Archive for Energy

We Are All Saudi Now

Not we, I suppose.


Saudi Arabia’s efforts to “drown” American energy producers make the oil-rich theocracy a crucial ally of the environmentalist movement, according to a leading green group.

The House of Saud, the kingdom’s royal family, is “our best ally in the fight against Keystone XL,” according to Paul Rauber, the senior editor of Sierra, the bi-monthly magazine published by the Sierra Club, a leading environmentalist group.

President Barack Obama has threatened to veto legislation expediting approval of the pipeline. However, Rauber said that the government of Saudi Arabia has done more to scuttle Keystone.

“Environmentalists are depending on President Barack Obama’s veto pen to block the project—at least until the State Department issues its final ruling in the matter,” Rauber wrote. “But we have another, even more potent ally in the fight: the House of Saud.”

That’s just the latest thing for which we have to thank the House of Saud:


Free Us From the Prius

You might as well drive around with a bumper sticker that says “My Other Car’s a Blast Furnace”:

“It’s kind of hard to beat gasoline” for public and environmental health, said study co-author Julian Marshall, an engineering professor at the University of Minnesota. “A lot of the technologies that we think of as being clean … are not better than gasoline.”

The key is where the source of the electricity all-electric cars. If it comes from coal, the electric cars produce 3.6 times more soot and smog deaths than gas, because of the pollution made in generating the electricity, according to the study that is published Monday by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. They also are significantly worse at heat-trapping carbon dioxide that worsens global warming, it found.

So pretty, yet so deadly

The study finds all-electric vehicles cause 86 percent more deaths from air pollution than do cars powered by regular gasoline. Coal produces 39 percent of the country’s electricity, according to the Department of Energy.

But if the power supply comes from natural gas, the all-electric car produces half as many air pollution health problems as gas-powered cars do. And if the power comes from wind, water or wave energy, it produces about one-quarter of the air pollution deaths.

Simple. Just call up your power company and order some wave energy. Or go to the ocean yourself and fill a bucket with it.

Hybrids and diesel engines are cleaner than gas, causing fewer air pollution deaths and spewing less heat-trapping gas.

But ethanol isn’t, with 80 percent more air pollution mortality, according to the study.

“If we’re using ethanol for environmental benefits, for air quality and climate change, we’re going down the wrong path,” Hill said.

We’re using ethanol to win the Iowa caucuses. And drive up the price of corn for starving people around the world.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go burn some of that $2.83 gas in my tank so I can fill up on that $2.71 while it lasts.


Feathered Fricassee

We don’t want to gloat, but we told you about this six months ago:

If you don’t remember (one out of so many scoops):

Environmentalists have hit out at a giant new solar farm in the Mojave Desert as mounting evidence reveals birds flying through the extremely hot ‘thermal flux’ surrounding the towers are being scorched.

After years of regulatory tangles around the impact on desert wildlife, the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System opened on Thursday but environmental groups say the nearly 350,000 gigantic mirrors are generating 1000 degree Fahrenheit temperatures which are killing and singing birds.

According to compliance documents released by developer BrightSource Energy last year, dozens of birds were found injured at the site during the building stage.

Poor birds are still flyin’ and dyin':

Workers at a state-of-the-art solar plant in the Mojave Desert have a name for birds that fly through the plant’s concentrated sun rays — “streamers,” for the smoke plume that comes from birds that ignite in midair.

Federal wildlife investigators who visited the BrightSource Energy plant last year and watched as birds burned and fell, reporting an average of one “streamer” every two minutes, are urging California officials to halt the operator’s application to build a still-bigger version.

The investigators want the halt until the full extent of the deaths can be assessed. Estimates per year now range from a low of about a thousand by BrightSource to 28,000 by an expert for the Center for Biological Diversity environmental group.

