|
|
|
Thought Police American Style |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Thursday, 12 June 2008 |
 I have the greatest respect for Tom Tryon from the Sarasota Herald -Tribune. In his column, "Age-based stereotypes go unchallenged as campaign unfolds", Tom comes to the defense of Senator John McCain.
As a conservative and supporter of Senator McCain I appreciate that. Thanks, Tom.
However, as an America I am not concerned by comments made by late night comedians about Senator McCain's age as I am about them not being able to talk about Senator Obama's race. Why can't late night comedians make stereotypical jokes about Senator Obama being black? The answer: Political Correctness.
David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister, once said, "The test of democracy is freedom of criticism." This is the problem. Don't get me wrong. I do not want hate speech or name calling. Certainly not cursing. Rather I want "freedom of criticism".
There are groups in America that have made any public criticism about them off limits. These groups include blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals, Muslims, and others. We have seen well known talk show hosts like Don Imus fired because of one critical statement about black women. We have seen a Senator not reelected due to a joke using the word "macaca". We have seen people of honest background and with good intentions called racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and bigots.
What we have in America today are "thought police". The "thought police" invoke their "code of silence pogroms" on those that criticize them. A pogrom means to "to wreak havoc, to demolish violently". That is what the 'thought police" do. They destroy the critic by invoking the pogrom of "political correctness".
It is forbidden to say Radical Islamist but it permissible to say dirty Zionist. It is just fine to produce public art that displays Jesus Christ's image in urine but it is forbidden to desecrate the Koran. It is alright for journalists and commentators to to curse the President of the United States but journalists and commentators cannot identify the killer of a mother and unborn child as a black man or the child molester of a 8 year old boy a homosexual when writing or reporting a story. It is applauded when we joke about Jews, Christians, Evangelicals, and Red Necks but forbidden to joke about Allah, print cartoons of Mohammed, or punish those that curse America from the pulpit. It's just not politically correct.
Tony Perkins wrote an article on how our neighbors in Canada have created their own form of "thought police" and named it the Human Rights Commission. Here is the sad and shocking story of political correctness gone amuck:
"Nowhere have politicians more miserably failed that test than in Alberta, Canada, where the gatekeepers of political correctness--the Human Rights Commission (HRC)--have sentenced a pastor to a lifetime of silence. The case was initiated in 2002, when Rev. Stephen Boissoin published letters to the editor opposing same-sex "marriage" in the Red Deer Advocate.
At the time, Canada was embroiled in a debate over whether to legalize counterfeit marriage across the country. When Professor Darren Lund of Calgary read Boissoin's editorials, he filed a complaint with the Alberta HRC, alleging that the content of the articles was "hateful." The Commission appointed a tribunal to investigate Boissoin, led by an unelected bureaucrat Lori Andreachuk. Last November, Andreachuk found Boissoin guilty of discrimination and, without the benefit of his testimony, forbade him from uttering "anything disparaging about homosexuals."
Notice that Andreachuk does not ban him from speaking about anything "illegal" but bars him from any negativity toward gays and lesbians. The official punishment, issued without so much as a public hearing, includes everything from personal emails to congregational sermons. As if the lifetime speech ban were not tyrannical enough, Andreachuk also ordered Boissoin to compensate Professor Lund, who was not a victim of the so-called "hate crime," $5,000. Under the terms of his sentencing, the Reverend must "cease publishing...remarks about homosexuals" and submit a written apology to Lund for publication in the Red Deer Advocate.
Ezra Levant, who is under similar scrutiny for printing cartoons about Mohammed, notes in a new column, "[Boissoin] has to publicly humiliate himself, by publicly declaring his contrition--a contrition he does not feel--and his abandonment of his deeply-held religious beliefs."
With all respect Tom I really wanted you to say that so long as the discourse is civil all topics are on the table. With freedom of speech comes the freedom to criticize without retribution.
Tom, as a journalist, you should be more worried about the limits put on you and your fellow journalists by the New York Times Manual of Style and Usage.
What America has is not "freedom of criticism" but rather "political correctness". |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 12 June 2008 )
|
|
|
Cheap Oil is a Right! |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Thursday, 12 June 2008 |
 The developed world of one billion people on a per capita basis, consumes and wastes 32 times more than the “developing world” of 5.5 billion as Jared Diamond, the well known author and professor at UCLA reminds us. Globalization of jobs and communication technology has raised the wealth, and aspirations of the developing world. China with a population 4 times ours has a per capita consumption rate about 2.9 greater than the developing world and is growing at about an 9% annual rate. The impact of China’s greatly increased consumption rate is already apparent in rising prices for commodities and raw materials.
Will it be possible for the world to support the increase in consumption? Conservation and reduction of wasteful practices can help but is insufficient. What is needed is a profusion of low cost energy through existing and new technologies. Energy is not only key to our lifestyle and economy but also key to agriculture. The high yields of our crops come from energy intensive agriculture utilizing fertilizer, mechanization and often genetically modified seeds. U. S. agricultural productivity is one key resource we take for granted. Increases in consumption by the developing world, Australia’s long drought, corn based ethanol, and increasing energy costs are the main drivers of skyrocketing food prices.
Reducing the cost of energy first begins with removing the constraints we have put on oil production and refining. Liquid fuels such as biodiesel, cellulosic ethanol, oils from algae, and fuel from coal (Sasol, a South African company provides 36% of their countries liquid fuel from coal.) should be encouraged. Renewable energy (wind, solar, hydro and tidal), nuclear plants and improved coal plants are also part of the solution. The capital necessary to develop these is readily available.
I believe, Americans realize that political posturing is placing our economy in jeopardy. Our government must develop a common sense national energy policy, which includes removal of the numerous government impediments to success. To further encourage investment a subsidy to alternate technologies should be required if oil falls below a pre-established price. As we have seen in the past OPEC can lower prices drastically and discourage competitive sources.
Our present mix of energy technologies and constraints on new sources is partly to blame for the rise in the price of grain and rice. Today, the lack of a rational national policy is resulting in the poor becoming even poorer. On our present path competition for energy and food will lead to a decline in our standard of living while strife in the world will increase. by Bruce Zeitlin Bruce Zeitlin is the retired President of Supergenics LLC an applied research and development company which developed superconductors for the Dept of Energy under Small Business Innovation Grants. Bruce retired in 1998 as Corporate Vice President of Intermagnetics General Inc. and General Manager of APD Cryogenics a wholly owned subsidiary of Intermagnetics (Since acquired by Philips Medical Systems). Created and managed IGC Advanced Superconductors, at the time the largest manufacturer of low temperature superconducting materials in the world. The company developed and manufactured materials for the first superconducting accelerator, the Tevatron at Fermi Lab. The materials are primarily used in MRI magnets, high energy physics accelerators, fusion research and NMR magnets. |
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 16 June 2008 )
|
|
|
White Al Qaeda - Part 2 |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Thursday, 12 June 2008 |
 The following are excerpts from an article by James Brandon from the Jamestown Foundation.
"Until recently, the idea of white British converts to Islam carrying out suicide bomb attacks in towns in England’s quiet, rural southwest would have been dismissed as fiction or fantasy. However, in the last two months two such attempts appear to have failed....
Andrew Ibrahim, a 19-year-old convert to Islam, was arrested by police on April 16 in Bristol. The following day, police raided his flat in the city, finding quantities of Hexamethylene Triperoxide Diamine (HMTD), a homemade explosive, along with two homemade vests, ball bearings, air gun pellets, nails and screws, wired circuitry, batteries and electric bulb filaments. Local newspapers reported that Ibrahim, who was born to an English mother and an Egyptian Coptic Christian father, had once been a shy, drug-taking music fan with dyed hair and facial piercings (North Somerset News, April 21). Around 2005-2006, he converted to Islam and began growing a beard and wearing Salafi-style clothes....
At lunchtime on May 22, Nicky Reilly, a 22-year-old convert to Islam, attempted to detonate three bombs in a crowded restaurant in Exeter. Only one of the devices exploded, lightly wounding Reilly as he handled it in the restaurant’s toilet. He was arrested soon afterward. Reilly suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome—a form of autism—and has obsessive compulsive disorder, reportedly washing his hands up to 50 times a day (Sunday People, June 1). Despite this, Reilly was intelligent and capable, apparently constructing a new type of improvised bomb made of sodium hydroxide, aluminum foil strips, kerosene and nails (Daily Telegraph, June 5). When he was 18, Reilly split up with his girlfriend and became depressed, self-harming and attempted suicide (Daily Telegraph, May 23). Soon afterward, he discovered Islam and converted, changing his name to “Mohammed Rasheed.”
Simon (or Suleiman) Keeler, 36, was found guilty in May of inciting terrorism and encouraging funding of terrorism, becoming the UK’s first white convert jailed for terrorism offenses. Keeler had been a prominent member of al-Muhajiroun, a radical pro-jihadist group, after converting to Islam in 1996 while unemployed and was regularly interviewed by the media. He was convicted for encouraging listeners at London’s prominent Regent’s Park mosque in November 2004 to fight British and U.S. troops in Iraq and to give money to support terrorism (Metropolitan Police press release, April 17).
There are clear similarities between all three converts. Both Reilly and Keeler were from working-class backgrounds, had limited formal education, and may have felt excluded from Britain’s knowledge-based economy. Ibrahim, a privileged drop-out reduced to living in a homeless shelter, may have felt similarly rejected by society. All three were also attracted to radical Islam at a time of personal crisis; embracing Islamism’s moral certainties was both a political statement and a solution to personal turmoil. Ultimately, all these converts completely rejected their Western background, adopted Arabic names and even mimicked the cultural—as opposed to Islamic—characteristics of their Muslim friends."
To read the full article go here. |
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 16 June 2008 )
|
|
|
White Al Qaeda |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Thursday, 12 June 2008 |
 This article consists of excerpts from a recently declassified intelligence assessment from Canada's Integrated Threat Assessment Center written on June 29, 2007.
A "lone wolf" is an individual who is inspired by a terrorist ideology or organization to conduct attacks, but acts independently, without established ties or accountability. Lone wolves do not associate with fellow-conspirators.
The Internet has become an important catalyst for inspiring homegrown extremists, including "lone wolves", by providing ideological motivation, encouragement, justification, target information, and instruction on techniques, all in an anonymous environment. Lone wolves motivated by Islamist extremism are a new concern. Several incidents carried out or planned by these extremist-inspired individual attackers have occurred in the US.
For the purpose of this assessment, a "lone wolf" is an individual who is inspired by a terrorist ideology or organization to conduct independent attacks. They may receive support from friends, but plan and conduct the attack alone. Lone wolves in North America have traditionally taken their inspiration from right-wing groups, single-issue causes, or national liberation movements. Lone wolves motivated by Islamic extremism are a recent development. Islamist terrorist strategists are now advocating that Muslims take action at a grassroots level, without waiting for instructions. Non-ideological factors, such as personal revenge, greed or coercion, do not appear to be motivators.
Lone-wolf attacks stem from the strategy of Leaderless Resistance (LR). LR emphasizes having no organizational structure and no formalized leadership. Small cells, or individuals, are self-sustaining, driven by ideology and capable of independent judgement and action. Fictionalized scenarios of LR, written by right-wing theorist William Pierce in his books, The Turner Diaries and Hunter, inspired lone wolves. Scenarios described in Hunter were later acted out by individuals such as:
Eric Robert Rudolph (1996 Atlanta Olympic bomber, also targeted abortion providers and gay bars, killing two and injuring over 100)
James Kopp (targeted abortion providers, killing one doctor in Amherst, New York)
Bufford Furrow (targeted a Jewish community centre in Los Angeles, killing one and injuring five)
Right-wing "lone wolves" have also attempted to obtain and use chemical and biological agents in their attacks. In April 2006, white supremacist Demetrius "Van" Crocker was convicted of trying to obtain Sarin nerve gas and C-4 explosives, which he intended to use against black residents in Jackson, Tennessee.
Extremists motivated by single issues such as the environment or the animal rights movement have also adopted the lone-wolf strategy. Radicals within these two movements have claimed responsibility for more than $100 million in damage in North America during the past two decades. Activists can become part of the eco-terror movement simply by carrying out an illegal action on its behalf. David Barbarash, a supporter of the Canadian Animal Liberation Front (ALF), claimed that the ALF "is not a group or a club that you can join, but a concept which is only realized when an action takes place under that name". Modeled after ALF, the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) consists of people described on its website as "anonymous not only to the public but also to one another".
Growing Regard for Lone-wolf Tactics among Islamist Extremists
Similar to the shift that occurred in right-wing groups to lone wolves and small cells, the success of counterterrorism security forces against AQ and its affiliates may be bringing about another evolution in Islamist extremist strategy. Islamist extremists now promote a model that encourages independent, grassroots extremists to conduct their own attacks.
One of the most important advocates of acts of terrorism carried out by small, autonomous cells or individuals is Abu Musab al-Suni (Mustafa bin Abd al-Qadir Setmariam Nasar), a prominent terrorist lecturer, trainer and military instructor. In his book The Call for an International Islamic Resistance, al-Suni outlined a strategy for a global conflict on as many fronts as possible and taking the form of resistance by small cells or individuals, rather than traditional guerrilla warfare. To avoid penetration and defeat by security forces, he advised that organizational links be kept to an absolute minimum.
Other more anonymous calls for spontaneous Islamist extremist action (which may include lone-wolf attacks) appear on the Internet. For instance, in a 2003 article on a extremist Internet forum, Sada al Jihad (Echoes of Jihad), Usama bin Laden sympathizers were encouraged to take action without waiting for instructions.
As a subset of homegrown Islamist terrorism in North America, lone-wolf attacks or planned attacks seem to be on the increase. Several such cases have been recorded since 9/11:
Extremists and terrorists worldwide use the Internet for a variety of purposes. For the lone wolf, it provides instruction and provides inspiration and motivation, all within an anonymous environment.
Islamist extremist web sites offer not only theoretical and religious instruction but also practical on-line training courses that urge visitors to take action on their own. For example, the comprehensive Encyclopedia of Preparation for Jihad is available online. Professional, video-formatted instructional materials detailing various explosive manufacturing recipes have also begun to circulate widely on the web in the past two years, along with at least 22 other separate audio-visual terrorist manuals.
Lone-wolf Attacks in Canada
So far there have been no Islamist-inspired lone-wolf attacks in Canada. However, a number of lone-wolf and small-cell attacks motivated by other causes have occurred since the 1970s. Ideologies motivating attacks in Canada are primarily: race-based hate; eco-terrorism; animal rights; and the anti-abortion movement. Political and religiously motivated issues in the Sikh, Armenian and Sri Lankan communities, stemming from their countries of origin, have also inspired lone-wolf attacks. The religiously motivated "Sons of Freedom" Doukhobors have inspired uniquely Canadian lone wolves. Canada has been named on at least four occasions, by AQ or its affiliates, as a legitimate target. Further, in June 2006, Canadian police and security forces disrupted an AQ-inspired homegrown cell (the Toronto 17).
ITAC Assessment
Lone wolves act without established ties or accountability to leadership. As they are self initiating and carry out their attacks individually,
The Internet is helpful to an individual who may be preparing to conduct a lone-wolf attack, providing ideological motivation, encouragement, justification, all within an anonymous environment. |
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 16 June 2008 )
|
|
|
Carbon is our friend! |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Wednesday, 11 June 2008 |
 The Sarasota Herald-Tribune has a major article written by Zac Anderson titled, "Not so cool: Sarasota-Bradenton tops for 'greenhouse gas emissions".
Actually, the Sarasota-Bradenton area should get a medal for producing more CO2 than other areas. We are helping our plants grow because you see CO2 is plant food. When we breath we emit CO2. The plants love us.
Zac spends the entire article talking about and to global warming alarmists. He quotes Jerry Karnas, Florida climate project director for Environmental Defense who states "You have the perfect storm for a carbon nightmare." Carbon nightmare? Really? Freddy Kruger is a nightmare, not our good friend carbon.
Of course our very own Florida Representative Keith Fitzgerald is quoted. He states, "Studies like this [Brookings Institution study] are important,"...They give us evidence to back up these efforts to change our growth and transportation patterns."
"This drives home the point we've been making as far as encouraging redevelopment, urban revitalization and the importance of our land use pattern," said County Administrator Jim Ley.
"Change our growth and transportation patterns" and "land use pattern" are code for destroying our local economy with more restrictions and taxes on energy, gasoline, development and of course us citizens. All in the glorious name of reducing CO2 emissions.
In Sarasota County, FL there is a movement right now within a group called SCOPE to require 100% of new development and 50% of existing buildings to have solar water heaters within five years. I sit on the committee looking at this proposal from the SCOPE SEA conference. I will be reporting out on the results soon.
The interesting thing is that Zac, who is a reporter, does not discuss the other side of the issue. I always thought that reporters were supposed to present both sides and let us decide. That is fair and balanced. Clearly Zac is not.
The only quote he uses at the very end of the article is from Rep. Paige Kreegel, R-Punta Gorda, who favors a free-market approach."We can talk all we want about conservation of energy and people not moving out towards the periphery, but nothing does it more than $4 gas," Rep. Paige said. We agree with Rep. Page. |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 12 June 2008 )
|
|
|
Liberal media bias on the economy |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Monday, 09 June 2008 |
 It wasn’t Bush, it wasn’t greedy corporations, or free trade, or history’s most over-predicted recession. It was not the oil companies, income inequality, or the excesses of cowboy capitalism. None of these things caused the unemployment rate to jump a half a percentage point in one month. Ask yourself a few questions: Why did unemployment surge at a time when unemployment compensation claims are historically low? More to the point, how could unemployment spike this much without a coinciding spike in corporate lay-offs? The answer to all of these questions is same: because very few people lost jobs last month. This huge jump in the size of the unemployed comes from new entrants to the economy – hundreds of thousands of them. In short, well over 600,000 people who were not job seekers in April became job seekers in May. And who starts looking for work at the end of Spring? That’s right – students. Hundreds of thousands of students are looking for work right now, and they’re not finding it. Congress is to blame. Last year Congressional Democrats (along with some Stockholm-Syndromed Republicans) passed the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, which started a phased hike of the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $7.25. Free market economists warned them that this would increase unemployment – that rapid increases in unemployment compensation hit teens and minorities the hardest. But the class-warriors are running the people’s house now, and they would hear none of that, so they took to the floor, let loose the dogs of demagoguery, and saddled America’s pizza parlors, municipal swimming pools, house painting businesses and lawn mowing services with a huge cost increase. Now, we see the perfectly logical outcome of wage controls – rising unemployment among the most economically vulnerable. The chart above tells the story: Friday’s unemployment spike occurred overwhelmingly among teenagers, and secondarily among African Americans. Just like we said it would. A kid who is at entry level of job skills may be a good deal at 5 bucks an hour, but not at 7. Our anointed leaders gets to glory in their generosity (with other people’s money) and just so long as very few people in the media know that a demand curve slopes downward (a good bet, there), no one calls them on it. This summer the left will make political lemonade out of a tough student job market. Heck, it may provide a small army of angry unemployed youth to man the campaign, hungry for hope and (loose) change, never once realizing that they’re working to entrench the leftie war on business which left them jobless this summer in the first place. Thanks to Jerry Bowyer from Patriot Post for this article. |
|
|
Republicans want to fix the problem of high gas prices, Democrats want to fix blame on oil companies |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Monday, 09 June 2008 |
|
 Not that we want to point fingers at our friends across the aisle. We have always believed that we should fix the problem and not the blame. However the following from our fellow bloggers at Power Line Blog shows where and by whom America's energy policy has been stalled.
For several decades, the Democratic Party has pursued policies designed to drive up the cost of petroleum, and therefore gas at the pump. Remarkably, the Democrats don't seem to have taken much of a political hit from the current spike in gas prices. Probably that's because most people don't realize how different the two parties' energy policies have been.
Congressman Roy Blunt put together these data to highlight the differences between House Republicans and House Democrats on energy policy:
ANWR Exploration
House Republicans: 91% Supported
House Democrats: 86% Opposed Coal-to-Liquid
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 78% Opposed
Oil Shale Exploration
House Republicans: 90% Supported
House Democrats: 86% Opposed
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration
House Republicans: 81% Supported
House Democrats: 83% Opposed
Refinery Increased Capacity
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 96% Opposed
SUMMARY
91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas.
86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas...
John Hinderaker, PowerLineBlog.com |
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 16 June 2008 )
|
|
|
Radical Islam's war against the West |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Monday, 09 June 2008 |
 Today the Sarasota Herald-Tribune again uses the war against Radical Islam to bash President Bush and his administration.
In their editorial, "Connecting the dots", they tell the same old story that, "Before the war in Iraq, President Bush and his chief associates claimed they knew about a solid link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, the international terrorist organization that attacked New York and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001." This statement is meaningless, irrelevant and myopic.
What the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, liberals, anti-war proponents and the Democratic Party are missing is that Radical Islam is at war with the West. Radical Islamists want to kill you and me. The question is will we fight back or capitulate.
Tom Trento, Director of the Florida Security Council put it best when he said, "When 'obsessed' people supported by historic precedent and philosophic foundation proclaim war against you and plot your death and destruction you better damn well take them seriously. Sadly, Americans are divided, some for political reasons, some out of ignorance, as to whether radical Islamism is indeed America’s number one problem."
"This division hastens our demise." says Tom.
Tom points out, "In order to be victorious in this global war on terror - which has two primary targets, the 'Great Satan,' America and the 'Little Satan,' Israel - we need a unified and united effort by a majority of Americans over a protracted period of time."
Tom goes on to say, "Currently, there are a significant number of Americans who understand this ideological battle and fully comprehend the deadly desires of our Islamist enemies and the catastrophic consequences of not properly responding at all required levels. Conversely, there are a significant number of Americans who do not understand this ideological battle, have no real comprehension of the related cataclysmic consequences and do not believe our Islamist enemies either desire or are capable of our complete destruction."
"As with most controversial issues, a considerable number of Americans are in the middle trying to figure out if we should conform ourselves to a cultural mindset that attempts to appease and befriend our enemies, or if we should adapt a resilient transformational posture preparing for an ideological war underscored by military battle," according to Tom.
Those who oppose the war do so at the risk of America and Israel. The Sarasota Herald-Tribune editorial board, either out of ignorance or ideology, have "no real comprehension of the related cataclysmic consequences and do not believe our Islamist enemies either desire or are capable of our complete destruction."
Radical Islam looks at Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine, Europe, Israel and the United States as simply fronts in their global war against western ideals and ideas. When we stop focusing on minor past details and come to grips with the global nature of this "clear and present danger" can America and our allies win. Otherwise we are doomed.
The war has already come to our shores. If we leave Iraq and Afghanistan the next battle will be in our homeland. Radical Islamists have said so. We must listen to them. |
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 16 June 2008 )
|
|
|
The world produces 85 million barrels of oil a day and uses 86.4 million barrels a day. |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Sunday, 08 June 2008 |
 Waldo Proffitt our friend and columnist for the Sarasota Herald-Tribune writes an interesting article on the high price of gasoline titled, "Will desperation bring change?".
Waldo is hoping, "The high price of filling up the fuel tanks of cars or trucks just might motivate millions of voters to demand elected officials "do something" or get out of the way for those who will."
The time to do something has long passed. In 1995 President Bill Clinton vetoed an energy bill that passed both houses of Congress to drill in ANWR in Alaska. Had he signed that bill we would be pumping at least 1,000,000 barrels a day of American oil into our economy.
Anyway, let's look at the specific proposals of Waldo and present our view on each of them.
Waldo's Proposal 1:
Waldo states, "The first thing we can do is conserve energy, including electricity, because much of our oil and natural gas is used to generate electricity. Kilowatt hours saved are barrels of oil saved."
Actually this is not true. The issue is not conservation, it is where we get our power from. Fifty percent of all of America's electricity comes from coal. If we really want to save oil and natural gas, which is much more expensive than coal, we would build more coal plants like they are planning to do in Europe. America is the Saudi Arabia of coal. We have billions of tons of coal. Enough to last us at least 200 years.
If you are worried about increased pollution by using coal don't be. In fact the energy industry as a whole has done a fantastic job reducing pollutants according to the James Madison Institute.
According to America's Power Florida only gets 29.2% of our power from coal. We get 16.9% from petroleum, 38% from natural gas and 0.1% from hydroelectric. If we went full tilt to coal we would dramatically reduce our costs and save oil and natural gas. Because of our heavy use of oil and natural gas Florida is the 13th most expensive state for power generation.
For example, our neighbors in Georgia, who are ranked 25th in cost of electricity, pay 7.63 cents per KWH of electricity, while we pay 10.45 cents per KWH. The difference? Georgia gets 62.7% of its energy from coal, 23.2% from nuclear, o.6% from petroleum and 9.4% from natural gas. Get the picture?
Waldo's Proposal 2.
Waldo wants to reduce our dependence on oil by a combination of conservation and efficiency. He says, "for starters we could raise mandated auto fuel efficiency by, say, 40 percent. Of course, increased production of hybrids would make it easier to reach that goal quickly."
The problem is conservation and greater efficiency are not the answers. According to the Manhattan Institute, "The history of the twentieth century is one of gigantic increases in efficiency—and even larger increases in consumption. The American economy has experienced massive efficiency gains: for each unit of energy, we produce more than twice as much GDP today than we did in 1950. Yet during that period of time, our national total energy consumption has tripled. Paradoxically, when it comes to energy, the more we save, the more we consume."
“Efficiency fails to curb demand because it lets more people do more, and do it faster—and more/more/faster invariably swamps all the efficiency gains,” Peter Huber and Mark Mills state in The Bottomless Well. Or, as Huber characterized this “efficiency paradox” in a 2001 Forbes column: “More efficient jet engines … cheaper tickets … more passengers … more jets in the air.” The same holds true for cars, lightbulbs, power plants, and everything else that uses energy.
Waldo Proposal 3:
Waldo wants, "Solar. Great strides are being made in the conversion of sunlight to heat to steam to electricity -- the most significant being ways to store solar energy. One of the most promising is to use the sun to heat molten salt to high temperatures and then use the molten salt to make steam to drive turbines at night or on cloudy days."
Here are some cons of solar energy from PowerPedia: - Limited areal power density: For electrical generation with photovoltaics, the average irradiation power density is approximately 1 kW/m2 usable by 8-15% efficient solar panels.
- Intermittency: It is not available at night and is reduced when there is cloud cover, decreasing the reliability of peak output performance or requiring a means of energy storage. For power grids to stay functional at all times, the addition of substantial amounts of solar generated electricity would require one or more of the following;
- energy storage facilities, such as Pumped-storage hydroelectric facilities, are needed to 'gapfill' low points in solar generation
- other renewable energy sources (i.e., wind, geothermal, tidal, wave, ocean power, etc) would need to be active, or
- backup conventional powerplants would be needed. There is an energy cost to keep coal-burning power plants 'hot', which includes the burning of coal to keep boilers at temperature. Natural gas power plants can quickly come up to full load without requiring significant standby idling. Without changes in the energy supply and control system (such as a shift to using current hydropower as nighttime/backup across wider regions or the incorporation of more renewable power), few coal power plants could be displaced, according to critics.
- Locations at high latitudes or with frequent substantial cloud cover offer reduced potential for solar power use.
- Solar cells produce DC which must be converted to AC when used in currently existing distribution grids. This incurs an energy penalty of 5-10%.
Waldo's proposal 4:
According to Waldo, "Wind. With rotors nearing 500 feet in diameter, windmills are among the more efficient sources of non-fossil power. Some people consider them unsightly, onshore or offshore. I would think their visual impression no worse than that of an open-pit coal mine. They are getting pretty close to being competitive in price to oil."
Let us give you a real example of using wind power. Shorty after Governor Crist signed three Executive Orders last year capping carbon emissions the plans to build five coal plants in Florida by 2012 were canceled. These plants combined would have produced 4,150 MW of much needed power for our state. To make up this deficit using wind power we did some rough calculations on what it would take to make up for the 4,150 MW of power.
Here is what we learned:
1. The Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center in Texas remains the largest wind farm in the world with a total capacity of 735 megawatts (MW) spread across approximately 47,000 acres in Taylor and Nolan counties near Abilene in west central Texas. The wind plant consists of 291 1.5-MW wind turbines from General Electric and 130 2.3-MW wind turbines from Siemens.
2. We used the bigger 2.3-MW wind turbines (which are 370+ feet tall) from Siemens to meet our current power deficit of 4,150 MW. That means we would need 1,805 wind turbines. We know from the Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center that they needed 47,000 acres for their 421 wind turbines. So we in Florida would need 4.29 times the acres of the Texas wind farm or approximately 201,508 acres.
Bottom line we would need approximately 201,508 acres of land to simply replace the capacity of the cancelled plants. Of course, Florida can put the wind farms in the Gulf of Mexico and bypass the need to use massive amounts of land. Either way the solution of using wind power is difficult at best to meet the current deficit, let alone any future energy needs due to growth.
Waldo's Proposal 5:
Waldo demands, "Ethanol. No, not ethanol made from corn. That has proven to be a mistake, driving up the price of corn for human and animal consumption beyond any acceptable level. Rather ethanol from sugar, biomass, agricultural wastes, and non-food crops."
Clearly the use of ethanol from corn, which the environmentalists and folks like Waldo raved about is bad. Fertilizer runoff from Mid West corn fields used to produce ethanol has caused the "dead zone" in the gulf to grow, food prices to go up and food riots to occur in many parts of the world. So what is so great about ethanol from sugar, biomass, agricultural wastes and non-food crops? Nothing.
A dark cloud looming over biofuels is whether producing them actually requires more energy than they can generate. After factoring in the energy needed to grow crops and then convert them into biofuels, Cornell University researcher David Pimental concludes that the numbers just don’t add up. His 2005 study found that producing ethanol from corn required 29 percent more energy than the end product itself is capable of generating. He found similarly troubling numbers in making biodiesel from soybeans.
“There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel,” Pimentel says. Waldo's Proposal 6:
Waldo states, "I have not mentioned coal or nuclear. More reliance on coal, of which we have a gracious plenty, is not an option unless we can burn it in a way which does not add to the threat of global warming. As of now, we do not have a proven technology to do it. Nuclear is fine with me, but lots of people find it scary, and it may not be politically feasible."
Actually there is a great technology called "clean coal". The federal government said yesterday [May 7, 2008] that it will spend $61.1 million for a clean-coal project in Ohio, a major step in deciding whether it is commercially feasible to burn Midwest coal without emitting the carbon dioxide thought to cause global warming.
The money will be funneled to a demonstration project in the Mount Simon Sandstone formation in Darke County in western Ohio.
About 1 million tons of carbon dioxide from an ethanol facility will be injected 3,000 feet into the sandstone formation.
Proponents contend that the process, known as carbon sequestration, is crucial for the future of Ohio coal. If electric utility plants can burn coal without causing global warming, it would provide a major boost to Ohio's coal industry.
We have written many times about the hoax that the primary cause of global climate change is human caused. Finally, we are big proponents of nuclear power. It is clean, cheap, safe and renewable. We are big fans, as is Dr. Meg Lowman from New College, in both fusion and fission nuclear power.
What is the real problem with higher gas prices? Supply.
We have shown above that altering demand (conservation or greater efficiency) does not cause use to go down. Rather use increases with conservation and efficiency.
Prices do go down when you increase supply. The best way to lower energy prices, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil, is to accelerate production of all forms of domestic energy.
We have taken off the table drilling for more fossil fuels in Alaska, the East and West coasts and in the Gulf of Mexico. We have not built a new gas refinery in over 30 years. We have not built a new nuclear power plant in over 40 years.
It is time, as Waldo says, to ""do something" or get out of the way for those who will". We agree. Waldo get out of the way. |
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 16 June 2008 )
|
|
|
Use our own natural resources or perish |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Sunday, 08 June 2008 |
|
 We continue to be amazed at the editorial board of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. In their column, "Same old drill", they take the totally illogical position that we should not drill for our own oil.
Their rational is it will take us ten years to get the oil flowing. This was the same rational that caused former President Bill Clinton to veto an energy bill in 1995 that would allow drilling in ANWR. If that bill had been signed we would have 1 million barrels of American owned oil flowing now into our economy every day. According to Robert J. Samuelson of the Washington Post, "It may surprise Americans to discover that the United States is the third-largest oil producer, behind Saudi Arabia and Russia. We could be producing more, but Congress has put large areas of potential supply off-limits. These include the Atlantic and Pacific coasts and parts of Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. By government estimates, these areas may contain 25 billion to 30 billion barrels of oil (against about 30 billion barrels of proven U.S. reserves today) and 80 trillion cubic feet or more of natural gas (compared with about 200 tcf of proven reserves). What keeps these areas closed are exaggerated environmental fears, strong prejudice against oil companies and sheer stupidity. Americans favor both "energy independence" and cheap fuel. They deplore imports -- who wants to pay foreigners? -- but oppose more production in the United States. Got it? The result is a "no-pain energy agenda that sounds appealing but has no basis in reality," writes Robert Bryce in "Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of 'Energy Independence.' " As Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said, "The real common sense solution, as we transition away from dependence on fossil fuels, is to increase the supply of domestic energy. We need to get the government out of the way and allow use of plentiful resources under our control. If Congress stopped penalizing and handcuffing our domestic energy production, we could produce an additional 2.7 to 3 million barrels of oil a day within a relatively short period of time." Senator Cornyn went on to say, "That is why Senate Republicans have introduced legislation, The American Energy Production Act, an important step towards driving down gas prices for all Americans. If enacted, this new legislation would allow access 24 billion barrels of oil—enough oil to supply America for 5 years with no foreign imports. It would also provide for authorization to explore for American oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)." We have shown over and over again that conservation and greater efficiency (like fleet mileage standards) do not work. According to the Manhattan Institute, "The history of the twentieth century is one of gigantic increases in efficiency—and even larger increases in consumption. The American economy has experienced massive efficiency gains: for each unit of energy, we produce more than twice as much GDP today than we did in 1950. Yet during that period of time, our national total energy consumption has tripled. Paradoxically, when it comes to energy, the more we save, the more we consume." Prices do go down when you increase supply. The best way to lower energy prices, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil, is to accelerate production of all forms of domestic energy. We have taken off the table drilling for more fossil fuels in Alaska, the East and West coasts and in the Gulf of Mexico. We have not built a new gas refinery in over 30 years. We have not built a new nuclear power plant in over 40 years. The Sarasota Herald-Tribune is oblivious to the pain caused by high gas and energy prices. All they, and their environmental friends in Congress, care about is reducing carbon emissions. Americans don't care about carbon emissions. What American's care about is cheap reliable energy. The "same old drill" is the solution. Increase supply and reduce price. Economics 101. |
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 11 June 2008 )
|
|
|
Drill, drill, and drill more! |
|
|
|
Written by Dr. Rich Swier
|
|
Sunday, 08 June 2008 |
 The very green Sarasota Herald-Tribune editorial board in their May 13, 2008 column "Same old drill" does not want us to take our own oil out of our own land. We thought that made absolutely no sense.
Now the same editorial board does not want us, in their column "Nuclear power needs attention", to replace existing coal, oil and natural gas power plants with nuclear power plants. This not only makes no sense it is senseless.
So we can't drill for our own oil, mine our own coal and extract natural gas from off shore and Alaska reservoirs. We can't build coal fired, oil fired and natural gas fired plants because they produce green house gases, which the editorial board and environmentalists say cause global warming (go here to read about how we are entering a global cooling period). And now we can't build nuclear power plants that produce zero carbon emissions.
So what is their brilliant solution to our energy crisis? "it is the energy we don't use -- conservation -- that will buy time for renewable strategies."
Does this kind of Pollyanna statement make you want to burn your copy of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune? Well don't because it may add to your carbon footprint and we wouldn't want that would we?
Now we have not built a new nuclear power plant in over 30 years because of, you guessed it, the environmentalists, onerous government regulation, trial lawyers, and liberal media mouthpieces like the Sarasota Herald-Tribune.
Existing nuclear power plants need replacing and new plants using current technology need to be built. The Herald-Tribune states, "As Progress Energy explained, recent reactor designs use "fewer moving parts and more passive fail-safe cooling systems that rely on natural forces of gravity, natural circulation, etc., instead of power supplies and motor-driven components."
The Herald-Tribune does not even talk about the tremendous success of nuclear powered Navy ships in their article. There you have floating nuclear reactors on submarines and aircraft carriers, with thousands of sailors and Marines within yards of the reactors and no incidents, deaths, or accidents. What about that?
As the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) points out, "Nuclear plants are the lowest-cost producer of baseload electricity. The average production cost of 1.76 cents per kilowatt-hour includes the costs of operating and maintaining the plant, purchasing fuel and paying for the management of used fuel."
U.S. nuclear plants are well-designed, operated by trained personnel, defended against attack and prepared in the event of an emergency.
If you want to know all the details on the operations of nuclear power plants go to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission web site.
In terms of nuclear waste the NEI points out, "Under an integrated management approach, used nuclear fuel will remain stored at nuclear power plants in the near term. Eventually, the government will recycle it and place the unusable end product in a repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev.
The solutions to our short term and long term energy needs must include all forms of energy production. We must drill for our own oil and natural gas for national security reasons, not concerns about global warming. We must mine our greatest U.S. wholly owned resource - coal. We must expand clean coal technology research. We must dramatically expand our nuclear power capacity to eventually replace our current coal, oil and natural gas fired plants. And yes we should include solar and wind power in those limited areas where it makes sense.
Our nation, our economy and our way of life depends on cheap and reliable power. Let's get moving now and drill, mine and build more nuclear power plants. We must for the future of our children and grandchildren. |
|
Last Updated ( Monday, 16 June 2008 )
|
|
| << Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next > End >>
| | Results 67 - 77 of 99 |
|
|
