreads of the very people who have gotten the United States twenty-trillion-dollars in debt and have been all but totally unable to balance a budget and then stick to that budget rather than break the back of the budget at the first opportunity to spend additional funds for the worst of reasons, to stimulate the economy from Washington D.C. If there is one thing we all should have learned by now, it is that no amount of spending from Washington D.C. will ever create as many jobs as cutting taxes an equal amount will cause. Monies from Washington D.C. always seems to have caveats and cut outs which result in political allies getting wealthy and the people becoming that much the poorer. Perhaps the time has come to try and run the Federal Government in Washington D.C. as a corporate board which meets to solve problems which are impeding progress at the state and local level and otherwise simply seek ways of trimming the Federal Government back to the barest of bones as possible. We all know that should the Federal Government outside of border enforcement, military defense budget, and foreign policy be cut by sixty percent that it would still mismanage just as well as it does now but would do so with much greater efficiency on each dollar spent.

 

John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank

John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani
Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank

 

A number of honest researchers and academics, yes such people do exist as Thomas Sowell and Ben Stein both have proven repeatedly, have sought for the entire Federal Government take each and every law and legislation previously passed and still enforceable, every single regulation written, and all other forms of Lawfare or enforceable code or related orders including every standing executive order to be reviewed. These Constitutionalists propose a simple test be applied, does it pass as Constitutional and if so under what Clause or Amendment. Anything surviving such review need undergo another test, does it impinge upon the restrictions of the Tenth Amendment. Anything found wanting is to be dissolved, repealed or otherwise stricken from the record. The governance that remains would find great pleasure and support from the common man. Of course we could never count on the government to all but slit its own throat thus such will never happen as long as the people are not demanding such. Still, to dream is one of the few pleasures which has yet to be regulated and taxed, but the government is most assuredly working to repair such oversight.

 

We can expect the assaults to rise after every name is floated, leaked or, dare it occur, actually be named as intended for a position in the Cabinet, Ambassador, Under Secretary or any of the myriad of positions; there will be a cacophonic clamoring in the media with editorialists, guest columnists, political expert testimonials and general discontent from letters to the editors not to mention the full page ads in the New York Times, the paper of record for such political shenanigans, discounting these individuals character, suitability for service, previous suspected faults, previous faults somehow gone unmentioned till now, reprehensible views, complete lack of a nuanced approach and potentially a general threat to the governance as we have known it. That last one in particular would be seen as a compliment and endorsement here at BTC. We could use a few people who call into question the current modes of operation in government and hopefully mix things up in such a way that some of the less necessary parts fall away, that would be wonderful. Still, the coming negativity will be double the norm as both party machines will be working overtime to tie President elect Trump and his coming administration into knots so tight that they never manage to fill a single position, especially Cabinet posts and then demand to know why the Administration was unprepared for what will come directly due to these pointed attacks aimed at subsuming any power or functionality from the White House.

 

Hopefully President elect Trump has researched how previous Presidents facing such universal opposition courted the necessary coalition of politicians in order to carry out the responsibilities of the Presidency. One of the earlier Presidents facing opposition unlike any President previous or since was President Lincoln but his resolute and severe actions would not be tolerated in today’s political climate. A President just as forceful but who played within the boundaries was President Truman. His down home charm, though many who opposed him might witness otherwise, and force of will came through and he has only gained in stature over time. President Lyndon Baines Johnson played hardball as well as having collected a lot of credits with members of Congress and was not above using brutish dirty politics when necessary and will not win you many friends, and Trump needs friends almost as badly as he needs allies. Then there was President Reagan who knew the art of a deal and also realized the most powerful weapon in any politician’s armory, the people. As long as a President can reach the people, something a President need not even rely on the mainstream media to accomplish today, and explain in simple, understandable terms what they desire to accomplish, the means by which they can reach those goals and how such will benefit the average man, then that President has his secret weapon, the will of the people supporting his programs. Yes, the media can play just as hard at that game and even attempt to twist, spindle and mutilate the President’s message sixteen ways come Sunday, but the President can reach the people in a manner even the media will find difficult to blunt. The President can even use the media fighting his proposals as a selling point with the electorate as divided as it appears to be today. Still, all a President needs is a decent start and some positive results. Nothing sells like success and we bet Donald Trump is as aware of that adage as we happen to be.