Same solar plant, same bird massacre. Only the month has changed. At one streamer every two minutes, with an average amount of daylight of 14 hours (dawn and dusk being especially active for birds), I estimate conservatively at least 75,000 birds fried by this one “green” solar plant alone—a lot more than mere “dozens”—since we first reported the problem.

Thank goodness we have wind turbines to fall back on.

President Barack Obama has mounted a second-term drive to combat climate change, proposing first-ever limits on carbon pollution from new and existing power plants.

His plan aims to help move the U.S. from a coal-dependent past into a future fired by wind and solar power, nuclear energy and natural gas.

Bird-hatin’ bastard.


How Many Nuclear Power Plants Does it Take to Illuminate a Light Bulb?

Trick question: they’ve outlawed light bulbs!

And nuclear power plants.

But if you want to make a global warm-monger pant in anticipation (not that you would), show him this graph:

A life-cycle footprint measures the negative impact of human activities on the environment. It’s the amount of green house gases produced, measured in units of carbon dioxide, or CO2.

Better than solar (which fries birds that fly through its concentrated beams), better than wind (which minces birds and bats), better even than burning biomass (like aborted fetuses)—better than all of them is good old clean nuclear power.

As the issue of global warming continues to capture the focus of America and the world, it is vitally important to look at the role nuclear can play in reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that continue to pollute the air and damage our ecosystem.

Nuclear energy is the most “eco-efficient” of all energy sources because it produces the most electricity in relation to its minimal environmental impact. There are no significant adverse effects to water, land, habitat, species and air resources.

Nuclear power plants produce no gases such as nitrogen oxide or sulfur dioxide that could threaten our atmosphere by causing ground-level ozone formation, smog, and acid rain. Nor does nuclear energy produce carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases suspected to cause global warming.

Electricity generated by nuclear avoids almost 700 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year in the U.S. The 2,100 tons of nitrous oxide (N2O) avoided by Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station is the amount of N2O, released in a year by 110,000 passenger cars.

Me, I don’t give a crap about so-called global so-called warming. It’s junk science, peddled by junkie scientists (addicted to government graft). But there are plenty of people out there who do, or claim to. Why do I have to praise the benefits of nuclear power? Where’s Bill McKibben on the issue? Why isn’t Al Gore screaming about it?

The boy can scream when he wants to!

Has anyone seen Memphis? He looks like he ate it.


Wanted: Dead

We’ve written plenty about the mayhem, murder, and peril birds suffer from wind turbines. It’s like Hitchcock in reverse: these slicers and dicers are merciless on our feathered friends, including and especially our national symbol, the bald eagle.

But it’s more than just birds:

DISEASE and heedless management of wind turbines are killing North America’s bats, with potentially devastating consequences for agriculture and human health.

Wind turbines nationwide are estimated to kill between 600,000 and 900,000 bats a year, according to a recent study in the journal BioScience. About half of those lost to turbines are hoary bats, which migrate long distances seasonally throughout North America. Eastern red and silver-haired bats, commonly seen in Central Park in New York City hunting insects at night, are also being killed by turbines by the tens of thousands.

We can’t afford to lose these creatures. In the Northeast, all of our native bat species eat insects. One little brown bat can eat 1,000 mosquitoes in an hour, reducing the potential for mosquito-borne diseases. A colony of 150 big brown bats can protect crops from up to 33 million rootworms over a growing season. The Mexican free-tailed bats of Bracken Cave in south-central Texas consume about 250 tons of insects every summer night. The natural pest control provided by that species across eight Texas counties has been valued at nearly $750,000 as it protects the $6 million summer cotton crop. Nationwide, the value of bats as pest controllers is estimated to be at least $3.7 billion and possibly much more.

So, you’re okay with chopping bats and eagles into mincemeat, just to “save” the climate?

You are so stupid:

Edward B. of Vancouver, Wash., writes:

Do wind farms affect weather, at least ­locally?

Marilyn responds:

Yes, and the more widespread they become, the more these changes will go beyond the immediate area. Some effects, such as ground warming and drying for miles around, are already known, but cumulative ­effects on the weather—especially if wind farming grows signifi­cantly—are unpredictable.

One point to note is that while wind farms are a source of renewable energy, this doesn’t mean they—and other forms of renewable energy, for that matter—don’t cause change. Even ­improved engineering of the turbines (to reduce turbulence, etc.) cannot eliminate the fact that the machines remove energy from the wind, and this will have an impact on the weather and ultimately the climate.

That’s Marilyn vos Savant, the “smartest” person in the world (as measured by IQ) in Parade Magazine. Why it never occurred to us that the law of conservation of energy applies to wind farms shocks me. She’s absolutely right: has anyone done even a preliminary study on the effect of turbines sucking wind energy our of the atmosphere? Think of wind currents as waterways. If you keep draining off more and more of the current to turn more and more turbines, eventually the wind runs “dry”. Good news for the birds and bats of the world, but not so hot (rather, too hot) for the farmers.

Comments (1)

Clown School

I’ve never watched Stephen Colbert, but I understand his shtik is to play a conservative blowhard unconsciously lampooning the right through outrageous and over-the-top statements.

He should sue someone named Chris Hayes for copyright infringement, on the left:

Chris Hayes says that the only comparable time in history where rich and powerful interests have relinquished wealth to the degree that oil companies would have to do to prevent catastrophic climate change is in 1865, the liberation of the slaves. Slavery represented half of the wealth of the South in 1860.


Now, before we go any further, I am not comparing slavery to the burning of fossil fuel. The evil of slavery is specific, distinct, and incomparable. The only thing comparable to slavery is slavery.

What followed was the bloodiest conflict this nation has ever seen and 600,000 people dead.

Why do I feel he’s aroused by the very thought of that? Six hundred thousand fewer people is an environmentalist’s wet dream.

Anyway, who would possibly think he’s equating global warming with slavery? All he did was equate them for the purpose of not equating them. People are so sensitive.

PS: The “evil of slavery [may be] specific, distinct, and incomparable”, but hardly unique. It’s all over the world, even today, and always has been.


Got Peat?

Boy, they ain’t kidding about global warming, huh? That’s some pretty bad [bleep].

Good thing enlightened people are taking the threat of greenhouse gases seriously:

Japan is turning into a rare bright spot in the world coal market, stepping up coal-fired power generation to replace nuclear plants that went offline after the 2011 Fukushima accident.

Plans by Japanese companies to spend billions of dollars on new coal-fired plants offer a striking contrast with the U.S., which has effectively blocked new coal plants using existing technology over concerns about global warming.

If the plans all come to fruition, Japan’s coal-fired power capacity would increase to around 47 gigawatts over the next decade or so, up 21% from the time right before the Fukushima accident.

It’s understandable that Japan might shy away from nuclear power (wrong but understandable), but do they really think coal is a safer bet?

The bodies of six miners trapped after a rock burst at a coal mine in central China’s Henan province were found by rescuers Friday.

What do the Japanese care? They still get their coal.

As somebody says, I’ll take global warming seriously when people act like it’s serious.

Comments (1)

Pheasant Over Glass

What wine do you serve with singed squab á la Mojave?

(Who thought this was a good idea?)

Environmentalists have hit out at a giant new solar farm in the Mojave Desert as mounting evidence reveals birds flying through the extremely hot ‘thermal flux’ surrounding the towers are being scorched.

After years of regulatory tangles around the impact on desert wildlife, the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System opened on Thursday but environmental groups say the nearly 350,000 gigantic mirrors are generating 1000 degree Fahrenheit temperatures which are killing and singing birds.

According to compliance documents released by developer BrightSource Energy last year, dozens of birds were found injured at the site during the building stage.

The green fascists told us that global warming would lead to mass die-offs—and they were right! Only they were wrong about the extent of the warming: a thousand degrees is by my reckoning a lot warmer than 1.3C.

President Barack Obama has mounted a second-term drive to combat climate change, proposing first-ever limits on carbon pollution from new and existing power plants.

His plan aims to help move the U.S. from a coal-dependent past into a future fired by wind and solar power, nuclear energy and natural gas.

President Obama is doing to the avian population what he did to American health care.

Careful birds, if the solar powered inferno doesn’t get you, the abattoir of the wind turbines will:

If you look around for statistics about bird deaths from wind turbines get you wildly different numbers. Some say just 10,000 birds a year meet their end at the hands (blades) of the wind industry. Others ramp that number up to 600,000. Now, a new study tried to actually use science to estimate.

In the end, using 58 mortality estimates that met their criteria, they came up with an estimate. According to the current literature somewhere between 140,000 and 328,000 birds die each year from collisions with wind turbines.

That’s not all, explains the blog Natural Reactions:

In addition, it appears that there is a greater risk of fatal collisions with taller turbines. This is a real problem, as larger wind turbines may provide more efficient energy generation. Consequently, it is expected that new wind farms will contain even bigger turbines, which will result in even more bird deaths. Future developments therefore will have to give very careful consideration to potential wildlife impacts when planning the type of turbine to install.

Okay, solar and wind are utterly destructive to the environment; that leaves nuclear and natural gas. Which is a-ok with me, but I don’t think Obama is serious about nuclear power. That leaves natural gas. Which again is a-ok with me, but it doesn’t make for much of an energy policy.

Not that condor fricassee does either.


I Believe That Children Are The Future

Quoth the great Whitney Houston—enemy of women’s health:

“Imagine a democracy across space, time and class, where legislative bodies represented not only those living in the world’s low-lying areas but their great-grandchildren–and ours. Or imagine that our elected representatives were proxies for those people. Imagine those representatives determining our current energy policy. Is there any doubt that things would change more rapidly?”–Mark Bittman, New York Times, July 2

Wait. The New York Times counsels us to consider the state of unborn children?


This is revolutionary!

For those hypothetical children to have standing in our energy policy, they would have to stand a chance of actually being, you know, children. Is the Times suggesting a bargain? They get a say on coal or gas if we get a say on whether they are born or flushed down the toilet?

Ooh, I need to think about this…

Comments (1)

A Man of His Word

President Obama (then Candidate Obama) in 2008.

So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.

President Obama today:

Yes, technologically unlocked oil and gas has created an energy revolution and industrial bright spot in the otherwise dim Obama era. By 2020, according to Yergin, shale gas alone is expected to support 4 million jobs (versus 1.7 million today). And the United States is expected to surpass Saudi Arabia as the world’s leading oil exporter, according to the International Energy Agency. Natural gas, meanwhile, is on course to overtake coal as the second largest source of energy worldwide by 2025. …

That’s why the surging supply of natural gas, the least carbon-intensive of traditional energy sources, is welcomed by all except a deep-ecology fringe. Natural gas produces half as much carbon as coal and a third the quantity of nitrogen oxides. The more prevalent the use of natural gas, the cleaner the air across America.

Expanded oil and gas production benefits state and local government as well. North Dakota, which welcomed the industry’s new technologies, saw its taxable sales and purchases jump nearly one-third in 2012 compared to the year before. Oil and gas tax receipts for the current biennium came in at $3.8 billion, leaving the Roughrider State with a budget surplus of $1.6 billion.

Under this brave man’s leadership, America stands poised to depose Saudi Arabia as world’s leading producer of greenhouse fuels. And we produce more natural gas than Congress does on three-bean chili day at the Capitol commissary. Good jobs for American workers have followed—all at the expense of coal, as he promised.

Today, for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of this president.

PS: Can you believe the ingrates in North Dakota voted for Romney over Obama by 58%-38%? Racist bastards.


Hating America

Okay, so maybe the president forgets the niceties once in a while:

Okay, maybe twice in a while:

Fine! It happens—

—with disturbing—


Are you quite done?

But no one has died because of his inappropriate behavior.

Until now:

Stop it!

Why, you…

The Obama administration has never fined or prosecuted a wind farm for killing eagles and other protected bird species, shielding the industry from liability and helping keep the scope of the deaths secret, an Associated Press investigation has found.

More than 573,000 birds are killed by the country’s wind farms each year, including 83,000 hunting birds such as hawks, falcons and eagles, according to an estimate published in March in the peer-reviewed Wildlife Society Bulletin.

Each death is federal crime, a charge that the Obama administration has used to prosecute oil companies when birds drown in their waste pits, and power companies when birds are electrocuted by their power lines. No wind energy company has been prosecuted, even those that repeatedly flout the law.

“It is the rationale that we have to get off of carbon, we have to get off of fossil fuels, that allows them to justify this,” said Tom Dougherty, a long-time environmentalist who worked for nearly 20 years for the National Wildlife Federation in the West, until his retirement in 2008. “But at what cost? In this case, the cost is too high.”

Documents and emails obtained by The Associated Press offer glimpses of the problem: 14 deaths at seven facilities in California, five each in New Mexico and Oregon, one in Washington state and another in Nevada, where an eagle was found with a hole in its neck, exposing the bone.

One of the deadliest places in the country for golden eagles is Wyoming, where federal officials said wind farms had killed more than four dozen golden eagles since 2009, predominantly in the southeastern part of the state. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose the figures. Getting precise figures is impossible because many companies aren’t required to disclose how many birds they kill. And when they do, experts say, the data can be unreliable.

Do we have a problem, jug-ears?

Wyoming, huh? That’s Cheney country. You don’t suppose Obama is targeting eagles in conservative states, do you? I wouldn’t put it past him.

PS: I just have to:


RPEC: Righteous Petroleum Exporting Countries

Between Israel’s off shore natural gas fields and America’s mammoth oil fields, we are together the Righteous Petroleum Exporting Countries:

The federal government is doubling its estimate of how much oil might be discovered and harvested in the booming area of the Dakotas and Montana, a region that’s already helping to drive the United States’ dramatic shift into a role as the world’s leading oil producer.

“These world-class formations contain even more energy resource potential than previously understood, which is important information as we continue to reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign sources of oil,” Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said Tuesday in a conference call.

The surge comes primarily because of the Three Forks shale formation, which lies mostly in North Dakota and crosses into South Dakota and Montana. It was considered to have little potential for productive drilling the last time federal geologists launched an estimate of the area, four years ago. But advances in drilling techniques and growing activity by oil companies caused the U.S. Geological Survey to take a closer look.

The USGS now thinks the Three Forks formation contains 3.73 billion barrels of undiscovered and technically recoverable oil. Combined with a similar figure for the neighboring Bakken formation, it represents double the oil and nearly triple the natural gas that geologists thought the region held four years ago.

Manna came from Heaven; oil and gas from underground. But the effect is the same:

A new seismic survey indicates an even larger amount of natural gas in Israel’s offshore Leviathan reserve, partners in the project said Wednesday.

According to the current best estimate, the field contains 18.9 trillion cubic feet of gas, up from 18 trillion cubic feet, based on a survey released in March, said Ratio Oil Exploration Ltd. Partnership (RATI.L.TV), which holds 15% of the drilling license. The amount of natural gas assumed to be in the field has been estimated upward several times since its discovery in 2010, when it was initially thought to contain 16 trillion cubic feet.

The field is scheduled to start production later this decade, and lead to Israel becoming an exporter of energy, but the government hasn’t yet decided how much gas it will allow to be exported.

Talk of conserving fuel to be patriotic is so last decade. With America and Israel leading the way, fossil fuels are the new red, white, and blue (or just blue and white)!


« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »