Tag: energy

Stupidity as Policy: the Phrase, “Climate Change” is Banned!

On By southwerkIn Business Ethics, Capitalism, Government Failure

I was having class one day and in the front row was a veteran of several combat tours in Iraq. The class got into a spirited discussion about a woman’s time of the month and the things you can buy like tampons and pads to help with that very common malady.

My combat veteran laid his head on the desk, covered his ears with his hands and tried to make the subject go away. I doubt if he was successful. We were friends, probably still are, haven’t heard from him in some years. I respected his service and gave him class time to talk about it.

Not everyone is going to be comfortable with every topic brought up in class. And I understand that.

But removing the phrase, “Climate Change” is different in a major and important way.

Climate Change is real, observable, and needs to be dealt with. And our government is supposed to dealing with it.

Before we go any further, let me give you a link and a quote from the current topic:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/energy-dept-adds-climate-change-184725341.html

“Please ensure that every member of your team is aware that this is the latest list of words to avoid — and continue to be conscientious about avoiding any terminology that you know to be misaligned with the Administration’s perspectives and priorities,” the directive from acting director of external affairs Rachel Overbey said.

“Misaligned with the administration’s perspectives and priorities,” the weasel words for pitiful stupidity from the reality denying loons that currently form our ruling regime.

(Admiring the latest delusion at the Dept. of Energy.)

Tell me, do you think that covering your ears and making racket will drop the earth’s temperature? Because I don’t.

What are these idiots doing? Well, they are completely devoted to chasing fossil fuel money, billions of dollars, and in pursuit of that money, there is no action no matter how obviously moronic and stupid that they won’t do.

And this is one of the stupid and moronic decisions that these people are embracing in the hope of stalling effective action against climate change so that fossil fuel companies can rake in the cash.

It is wrong. It is immoral. It is pathetic. And I hope and pray for the time when these fools are driven from the government, polite society and any hope of profit.

James Alan Pilant

Does the Trump Administration Have Dumber People than Kennedy? – Why Yes, Yes They Do!

On By southwerkIn Business Ethics, corruption, Government Failure

I want you to read the following quote, so you can have the same reaction I had:

“Even if you wrapped the entire planet in a solar panel, you would only be producing 20% of global energy. One of the biggest mistakes politicians can make is equating the ELECTRICITY with ENERGY!”

I was amazed. My first response was “What??” My second response was to quickly mentally review the many articles I have read about the efficiency and practicality of solar panels. while noting that my high school physics text book “claimed” that electricity was a form of energy.

And don’t let the facts like the little tiny obscure fact that I’m typing on a machine powered by electricity confuse you.

Who is this public official?

It is Chris Wright, our Energy Secretary!

Wow, now there is a first rate intelligence!

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/energy-secretary-says-wrapping-earth-233101352.html

Shomik Sen Bhattacharjee writing for the site, Benzinga, wrote an article: Energy Secretary Says Wrapping Earth With Solar Panels Would Produce 20% Of Global Energy, X Users Swiftly Community Note Official.

Energy researchers at MIT note that Earth receives on the order of 173,000 terawatts of solar energy continuously, orders of magnitude more than humanity’s total energy use, highlighting that the constraint is not raw solar resource but economics, siting, transmission and storage.

Global solar already supplies a rising share of electricity and is projected to keep growing through 2030, according to the International Energy Agency.

So, Energy Secretary is “unfamiliar” with the nature of electricity. And there I was thinking that vaccine denial was bad. Foolish me.

And he also appears to believe that solar energy barely exists and is almost useless which is contrary to any simple examination of the facts.

You have to wonder what kind of decisions results from these two misconceptions. Just imagine how many other misconceptions he has.

It really makes you wonder. This is a very minor news story but before the age of Trump, it would be front page news and dominate the news cycle.

But it can’t. Because we as a nation have long ago come to the realization that competence, truth telling or even the most mediocre levels of ability are absent in those chosen for high office in this administration.

That cabinet secretaries can deny basic facts with complete certainty is not a surprise.

But it does bode ill for all of us who had come to expect capable public servants.

James Alan Pilant

Should Americans Have a Say in What They Want?

On By southwerkIn Capitalism

You would think that in a democracy what a majority of the people want would matter. You’d think. But very often it seems that the distance between what Americans wish for and want to happen and what our government does is wider than the Grand Canyon.

Can I give you an example? Quite a few but let us do just one. Do Americans want subsidies for solar energy?

Let us look at the link below!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/survey-reveals-americans-overwhelming-opinions-120500351.html

(Quote from the article above.) An Instagram Reel by EnergySage — a platform that helps homeowners save up to $10,000 on rooftop solar panels — shared the stunning results of a recent study.

“Nearly 90% of Americans are in favor of government programs to help homeowners go solar,” the video says. “That includes 78% of 2020 voters for President Donald Trump.”

The clip also cites a survey from 2019, in which 92% of respondents said America should expand solar power. The lack of partisan split was equally encouraging: 86% of Republicans and 96% of Democrats backed the idea. The clip finishes with a map of the United States, highlighting the states that installed the most solar power in 2023, the year the Inflation Reduction Act went into full effect. Seven of the 10 backed the Republican candidate in 2024. (End quote.)

Those number would seem to suggest with great certainty that the American people want solar energy to be subsidized and it implies that they believe the future is going to be one of sustainable energy. So, how are their views reflected in the actions of their “democratically” elected government.

The federal government abolished a major tax credit for solar energy. See the link below.

https://www.energysage.com/news/congress-passes-bill-ending-residential-solar-tax-credit/

President Trump signed the “Big Beautiful Bill” into law on Independence Day, cutting the 30% residential solar tax credit by December 31, 2025—nearly a decade ahead of schedule. 

But that wasn’t the only thing cut. The current administration used its power to destroy a solar energy program of quite a large size in Ohio. Note the link below.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/the-war-on-sunshine-how-federal-cuts-just-stripped-ohio-of-156-million-for-solar-energy/ar-AA1KjTP8?ocid=BingNewsSerp

The abrupt termination of a $7 billion federal solar energy program has dealt a serious blow to Ohio’s renewable energy plans, with the Today in Ohio crew ruing the state’s loss of $156 million that would have powered thousands of homes with solar arrays.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to end the “Solar for All” grant program – created by the Biden administration – has eliminated cash that would have provided solar power to over 900,000 homes nationwide. For Ohio, the impact is severe.

But don’t the American people want solar energy? What’s happening here? What happened to the a government “of the people, for the people?”

It was purchased.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/big-oil-donations-trump

According to the report, Big Oil’s total known spending in the last election cycle amounted to “an astounding $445 million.”

“Importantly, however, the oil and gas industry also routes undisclosed funds through dark money groups that do not have to reveal their donors, making it nearly impossible to understand the full scope of their impact,” the report notes.

So, not so much a government of the people as a government purchased and operated for the benefit of giants corporations like the associated group know as “Big Oil.”

That explains a lot.

It explains why the President and his crawling minions in the House and Senate are entirely comfortable with defying the will of the people.

In terms of business ethics, it is a catastrophe. Morally wrong, it not only subverts democracy, it has the government enacting laws that results in policies that make money for contributors but in the long term are disastrous for the nation and the larger planet as well.

And it is a symbol to every student in the United States who sees that human beings educated in the finest institutions and elected by the American people sell themselves, their honor and their votes for money.


James Alan Pilant

We Need to Reconsider the Use of Gas Stoves

On By southwerkIn business ethics

https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1042477

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/how-safe-is-your-gas-stove-heres-what-a-new-study-shows-180044909.html

A new study concerning the dangers of gas stoves came out today. It is very alarming and it calls into question claims of safety for the appliance.

From the study (the top link above):

Beyond asthma cases, the long-term exposure to NO2 in American households with gas stoves is high enough to cause thousands of deaths each year – possibly as many as 19,000 or 40% of the number of deaths linked annually to secondhand smoke. This estimate is based on the researchers’ new measurements and calculations of how much nitrogen dioxide people breathe at home because of gas stoves and the best available data on deaths from long-term exposure to outdoor NO2, which is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

“As many as 19,000 deaths” is a lot of deaths but the new research also concerns childhood asthma and the overall national levels of pollutions.

The data we had before this was enough to strongly consider banning gas stove in new construction and if you have a child with asthma replacing your gas appliances immediately. This new research is more compelling and alarming. We should begin consider a national phase out.

However, for many families, the cost of replacement is just too much. If you have a gas stove, you can mitigate the effects by proper ventilation. Use the fan above the stove to diminish the pollutants. (Yes, there is supposed to be one up there.) And never ever use a stove to heat the home, they also produce benzene and carbon monoxide. Trust me, you don’t want large concentrations of either one in your home.

In the future, as a writer on business ethics, I am going to have to talk about the fossil fuel industry in the light of the history of lead pollution, climate denial, “clean and safe” natural gas, and some other things like fairly extensive support for various fascist governments before World War Two because I think it demonstrates a pattern of unethical behavior.

But that will be pretty lengthy and it will take a lot of research. For the moment, run with my observation that the oil and gas industry are not neutral observers when it comes to the use of gas stoves and treat what they say accordingly.

I believe based on the new research that this is not a safe way of cooking or heating.

James Pilant

This is from a year ago but it lines up nicely with the May 3rd Study.

The Wall Street Protests – “This has the feel of something very big happening.”

On By southwerkIn Opinion

Is ‘Occupy Silicon Valley’ next?

This is an article from Reuters written by Connie Loizos. It is in large part an interview with Paul Saffo, a futurist.   I call your attention to this paragraph. –

Saffo doesn’t know where all of this economic dissatisfaction will lead, but he is worried. “I think there’s a sea change afoot that’s going to sweep over everything the same way,” he says. “I still think there’s a lot of uncertainty, but all my instincts as a forecaster tell me this has the feel of something very big happening. I’m standing on the beach and noticing the water heading back out toward the horizon.”

I feel the same way. It’s possible this is all just smoke and mirrors but I don’t think so.

James Pilant

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

CBO … Federal Loan Guarantees for the Constructi​on of Nuclear Power Plants (via Point/CounterPoint)

On By southwerkIn business ethics

You weren’t aware that loans to build nuclear power plants were guaranteed by the federal government?

They had to, you see. No one would loan them money to build a plant because of the risk.

So, you might ask, “If the federal government did not guarantee the loans, would there be any nuclear power plants built in the United States from now on?”

No.

You may resent the fact that if you decide to borrow some money to build a factory, a restaurant, a day-care center, etc., the government isn’t going to guarantee a dime of it.

That’s very small minded of you. Isn’t obvious that the nuclear industry though its exemplary safety record, environmental activism and continuing careful and cost free disposal of nuclear waste, has earned these enormous government subsidies? (Whoops, they don’t do any of that, do they? – Oh, well, it’s still obvious that they are deserving and you aren’t.)

Maybe you should get mad?

James Pilant

Federal Loan Guarantees for the Construction of Nuclear Power Plants CBO's analysis examines the main factors that influence the cost to the federal government of providing loan guarantees for the construction of nuclear power plants. It includes illustrative cost estimates using the methodology specified by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, which determines the budgetary cost of the program, and also estimates prepared on a fair-value basis … Read More

via Point/CounterPoint

How to have a ‘rational’ debate over nuclear power (via Rational and Green)

On By southwerkIn business ethics2 Comments

There is a lot of debate on the web about nuclear power. This is a different kind of take on the issue. Our author explains how the emotional aspects of the danger of nuclear power has to be taken into consideration. I’m sure there are many who would argue that only the rational arguments should be taken into consideration.

However, the advocates of nuclear power have cast every kind of insult at their opponents ranging from tree hugger to murderer (that’s right, since using coal power can increase death from particulate matter, opposing nuclear power is murder), I think the use of the irrational on that side is already well established.

James Pilant

In any debate over nuclear power, the people calling for a “rational” discussion tend to be proponents of nuclear power. In response, those in the “anti-nuclear” camp will often adopt the “rational” vocabulary of their “pro-nuclear” counterparts, basing their arguments on issues of cost and statistical risk (and perhaps some case studies to prove the viability of renewable sources of energy). And thus, there emerges a tacit consensus between thes … Read More

via Rational and Green

Japan Passes Law To Cleanse Internet Of ‘Bad’ Fukushima Radiation News (via THE INTERNET POST)

On By southwerkIn business ethics

Predictable, I wonder why it took so long. As radiation is detected in larger and large amounts further and further away from the damaged nuclear plants, I guess things just started to get annoying. So, we’re just going to give all those nasty news agencies a good talking to!

James Pilant

Japan Passes Law To Cleanse Internet Of 'Bad' Fukushima Radiation News 'The supposedly free democratic nation of Japan, which supposedly values and promotes freedom of speech, has officially issued orders to telecommunication companies and webmasters to remove content from websites that counter the official government position that the disaster is over and there is no more threat from the radiation. The government charges that the damage caused by earthquakes and by the nuclear accident are being magnified by irresp … Read More

via THE INTERNET POST

Report Reveals America Now Receives More Power From Renewables Than Nuclear (via Climate Connections)

On By southwerkIn business ethics

The President has tossed Social Security on the negotiating table. The new jobs report is a horror story worthy of Stephen King. Sometimes, you think the world is just going to pieces. Just when you think good news is impossible to come by, you get some (at least, I hope that is how it works).

Take a look at this. We can build a better energy future. We are already starting to do it.

James Pilant

by Tafline Laylin, inhabitat.com, July 6 2011  http://tinyurl.com/3zl8lwa A recent report published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration reveals that America now receives more of its energy from [so called] "renewable" sources than it does from nuclear generation plants. In the first three months of 2011, the country’s biomass/biofuel, hydropower, wind, geothermal, and solar energy generation plants produced a combined 2.245 quadrillion … Read More

via Climate Connections

Should we be concerned, too? (via Keating’s Desk)

On By southwerkIn business ethics

It should come as no surprise that I am with the “we should be concerned” group.

However, I went to the web site, “Keating’s Desk,” read the post and almost went on. But I paused and looked at the article before and then I looked at the next one and the one after that. You just don’t want to stop. This is great stuff. A good writer who can think and has important issues in mind when he does.

I’ve added the web site to the favorites and intend to keep up with the writing there.

James Pilant

Should we be concerned, too? Keeping in mind what I wrote here about the safety of nuclear power plants, negligent oversight, and Alabama, this report from Yahoo news should be filed under Scary, too. Officials say that floodwater seeping into the turbine building at a nuclear power plant near Omaha on the banks of the Missouri River is not a safety risk. . . An 8-foot-tall, water-filled temporary berm collapsed at the plant early Sunday. Vendor workers are at the site to de … Read More

via Keating's Desk