 

So, where can a President Trump turn for such victories which will help the average man and family across the nation even including the left and right coasts, or should we say the left and the other left coasts? The first and most obvious and the one place President Trump already has the support of the people, repealing and replacing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obamacare. The best ideas in this case are the most simple and direct measures. Simply propose that the few and best measures such as insurance companies cannot refuse coverage for preexisting or chronic conditions and set the increased percentage allowable for certain widespread conditions such as spinal injury, diabetes, HIV and maybe as many as a dozen such conditions. Further allow full portability of one’s health insurance and a deductibility of all healthcare costs including insurance premiums up to a set figure, perhaps five-thousand dollars. There could even be a set price for a simple plan which cover only major medical such as emergency room treatment provided further in hospital treatment is required such as being admitted or setting a broken bone or other trauma or injury treatment but not to allow use of an emergency room as your physician to treat colds, flu and other minor medical needs, cover surgical procedure, cancer treatments and other major medical needs. This once was exactly what medical insurance was for coverage and everything else was one’s personal responsibility but government and work provided insurance pushed such cost effective measures off the road and replaced such with expensive regulations, paperwork, government mandates and soon medical costs were beyond reason. Finally, allow insurers to sell their insurance in any state once they offer plans across any state lines. Provide coverage in two states your plans are available to any state you wish to offer coverage while insurers wishing to take advantage of situation is one state or a few choice states can restrict their own areas of coverage but the states will no longer control who may offer insurance and as long as an insurer meets federally set minimal coverage, they will be able to be licensed in any state. Increasing competition should control prices bringing to an end the spiraling health insurance and hospital fees. Another ready to roll would be a tax simplification and reduction proposal. Such would also stimulate the economy and show results within a few months. If presented in a proper format then taxes on industry, corporations, companies and a rollback on regulations which stifle business coordinated with a simplification and reduction in taxation of the regular tax payer might get an entire package through Congress. Such easier to press through accomplishments could be used as their advantages begin to be evidenced to gain popular support for other needful legislation. One of the main items from day one must be the liberation of the energy industry from the oppressive regulations often pressed through by fiat of the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) or by Executive Order. Both forms of restrictions can be removed just as easily as they were imposed and completing the Keystone Pipeline would be a jobs program in and of itself. Drilling permits should also be issued as should fracking and allowing BLM (Bureau of Land Management) and limited Park Service lands for grazing would also give farmers and ranchers greater freedom to expand and better serve the people. Environmental restrictions which have unfairly favored solely the electric car for the benefit largely of General Electric and a few heavy political donors and have all but destroyed the development of the hydrogen powered vehicle should be repealed and the playing field leveled allowing all alternative fuels and sources for power to gain share of market equal to the quality and desirability of their product. These are but a few of the areas where government does not belong and time has long been coming where the entrepreneur is released from the shackles placed on too many industries by government.

 

The environment will be damaged will be the cry of the leftists. They will decry the sins of the United States ignoring the transgressions of many scales of magnitude more damaging by China, Brazil and much of the developing world. If they truly desire that the United States improve the carbon footprint of the world, they should be calling for programs where obsolete environmentally cleansing technologies are replaced in the coal, oil, gas and other power generation plants and taken by the government to be provided and installed on power plants in nations who have no such pollution treatment and mitigation technologies. Having lived long enough to remember chokingly bad air days in Los Angeles, seeing the brown inverted bowl over Denver coming down from Ft. Collins and roasting hotdogs and marshmallows over the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland as it burned in August of 1969 and reading that year of the death of all fish in Lake Erie. All the above mentioned problems are ancient history and there are fish in Lake Erie, the Cuyahoga River has been cleaned and air quality across the United States is excellent by comparison. China had to all but close down the entire area for more than three weeks when they hosted the Olympics so as to provide breathable air for the games and the athletes; otherwise, the air quality would have affected their performances and their general health. That is a reality which need be repaired. There were similar restrictions for the Rio de Janeiro games held recently. There is much which can be accomplished with simple, ready to install technological upgrades which Western companies, especially those of the United States, could be provided using older technologies which are obsolete in Western nations but would benefit developing nations. The same can be done for potable water supplies and virtually every area of environmental technology. As such technology proceeds making older technology obsolete and it is being replaced, the old technology should be made available to developing nations and could be a central part of assistance to these nations bringing them into the developed world and improving their standard of living. Innovative thinking and planning are friends and the means to making friends, and who doesn’t need more friends?

