Voice For Liberty

Tag: Climate change

  • Neodymium illustrates a consequence

    Our technology and economy is so complex and interdependent that it’s often impossible to predict the effect of one thing on another. Sometimes things done with the best of intentions — driving hybrid cars and building wind turbines, for example — have unintended consequences.

    Tthe Atlantic article Clean Energy’s Dirty Little Secret tells how the quest for neodymium, a component of the magnets that make a lot of green technology work, has created environmental hazard here in the United States. It’s also threatened to make us dependent on China for a critical industrial need.

    This article also points out that prosperous and wealthy companies like the United States can afford to be concerned about the environment. China either can’t afford this, or doesn’t care to pay. With something that causes local pollution, that’s one thing. But carbon dioxide has a global effect. It doesn’t matter where the carbon is created. To the extent that it is harmful to the environment — and that’s something that’s far from settled — it has a worldwide impact.

    That’s why it’s important that we in Kansas realize that there’s little we can do to impact carbon emissions on a worldwide scale. For us to harm our own economy in this impossible quest is unwise.

  • Going green can cost too much green

    “For two years, the city of Durango, Colo., bought electricity for all its government buildings from wind farms. The City Council ended that program this year, reverting to electricity derived from coal-burning plants and saving the cash-strapped city about $45,000.”

    That’s the start of the USA Today article Going green can cost too much green. It’s becoming evident that all across the world, people are beginning to realize that “green” power sources are expensive.

    Even green jobs — promoted by radical environmentalists as a way to save our economy from depression — don’t pay off. It was recently discovered that each green job created in Spain cost $774,000.

    We can’t afford to create very many jobs with that price tag.

    Here in Kansas, we’ve just reached a compromise agreement that will allow a coal-fired power plant to be build in Kansas. The agreement comes with increased costs, however. For one, the smaller plant won’t be able to enjoy the same economies of scale as the two larger plants. Then, the concessions made will also drive up the cost of the electricity the plant will generate.

  • Kansas HB 2014 vote analysis

    In the Kansas House of Representatives, two votes were taken this year on HB 2014. The major purpose of this bill is to allow the building of a coal-fired power plant in Kansas.

    The first vote, taken on February 27, 2009, was 79 Yes and 44 No. On April 3, 2009, the vote was 74 Yes and 48 No.

    So what changed? I prepared the following table to spot the changes. For representatives whose votes changed, the word “Change” appears.

    Two curious changes are Ray Merrick and Jason Watkins. I’m going to be in Topeka tomorrow, and I’ll try to track down these two and ask.

    Kansas HB 2014 Vote Analysis

  • Articles of Interest

    Kansas governors, renewable energy, napping, flying over New York, the Google, banks.

    Governor a former GOP star (Associated Press in Topeka Capital-Journal) A quick look at the political biography of Kansas’ new Governor Mark Parkinson. “Parkinson has said his political views didn’t change so much as the Republican Party changed. He has said he plans to make no major policy or staff changes from the Sebelius administration.”

    Sebelius spotted at jazz fest (Associated Press in Topeka Capital-Journal) “Sebelius said she and her husband have been coming to the annual festival for three decades, but officially, not this one. The blog said she didn’t want her attendance at Jazz Fest reported, because, she said, ‘We don’t want to appear to be frivolous.’” Personally, I don’t think taking a quick vacation in New Orleans is frivolous. I wish I could do it more often myself. But these remarks by the former Kansas Governor, now Secretary of Health and Human Services, make me wonder: is it frivolous only if it’s not reported?

    Study outlines state’s renewable energy potential (Daniel McCoy in the Wichita Business Journal) “A new study from the American Council on Renewable Energy reports previous estimates for Kansas’ renewable energy future may be far less than the actual potential. According to the ACORE study, Kansas could be poised to meet a 200 percent renewable energy standard. The report found the state is currently exploiting less than 1 percent of its wind energy potential. At a peak production rate, ACORE found Kansas could be producing 19 gigawatts of wind-generated power by 2024.” Too bad this wind power can’t be produced when we really need it the most — hot summer afternoons and evenings. If we can devise a way to store all this energy, that would change the equation. Until then, we must rely on energy sources like coal. Unless, that is, Kansas environmentalists would agree to turn off their air conditioners and tell, say, Cessna to stop manufacturing airplanes when the wind isn’t blowing.

    Aging Gracefully: Napping Dr. Andrew Weil makes the case for taking a nap now and then.

    Official May Be Fired for Authorizing N.Y. Flyover (Washington Post) “White House press secretary Robert Gibbs pointedly refused to rule out a firing in the case of the Air Force One backup’s flight that terrified some in New York City on Monday.”

    Google Unveils New Tool To Dig for Public Data (Washington Post) “Google launched a new search tool yesterday designed to help Web users find public data that is often buried in hard-to-navigate government Web sites.

    The tool, called Google Public Data, is the latest in the company’s efforts to make information from federal, state and local governments accessible to citizens. It’s a goal that many Washington public interest groups and government watchdogs share with President Obama, whose technology advisers are pushing to open up federal data to the public.” This is a great idea, if it really works. Just today I tried to find the salaries of Sedgwick County commissioners and Wichita city council members, and I — someone who, if I do say so myself, is pretty handy at using the Internet — was foiled.

    Feeling Secure, Some Banks Want to Be Left Alone (New York Times) As Washington pushes banks to mend their finances, the banks are pushing back. Emboldened by newfound profits and eager to shake off federal control, a growing number of banks are resisting the Obama administration’s proposals for fixing the financial system. Lenders that skirted disaster only months ago with the help of taxpayer dollars are now balking at government prescriptions.”

    The Mogul Who Built Corporate America (New York Times) “Mr. Stiles is clear-eyed about his subject’s nearly amoral rapacity. He writes that [Cornelius] Vanderbilt ‘exacerbated problems that would never be fully solved: a huge disparity in wealth between rich and poor; the concentration of great power in private hands; the fraud and self-serving deception that thrives in an unregulated environment.’ But again and again in ‘The First Tycoon,’ he also defends Vanderbilt against his most vocal detractors and, whenever possible, corrects the historical record when it has portrayed him unfairly. Vanderbilt did not actually say, to give just one example, a line that was used against him at the time: ‘Law! What do I care about the law?’” I suppose this is about as balanced as we’re going to get from the New York Times. In reality, Vanderbilt faced government-subsidized competitors, and won.

  • Does Jim Ward hate trees?

    Yesterday members of the South-central Kansas Legislative Delegation — nine of them, anyway — met for two hours with citizens. Following is a citizen report sent to me.

    Does Jim Ward hate trees?

    The Legislative Forum focused on the budget shortfall and how to deal with it. I was shocked within the first five minutes when, after the panel was introduced, only specific members of the audience were given special recognition. Audience members who were employees of USD 259, the Wichita public school district, were granted time carved out of the people’s minutes. Each was honored with an introduction by name, place of work, and even given time to talk about their sports teams! Attendees not on the government payroll — e.g. those paying the salaries of each person specially recognized and catered to — got not a word of recognition. Were we worth that little? Actually worth the nothing they gave us? Do the legislators believe that each person in the room has one vote each, or do some get extra? I think I witnessed vote-buying. And it wasn’t their constituents they cared about; no, it was fellow government hacks.

    Comments by one legislator on the first topic are downright disgusting. Regarding the the expansion of Holcomb Station (new power plants a private company seeks to build with its own funds in southwest Kansas), Representative Jim Ward expressed concern over the carbon dioxide “and other poisonous gases” the plant would give off.

    Are you shocked? Jim Ward thinks that the air you exhale is poisonous. I could only think that maybe his hot air is poisonous — well, not just “maybe,” but definitely. Doesn’t he know that plant life on our planet must have carbon dioxide to live? Is he ignorant of the fact that we humans, animals, your dog and cat have a natural symbiotic relationship with plants? We produce the carbon dioxide that plants need to live and they use it to produce more oxygen for us to live. There’s long been a natural balance in the earth. It existed long before he came along. How does he not know this? And, most especially why is he calling CO2 poison? Does he hate plants? Does he want to exterminate plant life? Is he anti-vegetable? Does he hate flowers? Perhaps he hates trees? Where was this guy educated? … Oh wait, he probably went to the schools run by those people in the room who were granted the highest attention and honor for their very presence — I bet he went to a monopolistic government school. The ones we are forced to pay for and to which he’d evidently love to force all people to attend. This is why he can’t think for himself.

    — Val

  • What President Obama really believes about coal

    I wonder what President Obama really believes about clean coal technology. Or about anything, for that matter.

  • Fraud, deceit, and misinformation regarding carbon dioxide

    An edited version of this editorial by Dennis Hedke appeared in the Wichita Eagle today. This is the original version.

    EPA declares greenhouse gases a threat, (Renee Shoof, McClatchy Newspapers, 4/18/09). This pronouncement follows a U.S. Supreme Court conclusion that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a pollutant, with a directive to the EPA to study whether this gas posed a threat to our health and welfare, or whether the science was too uncertain to make a judgment.

    Let me be unequivocal. CO2 is not now, has never been, and will never be a “pollutant.” It is a colorless, odorless, tasteless, harmless gas that is one of the essential components to the life of all plants and animals on this planet. Current concentrations of the gas in earth’s atmosphere average about 380 parts per million (ppm), or about 0.04 %. Current estimates of the human-induced fraction are about 5% of the 0.04%, or about 0.002%.

    Let’s talk economics. The US government has defined a strategy (McCain-Lieberman) which on best-case seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions of CO2 by 31,400 tons/year by 2050. The calculated temperature reduction due to this “improvement”: 0.04 degrees Celsius, or 0.08 degrees Fahrenheit. The calculated cost: $1.3 trillion. Another one of those trillion dollar “deals” for America.

    Earth’s temperature has been rising steadily since around 1750, the end of the Little Ice Age. This temperature increase is independent of CO2 concentration. In fact, what the data shows is that CO2 concentration increases well after the temperature increases on a global scale. Water vapor makes up 90% of the greenhouse gas mix, and is the dominant factor in any greenhouse effects.

    If CO2 were a pollutant, then why would our US submarines allow an environmental concentration of this very same gas in the neighborhood of 8,000 ppm? It is unconscionable that our government is demanding that we try to regulate the concentration of this gas in the atmosphere, knowing full well that concentrations more than 20 times that amount produce absolutely no ill effects on American sailors.

    34,000 American scientists, including myself, have signed a Petition demanding that the United States disassociate from the Kyoto Protocol, and instead follow the actual data and evidence which clearly shows that CO2 presents not even the slightest potential for damage or risk to our environment. It is high time the fraud, deceit and misinformation being disseminated and thrust upon the American public be brought to a screeching halt.

    If any government representative wishes to debate any aspect of this matter, I would welcome that opportunity, anytime, anywhere.

    Dennis Hedke
    Geophysicist
    Wichita, KS

  • Share in the green-energy boom and quit fighting

    Share in the green-energy boom. That’s the title of Rhonda Holman’s editorial in Sunday’s Wichita Eagle.

    It’s backed up in today’s paper by Enough fighting over coal plants. This editorial is notable for a few points.

    Holman makes an argument against the plants by noting that it’s likely that the Obama administration will impose regulation or taxation of these plants. But these plans are unwise and will harm the American economy. Hopefully the Omaba administration will realize this.

    She says the plants will stick “the state with all 11 million tons of carbon dioxide.” If carbon emissions are a problem, it’s because of its contribution to global warming or climate change. It doesn’t matter where the carbon dioxide is produced. Its effect is the same.

    In this argument, she treats carbon emissions as though they were local pollutants. Coal plants do produce these, but they’ve been greatly reduced through technology. Further, local pollutants are of entirely different character from carbon emissions.

    Readers of the Wichita Eagle should be asking if Holman doesn’t know this, or if she does know it, why does she say these things?

    It’s a good question. Facts are sometimes in short supply among radical environmentalists.

    But the precise content of these editorials is not as important as the premises they’re based on. These are that we must reduce carbon dioxide emissions in order to save the planet, and that we can create a lot of jobs and wealth by doing so.

    The science behind global warming is not at all settled. See Global Warming Rope-a-Dope for an example.

    As far as green jobs producing wealth, my post Green energy policies causing harm in Europe reports how green jobs in Spain end up costing $774,000 each.

    In Academic Study Challenges Projections of Green Jobs, read about a study that concludes “lack of sound research methods, erroneous economic assumptions and technological omissions have routinely been utilized to lend support, rather than provide legitimate analysis, to major public policies and government spending initiatives.”

    We need to base Kansas energy policy on facts and reason.

  • Articles of Interest

    Bailout costs rise, local election turnout, health care, light bulbs, newspapers, Kansas coal prospects

    Estimate of TARP’s Cost to Taxpayers Increases (Wall Street Journal) “The Congressional Budget Office has quietly altered its estimate of the ultimate cost to taxpayers of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, now figuring the initiative will be much more expensive in the long run than it previously figured. In January, the CBO pegged the ultimate cost to taxpayers of the $700 billion TARP at $189 billion. When the agency issued revised numbers in late March, it revised that to $356 billion, a change that drew little attention.” I don’t imagine this will be the last time we see the cost of bailouts rising.

    Expected Turnout For Tuesday’s Election: 12 Percent (Brent Wistrom in the Wichita Eagle) “The six candidates for Wichita City Council have clashed on many fronts. But they agree on one thing. The projected turnout for Tuesday’s election is dismal.”

    That’s ridiculous (Letter to the editor of the Wichita Eagle) A letter-writer makes the case for government provided health care by illustrating a scenario where if a citizen calls for police or fire assistance, they’ll have to make payment arrangements before receiving service. This, of course, is a ridiculous comparison and ignores the context in which these services are provided. Besides, it wouldn’t be a bad thing to look into private provision of police and fire protection.

    Climate Change’s Dim Bulbs (George F. Will in the Washington Post) Will comments on some of the problems with compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL), as recently noted in a New York Times article The Bulb That Saved the Planet May Be a Little Less Than Billed. He concludes: “Worrywarts wonder what will happen when a lazy or careless, say, 10 percent of 300 million Americans put their worn-out bulbs in the trash. Stop worrying. What do you think? That Congress, architect of the ethanol industry and designer of automobiles, does not think things through?”

    Life After Newspapers (Michael Kinsley in the Washington Post) Kinsley claims that people are getting more news and analysis than ever. It’s just online. If true — I was not aware of this — then there is hope for newspaper companies to survive: “Sorry, but people who have grown up around computers find reading the news on paper just as annoying as you find reading it on a screen. … If your concern is grander — that if we don’t save traditional newspapers we will lose information vital to democracy — you are saying that people should get this information whether or not they want it. That’s an unattractive argument: shoving information down people’s throats in the name of democracy. But this really isn’t a problem. As many have pointed out, more people are spending more time reading news and analysis than ever before. They’re just doing it online.”

    Sebelius holding coal cards (Tim Carpenter in the Topeka Capital-Journal) Analysis of the “coal bill,” which passed the Kansas house, but with fewer votes than it has in the past. House Speaker Mike O’Neal said earlier this year that there would be enough votes in the house to override the governor’s promised veto, but it looks like the vote count is moving in the wrong direction.