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

August 21, 2016

The Environmental Extremist Perfect World

 

Between recent events in state and local governments, the political dreams of some select Presidential candidates including one of the main candidates, Congressional and Senatorial campaigns and the abundant environmental NGO’s demands of candidates and governance, it is easy to extrapolate and draw an accurate picture. We have watched as coal mines and coal fired electric generating plants have been forced by government into closing their production, their generation of electricity or to an expensive changeover to natural gas and the current drive against the remaining coal plants and numerous oil powered plants to shut down or change to natural gas. Where the success has been most prolific there is a new drive, to close natural gas powered plants. Then there has been the court and legislative drives to criminalize fracking and close down any drilling or other harvesting of carbon fuels within zones such as schools, daycares, public malls, shopping centers, hospitals, residential housing or even any structure used by human beings with some demanding as much as a half mile setback which could have the effect of closing as high and three-quarters of all mining, drilling, fracking of other carbon fuel harvesting. Their intended goal is to have the majority of electrical generation come from renewable fuels or eco-friendly generation. The eco-friendly generation is where the problems arise. One might believe that hydro power would meet their requirements but one would be incorrect. Dams, you see, block rivers and thus prevent natural river flow and development and a number of environmental fanatics are demanding the undamming of rivers returning them to their natural flow rates and support for ecosystems. Then there is wind power but these are a danger to birds and until a safe and completely bird safe system can be developed they demand that wind turbines be parked to save the birds, especially those in the path of migratory birds. With even natural gas, the environmentalists’ favorite fuel, coming under fire where other fuels have been closed down or changed over to natural gas, what is now appearing to be a fool’s choice if natural gas is actually unacceptable as well.

 

So, what generation source would be acceptable to all the ecology fanatics? Even if wind power were acceptable, the demand for adequate production is beyond imagination. Industry and government data show that generating just 20% of US electricity with wind power would require some 18,000,000 acres of land, 186,000 turbines, 19,000 miles of new transmission lines, and 270,000,000 tons of concrete, steel, copper, fiberglass and rare earths. Just multiply these figures by five and add another ten percent for good measure and you would immediately realize that such an idea is ridiculously demanding. The ecology fanatics like to tout wave technology which is in its initial stages and should it become viable then these fanatics would find a reason that it endangered kelp or jelly fish or some other problem. There are those who claim that solar power generation is dangerous as it causes heat pollution. So do human beings simply by living generate heat, but perhaps we should keep that a secret before the environmentalists demand we take measures to prevent our heat pollution from destroying the delicate balance and possibly adding to the loss of glaciers. As far as we can figure, there is no generation of electricity or powering our vehicles which in the end would be acceptable to these fanatics. Yes, there are reasonable ecological dreamers whose demands almost make sense but they are outdone by the fanatics who apparently have no lack of energy in generating demands and petitions not to mention making grand displays and demonstrations against virtually every form of power generation.

 

The reasonable ecological warriors have also made a miscalculation, though we are wary of informing them, in their claims that electric cars reduce pollution. These electric cars require charging which can most easily be done one of two means currently. The first is to power a generator on the vehicle with a gasoline powered engine which pollutes just as a regular gasoline powered engine would and even more power must be generated to make up for energy loss in any system. The other and most used manner is to plug the car in overnight and charge the batteries. Well, where does that electricity originate. A power plant which, as the eco friends will inform us at every turn, generates pollution just as would the gasoline powered cars. All battery powered vehicles manage is to relocate the pollution and have it enter the atmosphere at night, the one time when the air formerly had an opportunity to be safer from pollution. Even if it manages to reduce the hydrocarbons spewed into the atmosphere, the difference is likely minimal and one need weigh whether or not the difference is worth trading the freedom of traveling beyond the range of battery power for such things as, what is that thing called where you drive a distance to have simply family fun time? Oh yes, a vacation.

 

We had an introduction granted us lesser people from Al Gore whose homes are simply unbelievable carbon powered heat sinks and anything but eco-friendly (see below). Let us also not forget that Al Gore jets back and forth in a private jet rather than using commercial airliners which would cut back on his carbon footprint, but Mr. Gore is one of the privileged and cannot be expected to rub elbows with the great unwashed. The same can be stated for another great enviro-warrior, Nancy Pelosi. You see Ms. Pelosi demanded a larger more fuel hungry jet for her trips most weekends from Washington D.C. to her home in California because she was put off having to stop and refuel somewhere, often Arkansas, in flyover country where those other people reside, how totally revolting, almost like gagging on a spoon like a valley girl. Many of the Representative and Senators have similar stories about how they abuse the atmosphere and pollute the air the rest of America breathes and then have the audacity of demanding that people drive cars which are death traps should they have an accident with the large Mercedes or Cadillac or whatever luxury chauffeur driven vehicle these servants of the people use at both ends of their personal jet flight home whenever they feel homesick. Granted, not all of the representatives of the people act with such lack of caring. Many do fly regular airlines and even use cabs or drive reasonable vehicles, but they are the exception. Then there is Bernie, I’m a humble socialist living a life like any little person, Sanders who made news in the Washington Post soon after the Democrat conventions. Let us quote, “Sanders family’s ‘new waterfront crib has four bedrooms and 500 feet of Lake Champlain beachfront,’ according to the Vermont newspaper Seven Days, which broke the news on Monday. Sanders’s spokesman, Michael Briggs, told us the home is 1,800 square feet (hardly a mansion). Jane O’Meara Sanders, the senator’s wife, said she had ‘always hoped’ to buy a home in the area, which has more of a country village vibe than Hamptons feel.” We wish our apartment was 1,800 square feet and sat on a 500 foot lakefront though our cozy little apartment five blocks from the Mediterranean Sea is sweet enough even if it is a little too close to Lebanon if another war breaks out. Let us return back to our eco-friends.

 

Al Gore Home Montecito California

Al Gore Home Montecito California

 

Al Gore Home Nashville Tennessee

Al Gore Home Nashville Tennessee

 

Al Gore Home Santa Barbara California

Al Gore Home Santa Barbara California

 

The one thing which is disturbing about many of the friends of Earth demands is for the human race to stop using any electricity, end the use of fertilizer, stop making things out of plastics, use only renewable energy sources, replace vehicles with alternate transportation such as donkeys and horses, and return to living as our ancestors did a thousand years ago. There is a small problem with these demands; it would result in the death of a vast majority of human beings on the planet. This of course would greatly please the ZPG crowd, the zero population growth. Believe it or not, there is another group which would claim that the loss of these people was but a good start. These people call for the reduction of the human population by ninety percent leaving only a small group of eco-friendly people who know how to live in a reasonable agreement with nature. Even these people are not the most extreme as there is a group which calls for the eradication of the human race as without people the planet would be in balance and the human beings are only a source of Earthly destruction. We have a simple policy with both of these last two groups, you guys first as it were your idea and we promise to live in a manner nicer to the planet. What we are not telling them is we have decided their sacrifice was sufficient for the rest of us to continue in relative comfort. Satisfying the insatiable is a foolish game as by definition they will never be content no matter how much the society bends to please them. Their idea of perfection does not include the rest of us and there is the problem. If it comes to us or them and they are the fanatics who believe there are too many people, then let them lead the way and we can call that our solution, sounds good, no?

 

Beyond the Cusp 

 

« Previous PageNext Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: