committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-08--Green New Deal dress rehearsal

Green New Deal dress rehearsal

More than 1.4 million cases of Wuhan Coronavirus and 106,000 deaths in the United States alone have accompanied stay-home lockdowns , businesses bankruptcies , over 40 million unemployed workers , plummeting tax revenues and unprecedented debt .
Ongoing rioting , vandalism , arson and looting are compounding problems for many cities and minority communities .
But where many see disaster , others see opportunity .
Some want to use the crises to enact laws and welfare programs they could never get otherwise .
More ambitious activists see the lockdown as a blueprint or dress rehearsal for a total energy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the planet.
” If three months of Covid lockdowns can reduce fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions , they argue , permanent fossil fuel bans are possible , essential and should be undertaken immediately .
Five years ago , former UN official Christiana Figueres said the real goal of climate actions was to “ intentionally transform the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years ” – and replace it with socialist-environmentalist global governance .
More recently , she said post-Corona economic stimulus packages should be used to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ projects that will create jobs and put the world on a safer , fairer , more resilient path.
” Others want to use climate change as a pretext for dictating how global wealth and resources will be redistributed .
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ’ s chief of staff is on the same page .
The Green New Deal “ wasn ’ t originally a climate thing at all , ” he said in May 2019 .
It was “ a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.
” Presidential candidate Joe Biden and other leading Democrats have endorsed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ the pandemic could create an opportunity to rebuild the global economy along more sustainable lines.
” His environment chief thinks COVID-19 presents “ a chance to do capitalism differently.
” The UN Green Climate Fund says it “ offers an opportunity to direct finances towards bolstering climate action ” and “ re-launch [ ing ] economies on low-emission , climate-resilient trajectories , ” to control climate and weather and prevent massive extinctions .
In short , echoing former Obama science advisor John Holdren , they want the United States and other modern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ low-consumption life styles that ensure “ more equitable distribution of wealth , ” and tell poor countries how much “ ecologically feasible ” development they will be permitted to pursue .
Perhaps most important , these “ visionary ” ruling elites will be in charge .
They will define what is clean , green , renewable , sustainable , ecologically feasible , safer , fairer , more resilient .
They will demand less travel , trade and commerce – for the masses .
They will live quite well , while telling today ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must disappear and they must be content with minimum-wage jobs installing , maintaining and dismantling wind turbines and solar panels made overseas .
Fans and implementers of Covid-19 lockdowns have been oblivious to the economic , societal and human devastation caused by the lockdowns : not just economic losses , depleted savings and ruined dreams , but millions of cases of depression , drug addiction , alcoholism , domestic violence , obesity , stroke , heart attack , thousands of deaths from these causes , and suicide and murder attributable to the lockdowns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or still uncounted deaths and disabilities from missed biopsies , skipped cancer screenings and chemotherapy , missed early treatments for stroke and heart-attack patients , and organ transplants simply not performed – because “ non-essential ” medicine was closed down , people lost their health insurance , or patients were afraid to go to clinics and emergency rooms .
Many hospitals , clinics and practices lost so much money that they may have to close their doors .
The cumulative long-term impact from that on healthcare , life spans , and death tolls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ severely ill patients could be enormous .
These human costs will take years to manifest themselves and be calculated .
Indeed , the ultimate cost of the lockdown could be worse than the virus .
We still do not have reliable data on Covid infections , cases and deaths – and don ’ t know whether deaths were due to Corona , or merely associated with the virus and primarily due to age or serious underlying health problems .
We don ’ t even know how many vulnerable elderly people died from Covid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York , New Jersey , Pennsylvania and other officials to force nursing homes to accept recovering Corona patients and keep Covid-infected staff working in those facilities .
All this is from lockdowns lasting several months .
Suggestions that we “ transform ” our economy with expensive , unreliable , weather dependent energy – and endure energy , employment , healthcare and other deprivations in perpetuity – border on homicidal insanity .
They would postpone or eliminate any economic recovery , result in unimaginable misery and death in now-developed countries – and condemn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impoverished nations to horrible suffering , disease , starvation and death .
As to saving the planet and ensuring “ ecologically feasible ” development , GND energy systems would be vastly more devastating to scenic areas , habitats and wildlife – and to human health and welfare – than any likely effects from manmade portions of future climate changes or weather events .
As Michael Moore ’ s new film , “ Planet of the Humans , ” dramatically demonstrates , wind , solar , battery and biofuel technologies are the antithesis of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Even worse , the ecological devastation it documents is happening in a world that is still 81 % dependent on oil , natural gas and coal , 4 % on nuclear and 7 % on hydroelectric .
The impacts and species losses would be orders of magnitude greater if we were 100 % dependent on pseudo-renewable energy sources .
Adopting UN-AOC energy prescriptions would require literally millions of 800-foot-tall wind turbines , billions of solar panels , billions of half-ton batteries , thousands of biofuel plantations and clear-cut forests , billions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and expanded mines to provide tens of billions of tons more metals and minerals .
The ecological impacts would reach every corner of every continent .
Hundreds of bird , bat , reptile and mammalian species would disappear .
Household , hospital , school , business and factory electricity costs would skyrocket .
Jobs and industries would vanish .
Those prescriptions would also make the United States enormously dependent on China , not just for medical devices and pharmaceutical components – but for metals , raw materials and component parts needed in wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ batteries , and defense , aerospace and high-technology applications .
And all that mining and manufacturing , in Asia and other distant lands , would require fossil fuels , at levels far beyond anything seen in history , under minimal to nonexistent pollution , workplace safety and human rights laws , accompanied by prodigious emissions of carbon dioxide .
Fans and implementers of GND transformations are willfully oblivious of these realities .
They refuse to discuss them or allow others to discuss them – because to do so would destroy their phony “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for total control over our lives , livelihoods , living standards and liberties .
No wonder the UN-AOC-environmentalist crowd went ballistic over Moore ’ s film .
YouTube yanked the movie from its viewing platform , and “ mainstream ” media , social media , search engines and information sites are now engaging in blatant censorship on climate , energy and environmental issues .
An increasingly activist , liberal media complex also wants to dictate and control what people see , hear , say and think on race relations , medicine and virtually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NY Times and Washington Post , to Facebook , Twitter , Google , YouTube and Wikipedia , platforms that should be forums for robust debate instead are used to dictate what is true or false , permissible or banned .
US , EU and UN green new deals are just one component of the battle for our future .
Corona lockdowns should serve as a bitter taste of what could come – not as a dress rehearsal or blueprint for it .

More than 1.4 million cases of Wuhan Coronavirus and 106,000 deaths in the United States alone have accompanied stay-home lockdowns, businesses bankruptcies, over 40 million unemployed workers, plummeting tax revenues and unprecedented debt. Ongoing rioting, vandalism, arson and looting are compounding problems for many cities and minority communities.
Yet where many see disaster, others see opportunity. Some want to use the crises to enact laws and welfare programs they could never get otherwise. More ambitious activists see the lockdown as a blueprint or dress rehearsal for a total energy, economic and lifestyle transformation to “save the planet.” If three months of Covid lockdowns can reduce fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, they argue, permanent fossil fuel bans are possible, essential and should be undertaken immediately.
Five years ago, former UN official Christiana Figueres said the real goal of climate actions was to “intentionally transform the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years” – and replace it with socialist-environmentalist global governance. More recently, she said post-Corona economic stimulus packages should be used to “kick-start” investments “in low-carbon infrastructure projects that will create jobs and put the world on a safer, fairer, more resilient path.” Others want to use climate change as a pretext for dictating how global wealth and resources will be redistributed.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff is on the same page. The Green New Deal “wasn’t originally a climate thing at all,” he said in May 2019. It was “a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.” Presidential candidate Joe Biden and other leading Democrats have endorsed the GND.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres believes “the pandemic could create an opportunity to rebuild the global economy along more sustainable lines.” His environment chief thinks COVID-19 presents “a chance to do capitalism differently.” The UN Green Climate Fund says it “offers an opportunity to direct finances towards bolstering climate action” and “re-launch[ing] economies on low-emission, climate-resilient trajectories,” to control climate and weather and prevent massive extinctions.
In short, echoing former Obama science advisor John Holdren, they want the United States and other modern societies to de-develop and de-industrialize, establish low-consumption life styles that ensure “more equitable distribution of wealth,” and tell poor countries how much “ecologically feasible” development they will be permitted to pursue.
Perhaps most important, these “visionary” ruling elites will be in charge. They will define what is clean, green, renewable, sustainable, ecologically feasible, safer, fairer, more resilient. They will demand less travel, trade and commerce – for the masses. They will live quite well, while telling today’s oilfield and factory workers their industries must disappear and they must be content with minimum-wage jobs installing, maintaining and dismantling wind turbines and solar panels made overseas.
Fans and implementers of Covid-19 lockdowns have been oblivious to the economic, societal and human devastation caused by the lockdowns: not just economic losses, depleted savings and ruined dreams, but millions of cases of depression, drug addiction, alcoholism, domestic violence, obesity, stroke, heart attack, thousands of deaths from these causes, and suicide and murder attributable to the lockdowns.
Add to that millions of future or still uncounted deaths and disabilities from missed biopsies, skipped cancer screenings and chemotherapy, missed early treatments for stroke and heart-attack patients, and organ transplants simply not performed – because “non-essential” medicine was closed down, people lost their health insurance, or patients were afraid to go to clinics and emergency rooms.
Many hospitals, clinics and practices lost so much money that they may have to close their doors. The cumulative long-term impact from that on healthcare, life spans, and death tolls among obese, diabetic, elderly and severely ill patients could be enormous. These human costs will take years to manifest themselves and be calculated. Indeed, the ultimate cost of the lockdown could be worse than the virus.
We still do not have reliable data on Covid infections, cases and deaths – and don’t know whether deaths were due to Corona, or merely associated with the virus and primarily due to age or serious underlying health problems. We don’t even know how many vulnerable elderly people died from Covid complications inflicted on them by decisions by New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and other officials to force nursing homes to accept recovering Corona patients and keep Covid-infected staff working in those facilities.
All this is from lockdowns lasting several months. Suggestions that we “transform” our economy with expensive, unreliable, weather dependent energy – and endure energy, employment, healthcare and other deprivations in perpetuity – border on homicidal insanity. They would postpone or eliminate any economic recovery, result in unimaginable misery and death in now-developed countries – and condemn tens of millions of people in still impoverished nations to horrible suffering, disease, starvation and death.
As to saving the planet and ensuring “ecologically feasible” development, GND energy systems would be vastly more devastating to scenic areas, habitats and wildlife – and to human health and welfare – than any likely effects from manmade portions of future climate changes or weather events.
As Michael Moore’s new film, “Planet of the Humans,” dramatically demonstrates, wind, solar, battery and biofuel technologies are the antithesis of clean, green, renewable and sustainable. Even worse, the ecological devastation it documents is happening in a world that is still 81% dependent on oil, natural gas and coal, 4% on nuclear and 7% on hydroelectric. The impacts and species losses would be orders of magnitude greater if we were 100% dependent on pseudo-renewable energy sources.
Adopting UN-AOC energy prescriptions would require literally millions of 800-foot-tall wind turbines, billions of solar panels, billions of half-ton batteries, thousands of biofuel plantations and clear-cut forests, billions of battery-powered vehicles, and thousands of new and expanded mines to provide tens of billions of tons more metals and minerals. The ecological impacts would reach every corner of every continent. Hundreds of bird, bat, reptile and mammalian species would disappear. Household, hospital, school, business and factory electricity costs would skyrocket. Jobs and industries would vanish.
Those prescriptions would also make the United States enormously dependent on China, not just for medical devices and pharmaceutical components – but for metals, raw materials and component parts needed in wind turbines, solar panels, backup power batteries, and defense, aerospace and high-technology applications. And all that mining and manufacturing, in Asia and other distant lands, would require fossil fuels, at levels far beyond anything seen in history, under minimal to nonexistent pollution, workplace safety and human rights laws, accompanied by prodigious emissions of carbon dioxide.
Fans and implementers of GND transformations are willfully oblivious of these realities. They refuse to discuss them or allow others to discuss them – because to do so would destroy their phony “saving the planet” narrative and quest for total control over our lives, livelihoods, living standards and liberties.
No wonder the UN-AOC-environmentalist crowd went ballistic over Moore’s film. YouTube yanked the movie from its viewing platform, and “mainstream” media, social media, search engines and information sites are now engaging in blatant censorship on climate, energy and environmental issues.
An increasingly activist, liberal media complex also wants to dictate and control what people see, hear, say and think on race relations, medicine and virtually every other political topic. From the NY Times and Washington Post, to Facebook, Twitter, Google, YouTube and Wikipedia, platforms that should be forums for robust debate instead are used to dictate what is true or false, permissible or banned.
US, EU and UN green new deals are just one component of the battle for our future. Corona lockdowns should serve as a bitter taste of what could come – not as a dress rehearsal or blueprint for it.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-09--Reigning in Green bureaucracy

Reigning in Green bureaucracy

It took about 13 months and 15 days to construct the Empire State Building in New York City , which opened in 1931 on 34th street in midtown Manhattan .
At 1,250 feet and 102 stories , it was the tallest building in the world until 1970 , when the Twin Towers in downtown eclipsed it .
It took 11 years to construct the Freedom Tower , which opened 2014 adjacent to where the Twin Towers once stood .
At nearly 1,300 feet , this skyscraper took nearly ten times longer to construct .
This comparison and countless other examples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last week signed an executive order for federal agencies to shorten environmental reviews for construction of highways , mines , pipelines and other projects on federal lands as the nation continues to suffer economically during the Covid-19 emergency .
Modern day construction of infrastructure takes too long and becomes too expensive due , at least in part , to mandated , multi-layered bureaucratic reviews .
Laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA ) , the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act require agencies to conduct multi-step , detailed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the environment .
The executive order is a continuation of efforts by the president going back three years to streamline these regulatory reviews in order to speed up projects , lower their cost and strengthen the economy .
NEPA has been on the books since 1970 .
Such laws are necessary and warranted , yet many anti-development and Green groups have historically used them not to ensure adequate reviews and safeguards , but to stop human progress and modernization .
Litigation also reaps a financial bonanza for trial lawyers , who also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ System , built in the 1950 ’ s , is one of the greatest public work achievements in history , a crown jewel of President Eisenhower ’ s administration .
It is fully embraced by millions of Americans who drive on it , and integral to the economy .
Imagine trying to build that system today ?
It is unimaginable , with the multitude of agencies and laws involved .
The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act ( ARRA ) in 2009 , which passed to help the nation recover from the Great Recession @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This $ 787 billion undertaking ( which was big money at the time ) was sold as an infrastructure bill that would bring “ shovel-ready projects ” to completion and create jobs .
It did little , absent a small portion that was used for highway and bridge repair .
President Obama later that “ ’ shovel-ready ’ was not as shovel-ready as we expected.
” President Trump ’ s latest executive order does not repeal NEPA or any other statute .
It can not .
Rather , it is about administering such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manner , which is a discussion worth having , especially now .
The Trump administration has been pushing the debate over the costs and benefits of environmental laws and processes affecting construction and job creation , especially now as the nation grapples with economic collapse from the pandemic with millions of Americans out of work .
Sadly , millions of unemployed Americans will have no sympathy from extremist Green groups and politicians who , right on key , assume the worst from streamlining environmental regulations .
A comment by Christy Goldfuss of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example .
Goldfuss headed President Obama ’ s Council on Environmental Quality , and said the Trump administration is “ trying to divert attention away ( sic ) from the crisis of racial injustice happening around the country by giving agency leads the excuse to ram through polluting projects that will prop up the dying fossil fuel industry while destroying the very same communities that are dying at higher rates from Covid-19 and police violence as well.
” Ms. Goldfuss ’ attempt to connect streamlining of environmental reviews to racial politics is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s also an example of the impossibility of having an honest debate about anything in this country .
Notice further her mention of “ prop [ ing ] up the dying fossil fuel industry.
” There ’ s the real rub for green activists .
Killing fossil fuels is the key ingredient to transforming America in ways that will make us poorer and more dependent on the government for sustenance , which ultimately empowers people influencing and running the government .
The Trump administration ’ s efforts to streamline bureaucratic oversight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not zero-sum anti-environment , despite the hysteria from the usual suspects .
We need not return to the days when a skyscraper or major bridge crossing could be built in a year ; but when it takes up to a decade and longer , then the environmental process needs fixing to ensure a sensible , cost-effective balance .

It took about 13 months and 15 days to construct the Empire State Building in New York City, which opened in 1931 on 34th street in midtown Manhattan. At 1,250 feet and 102 stories, it was the tallest building in the world until 1970, when the Twin Towers in downtown eclipsed it.
It took 11 years to construct the Freedom Tower, which opened 2014 adjacent to where the Twin Towers once stood. At 1,300 feet, this skyscraper took nearly ten times longer to construct.
This comparison and countless other examples are the key reason that President Trump last week signed an executive order for federal agencies to shorten environmental reviews for construction of highways, mines, pipelines and other projects on federal lands as the nation continues to suffer economically during the Covid-19 emergency. Modern day construction of infrastructure takes too long and becomes too expensive due, at least in part, to mandated, multi-layered bureaucratic reviews.
Laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act require agencies to conduct multi-step, detailed reviews the potential impact of construction projects on the environment. The executive order is a continuation of efforts by the president going back three years to streamline these regulatory reviews in order to speed up projects, lower their cost and strengthen the economy.
NEPA has been on the books since 1970. Such laws are necessary and warranted, yet many anti-development and Green groups have historically used them not to ensure adequate reviews and safeguards, but to stop human progress and modernization. Litigation also reaps a financial bonanza for trial lawyers, who also are politically influential.
The Interstate Highway System, built in the 1950’s, is one of the greatest public work achievements in history, a crown jewel of President Eisenhower’s administration. It is fully embraced by millions of Americans who drive on it, and integral to the economy. Imagine trying to build that system today? It is unimaginable, with the multitude of agencies and laws involved.
The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) in 2009, which passed to help the nation recover from the Great Recession, provides a salient modern contrast. This $787 billion undertaking (which was big money at the time) was sold as an infrastructure bill that would bring “shovel-ready projects” to completion and create jobs. It did little, absent a small portion that was used for highway and bridge repair. President Obama later acknowledged that “’shovel-ready’ was not as shovel-ready as we expected.”
President Trump’s latest executive order does not repeal NEPA or any other statute. It cannot. Rather, it is about administering such laws in a more balanced and efficient manner, which is a discussion worth having, especially now. The Trump administration has been pushing the debate over the costs and benefits of environmental laws and processes affecting construction and job creation, especially now as the nation grapples with economic collapse from the pandemic with millions of Americans out of work.
Sadly, millions of unemployed Americans will have no sympathy from extremist Green groups and politicians who, right on key, assume the worst from streamlining environmental regulations.
A comment by Christy Goldfuss of the Center for American Progress was a revealing example. Goldfuss headed President Obama’s Council on Environmental Quality, and said the Trump administration is “trying to divert attention away (sic) from the crisis of racial injustice happening around the country by giving agency leads the excuse to ram through polluting projects that will prop up the dying fossil fuel industry while destroying the very same communities that are dying at higher rates from Covid-19 and police violence as well.”
Ms. Goldfuss’ attempt to conflate streamlining of environmental reviews with racial politics is a vile non-sequitur designed to exacerbate division. It’s also an example of the impossibility of having an honest debate about anything in this country.
Notice further her mention of “prop[ing] up the dying fossil fuel industry.” There’s the real rub for green activists. Killing fossil fuels is the key ingredient to transforming America in ways that will make us poorer and more dependent on the government for sustenance, which ultimately empowers people influencing and running the government.
The Trump administration’s efforts to streamline bureaucratic oversight and litigation to construct and repair infrastructure is not zero-sum anti-environment, despite the hysteria from the usual suspects. We need not return to the days when a skyscraper or major bridge crossing could be built in a year; but when it takes up to a decade and longer, then the environmental process needs fixing to ensure a sensible, cost-effective balance.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-09--Climate campaigners want to make the shutdown permanent

The world is reopening and economic recovery is gathering steam .
Global warming campaigners don ’ t like this one bit .
They view the COVID-19 shutdown as a model for the future they want .
Echoing former Obama science advisor John Holdren , they want the United States and other modern societies to de-develop and de-industrialize , establish low-consumption life styles that ensure “ more equitable distribution of wealth , ” and tell poor countries how much “ ecologically feasible ” development they will be permitted to pursue .
CFACT ’ s Marc Morano posted extensive coverage to CFACT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pearl of wisdom from Britain ’ s Prince Charles who told the World Economic Forum : We have a unique but rapidly shrinking window of opportunity to learn lessons and reset ourselves on a more sustainable path… We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this crisis .
Its unprecedented shockwaves may well make people more receptive to big visions of change .
CFACT has been fully engaged with the UN climate change process since its inception .
Yvo used to run it , until he left to cash in as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only way that a 2015 agreement can achieve a 2-degree goal , ” de Boer said in 2013 , “ is to shut down the whole global economy.
” Both the terror that prompted the COVID-19 lock down , and the frightening scenarios climate pressure groups launch into an all-too-receptive media , are grounded not in reality , but extreme scenarios in computer models .
They have never approached reality .
As CFACT explained as the virus economic shut down was in its infancy : every dollar you spend , no matter how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a free market economy that power is tremendous .
When we withdraw from the marketplace , a reverse multiplier takes hold with a strangling grip .
Freedom is the right of every person on Earth .
Like America ’ s founding father ’ s , we at CFACT hold that truth to be self-evident .
Freedom feeds the world .
Socialism and control starve it .
Whatever challenge we face , it is economic freedom that will provide the means to meet it .

The world is reopening and economic recovery is gathering steam.
Global warming campaigners don’t like this one bit. They view the COVID-19 shutdown as a model for the future they want.
CFACT senior policy advisor Paul Driessen explains:
Echoing former Obama science advisor John Holdren, they want the United States and other modern societies to de-develop and de-industrialize, establish low-consumption life styles that ensure “more equitable distribution of wealth,” and tell poor countries how much “ecologically feasible” development they will be permitted to pursue.
CFACT’s Marc Morano posted extensive coverage to CFACT’s Climate Depot including this royal pearl of wisdom from Britain’s Prince Charles who told the World Economic Forum:
We have a unique but rapidly shrinking window of opportunity to learn lessons and reset ourselves on a more sustainable path… We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this crisis. Its unprecedented shockwaves may well make people more receptive to big visions of change.
Does anyone remember Yvo de Boer?
CFACT does.
CFACT has been fully engaged with the UN climate change process since its inception. Yvo used to run it, until he left to cash in as a professional carbon trader.
“The only way that a 2015 agreement can achieve a 2-degree goal,” de Boer said in 2013, “is to shut down the whole global economy.”
Both the terror that prompted the COVID-19 lock down, and the frightening scenarios climate pressure groups launch into an all-too-receptive media, are grounded not in reality, but extreme scenarios in computer models. They have never approached reality.
As CFACT explained as the virus economic shut down was in its infancy: every dollar you spend, no matter how trivial, has an economic multiplier effect. In a free market economy that power is tremendous. When we withdraw from the marketplace, a reverse multiplier takes hold with a strangling grip.
Freedom is the right of every person on Earth. Like America’s founding father’s, we at CFACT hold that truth to be self-evident.
Freedom feeds the world. Socialism and control starve it.
Whatever challenge we face, it is economic freedom that will provide the means to meet it.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-10--Trump order confronts Big Tech bias

Trump order confronts Big Tech bias

President Trump finally issued an targeting viewpoint discrimination by Big Tech social media companies .
The Order grows out of Trump ’ s summit on this thorny issue last July .
Topping the list of targets are Facebook , Twitter , Instagram , YouTube and Google , but there are many other possibilities .
This form of discrimination is very much uncharted legal territory .
The chosen central concept for Big Tech wrongdoing is “ censorship ” , as the EO is titled “ Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship ” .
This choice in itself is a strategic legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hunting license for federal agencies .
There are two distinct parts .
The first is basically laying out a number of legal arguments .
If you are not familiar with the legal issues this may seem like empty rhetoric , but it is actually the opposite .
The lawyers who wrote this order are preparing to stand before a judge .
In fact the Order begins by focusing on the present law , which protects Big Tech from liability when they publish someone else ’ s content .
Here is the opening paragraph @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is presented as a Federal policy : “ It is the policy of the United States to foster clear ground rules promoting free and open debate on the internet .
Prominent among the ground rules governing that debate is the immunity from liability created by section 230 ( c ) of the Communications Decency Act ( section 230 ( c ) ) .
47 U.S.C .
230 ( c ) .
It is the policy of the United States that the scope of that immunity should be clarified : the immunity should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to provide protection for those who purport to provide users a forum for free and open speech , but in reality use their power over a vital means of communication to engage in deceptive or pretextual actions stifling free and open debate by censoring certain viewpoints.
” The argument , which I like very much , is that at least some the various discriminatory actions are editorial in nature and as such they are not protected by section 230 ( c ) .
That is , the content is that of the Big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ videos that express climate change skepticism as “ fact checked false ” is a glaring example .
Other cases are not so clear , such as Google News listing 90 % or more liberal articles .
Something other than limiting section 230 ( c ) is probably required to adequately address this sort of ‘ discrimination by selection ’ .
The Order explores these issues as well .
The second part of the Order encourages various Federal agencies to investigate these issues .
They are encouraged rather than ordered because the President can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action against private parties .
Action on section 230 ( c ) is especially hands off .
That law is enforced by the Federal Communications Commission , which is an independent agency .
Technically it does not work for the President .
So the Order tells another agency , in the President ’ s Department of Commerce , to petition the FCC regarding 230 ( c ) .
In short there is a lot of potentially powerful legal machinery gearing up in this Order .
Some of the liberal pundits that have bashed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They think that because the Order does not tell people to do stuff it has no teeth .
It is actually pulling some really big legal levers , loosing the hunting hounds , as it were .
I suspect some of those hounds helped write it .
In addition , President Trump has issued a lengthy on the Order .
They are actually an informal interview of sorts , with people asking questions .
One wonders just what force these remarks have ?
Given that it is the President explaining his own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same authority as the Order .
Here is the basic argument , extracted from the opening remarks : “ A small handful of powerful social media monopolies control a vast portion of all public and private communications in the United States .
They have had unchecked power to censor , restrict , edit , shape , hide , alter virtually any form of communication between private citizens and large public audiences .
There ’ s no precedent in American history for so small a number of corporations to control so large a sphere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bias is a threat to freedom itself .
Imagine if your phone company silenced or edited your conversation .
Social media companies have vastly more power and more reach than any phone company in the United States .
More reach , actually , than your newspapers , by far .
More reach than a lot of your traditional forms of communication .
Therefore , today I ’ m signing an executive order to protect and uphold the free speech and rights of the American people.
” I have done research on how Google @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how Google itself discriminates against skeptics of climate alarmism .
See for example these two articles : How Google discriminates against conservatives and climate skeptics ( ) Based on my research , I think President Trump is clearly on the right track ; here ’ s hoping his hunt is successful .
It may take a second term .
Stay tuned to CFACT .

President Trump finally issued an Executive Order targeting viewpoint discrimination by Big Tech social media companies. The Order grows out of Trump’s summit on this thorny issue last July. Topping the list of targets are Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and Google, but there are many other possibilities.
This form of discrimination is very much uncharted legal territory. The chosen central concept for Big Tech wrongdoing is “censorship”, as the EO is titled “Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship”. This choice in itself is a strategic legal decision.
The Order is basically a hunting license for federal agencies. There are two distinct parts. The first is basically laying out a number of legal arguments. If you are not familiar with the legal issues this may seem like empty rhetoric, but it is actually the opposite. The lawyers who wrote this order are preparing to stand before a judge.
In fact the Order begins by focusing on the present law, which protects Big Tech from liability when they publish someone else’s content. Here is the opening paragraph on that legal issue. Note that it is presented as a Federal policy:
“It is the policy of the United States to foster clear ground rules promoting free and open debate on the internet. Prominent among the ground rules governing that debate is the immunity from liability created by section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act (section 230(c)). 47 U.S.C. 230(c). It is the policy of the United States that the scope of that immunity should be clarified: the immunity should not extend beyond its text and purpose to provide protection for those who purport to provide users a forum for free and open speech, but in reality use their power over a vital means of communication to engage in deceptive or pretextual actions stifling free and open debate by censoring certain viewpoints.”
The argument, which I like very much, is that at least some of the various discriminatory actions are editorial in nature and as such they are not protected by section 230(c). That is, the content is that of the Big Tech online platform. Labeling articles or videos that express climate change skepticism as “fact checked false” is a glaring example.
Other cases are not so clear, such as Google News listing 90% or more liberal articles. Something other than limiting section 230(c) is probably required to adequately address this sort of ‘discrimination by selection’. The Order explores these issues as well.
The second part of the Order encourages various Federal agencies to investigate these issues. They are encouraged rather than ordered because the President cannot order enforcement agencies to take adverse action against private parties.
Action on section 230(c) is especially hands off. That law is enforced by the Federal Communications Commission, which is an independent agency. Technically it does not work for the President. So the Order tells another agency, in the President’s Department of Commerce, to petition the FCC regarding 230(c).
In short there is a lot of potentially powerful legal machinery gearing up in this Order. Some of the liberal pundits that have bashed the Order have completely missed this fact. They think that because the Order does not tell people to do stuff it has no teeth. It is actually pulling some really big legal levers, loosing the hunting hounds, as it were. I suspect some of those hounds helped write it.
In addition, President Trump has issued a lengthy set of remarks on the Order. They are actually an informal interview of sorts, with people asking questions. One wonders just what force these remarks have? Given that it is the President explaining his own order, they may well have the same authority as the Order.
Here is the basic argument, extracted from the opening remarks:
“A small handful of powerful social media monopolies control a vast portion of all public and private communications in the United States.
They have had unchecked power to censor, restrict, edit, shape, hide, alter virtually any form of communication between private citizens and large public audiences. There’s no precedent in American history for so small a number of corporations to control so large a sphere of human interaction.
This censorship and bias is a threat to freedom itself. Imagine if your phone company silenced or edited your conversation. Social media companies have vastly more power and more reach than any phone company in the United States. More reach, actually, than your newspapers, by far. More reach than a lot of your traditional forms of communication.
Therefore, today I’m signing an executive order to protect and uphold the free speech and rights of the American people.”
I have done research on how Google News discriminates against conservative news sources and how Google itself discriminates against skeptics of climate alarmism. See for example these two articles:
Google’s global warming search bias ( here )
How Google discriminates against conservatives and climate skeptics ( here )
Based on my research, I think President Trump is clearly on the right track; here’s hoping his hunt is successful. It may take a second term. Stay tuned to CFACT.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-11--Trump rolls back Obama’s North Atlantic monument fishing ban

In a proclamation issued June 5 , President Trump lifted a fishing ban on 4,000 miles of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Monument , located about 130 miles off the New England coast .
The ban on fishing had been slapped on the area in the final days of the Obama administration as part of the executive order creating the marine national monument under the 1910 Antiquities Act .
Bitterly opposed by the New England seafood industry and many state and local officials of both parties , Obama ’ s move spawned lawsuits that have been winding their way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia , with no success , for three years .
“ We ’ re opening it up today , ” Trump told a White House roundtable consisting of fishermen and former Maine Republican Gov .
Paul LePage .
“ We ’ re undoing his executive order .
What was his reason ?
He didn ’ t have a reason , in my opinion.
” ( Washington Post , June 5 ) The move was hailed by crabbers , lobstermen , and others whose livelihoods depend on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a fishing industry group , thanked the president “ for restoring sustainable fishing activities in Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument.
” The group added that fishery management decisions should be made through the robust council process required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act and not through monument designations .
Today ’ s action returns fishery management within the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts to the councils , which successfully managed these areas before the monument was created in 2016 and will continue to do so now.
” In justifying the ban on commercial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said it would protect the area ’ s “ pristine ” quality , even though commercial fishing , and not overfishing , had gone on there for decades .
Trump ’ s proclamation puts commercial fishing on equal footing with recreational fishing , which , under the Obama policy , had not been banned within the monument ’ s boundaries .
The 1976 Magnuson-Stevens Act ( Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act ) is the primary law governing marine fisheries management in U.S. federal waters .
Among other things , it created eight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and seek to protect marine mammals and other species from becoming entangled in lines and nets or from being injured by dangling hooks .
In the aftermath of the 2016 Obama ban on commercial fishing in the new monument , the regional councils have repeatedly asked that fishery management in national marine monuments be returned to the councils .
In a May 2020 letter to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross , the councils wrote , “ The ban on commercial fishing within Marine National Monument waters is a regulatory burden on domestic fisheries , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to travel outside U.S. waters with increased operational expenses and higher safety-at-sea risks.
” Early in the Trump administration , Reps .
Rob Bishop ( R-Utah ) and Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen ( R-American Samoa ) wrote the president calling on the ban on commercial fishing in the monument to be lifted so American fishermen could compete internationally .
They then added : “ Using the Antiquities Act to close U.S. waters to domestic fisheries is a clear example of federal overreach and regulatory duplication and obstructs well-managed , sustainable U.S. fishing industries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

In a proclamation issued June 5, President Trump lifted a fishing ban on 4,000 miles of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Monument, located about 130 miles off the New England coast.
The ban on fishing had been slapped on the area in the final days of the Obama administration as part of the executive order creating the marine national monument under the 1910 Antiquities Act. Bitterly opposed by the New England seafood industry and many state and local officials of both parties, Obama’s move spawned lawsuits that have been winding their way through a federal district and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, with no success, for three years.
“We’re opening it up today,” Trump told a White House roundtable consisting of fishermen and former Maine Republican Gov. Paul LePage. “We’re undoing his executive order. What was his reason? He didn’t have a reason, in my opinion.” (Washington Post, June 5)
“Restoring Sustainable Fishing Activities”
The move was hailed by crabbers, lobstermen, and others whose livelihoods depend on a vibrant seafood industry. Saving Seafood, a fishing industry group, thanked the president “for restoring sustainable fishing activities in Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument.” The group added that fishery management decisions should be made through the robust council process required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act and not through monument designations. Today’s action returns fishery management within the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts to the councils, which successfully managed these areas before the monument was created in 2016 and will continue to do so now.”
In justifying the ban on commercial fishing, Obama and other monument supporters said it would protect the area’s “pristine” quality, even though commercial fishing, and not overfishing, had gone on there for decades. Trump’s proclamation puts commercial fishing on equal footing with recreational fishing, which, under the Obama policy, had not been banned within the monument’s boundaries.
The 1976 Magnuson-Stevens Act (Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act) is the primary law governing marine fisheries management in U.S. federal waters. Among other things, it created eight regional councils, which guard against overfishing and seek to protect marine mammals and other species from becoming entangled in lines and nets or from being injured by dangling hooks.
In the aftermath of the 2016 Obama ban on commercial fishing in the new monument, the regional councils have repeatedly asked that fishery management in national marine monuments be returned to the councils.
“Regulatory Burden on Domestic Fishermen”
In a May 2020 letter to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, the councils wrote, “The ban on commercial fishing within Marine National Monument waters is a regulatory burden on domestic fisheries, requiring many of the affected American fishermen to travel outside U.S. waters with increased operational expenses and higher safety-at-sea risks.”
Early in the Trump administration, Reps. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) and Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen (R-American Samoa) wrote the president calling on the ban on commercial fishing in the monument to be lifted so American fishermen could compete internationally. They then added: “Using the Antiquities Act to close U.S. waters to domestic fisheries is a clear example of federal overreach and regulatory duplication and obstructs well-managed, sustainable U.S. fishing industries in favor of their foreign counterparts.”


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-11--The 97% consensus myth — Watch Now

The 97% consensus myth — Watch Now

97 Percent of scientists believe in catastrophic human caused climate change ?
Of course not !
But far too many @ @ @ @ @ defies basic logic and observation .
( Can you think of any highly-political issue where @ @ @ @ @ % agreement ? )
The 97 % Myth has succeeded in fooling many people because @ @ @ @ @ over and over again by those who have a financial and/or ideological stake in the @ @ @ @ @ , what any scientist ‘ believes ’ doesn ’ t matter anyway .
Science is @ @ @ @ @ repeated experimentation .

97 Percent of scientists believe in catastrophic human caused climate change?
Of course not!
But far too many believe this ridiculous statement that defies basic logic and observation. (Can you think of any highly-political issue where you could get even 65% agreement?) The 97% Myth has succeeded in fooling many people because the phony number is repeated over and over again by those who have a financial and/or ideological stake in the outcome.
By the way, what any scientist ‘believes’ doesn’t matter anyway. Science is what happens during rigorous and repeated experimentation.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-09--Reining in Green bureaucracy

Reining in Green bureaucracy

It took about 13 months and 15 days to construct the Empire State Building in New York City , which opened in 1931 on 34th street in midtown Manhattan .
At 1,250 feet and 102 stories , it was the tallest building in the world until 1970 , when the Twin Towers in downtown eclipsed it .
It took 11 years to construct the Freedom Tower , which opened 2014 adjacent to where the Twin Towers once stood .
At 1,300 feet , this skyscraper took nearly ten times longer to construct .
This comparison and countless other examples are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week signed an executive order for federal agencies to shorten environmental reviews for construction of highways , mines , pipelines and other projects on federal lands as the nation continues to suffer economically during the Covid-19 emergency .
Modern day construction of infrastructure takes too long and becomes too expensive due , at least in part , to mandated , multi-layered bureaucratic reviews .
Laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA ) , the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act require agencies to conduct multi-step , detailed reviews @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the environment .
The executive order is a continuation of efforts by the president going back three years to streamline these regulatory reviews in order to speed up projects , lower their cost and strengthen the economy .
NEPA has been on the books since 1970 .
Such laws are necessary and warranted , yet many anti-development and Green groups have historically used them not to ensure adequate reviews and safeguards , but to stop human progress and modernization .
Litigation also reaps a financial bonanza for trial lawyers , who also are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , built in the 1950 ’ s , is one of the greatest public work achievements in history , a crown jewel of President Eisenhower ’ s administration .
It is fully embraced by millions of Americans who drive on it , and integral to the economy .
Imagine trying to build that system today ?
It is unimaginable , with the multitude of agencies and laws involved .
The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act ( ARRA ) in 2009 , which passed to help the nation recover from the Great Recession , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 787 billion undertaking ( which was big money at the time ) was sold as an infrastructure bill that would bring “ shovel-ready projects ” to completion and create jobs .
It did little , absent a small portion that was used for highway and bridge repair .
President Obama later acknowledged that “ ’ shovel-ready ’ was not as shovel-ready as we expected.
” President Trump ’ s latest executive order does not repeal NEPA or any other statute .
It can not .
Rather , it is about administering such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manner , which is a discussion worth having , especially now .
The Trump administration has been pushing the debate over the costs and benefits of environmental laws and processes affecting construction and job creation , especially now as the nation grapples with economic collapse from the pandemic with millions of Americans out of work .
Sadly , millions of unemployed Americans will have no sympathy from extremist Green groups and politicians who , right on key , assume the worst from streamlining environmental regulations .
A comment by Christy Goldfuss of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example .
Goldfuss headed President Obama ’ s Council on Environmental Quality , and said the Trump administration is “ trying to divert attention away ( sic ) from the crisis of racial injustice happening around the country by giving agency leads the excuse to ram through polluting projects that will prop up the dying fossil fuel industry while destroying the very same communities that are dying at higher rates from Covid-19 and police violence as well.
” Ms. Goldfuss ’ attempt to conflate streamlining of environmental reviews with racial politics is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s also an example of the impossibility of having an honest debate about anything in this country .
Notice further her mention of “ prop [ ing ] up the dying fossil fuel industry.
” There ’ s the real rub for green activists .
Killing fossil fuels is the key ingredient to transforming America in ways that will make us poorer and more dependent on the government for sustenance , which ultimately empowers people influencing and running the government .
The Trump administration ’ s efforts to streamline bureaucratic oversight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not zero-sum anti-environment , despite the hysteria from the usual suspects .
We need not return to the days when a skyscraper or major bridge crossing could be built in a year ; but when it takes up to a decade and longer , then the environmental process needs fixing to ensure a sensible , cost-effective balance .


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-12--Batteries not a sustainable backup for wind and solar — Part II: Safety, health & cost

Joy and Celebration : In his Laudeat et Jubilat , Mozart gave specific instructions to the conductor ; “ Allegro ma non troppo , ” or play it happily , but not so much .
In this second and concluding part on backing up inconsistent wind and solar energy with battery storage , we give these same instructions to the Governors , Utility , and Industry captains .
They will joyfully receive the mega-billion dollar contracts for the solar and wind plants .
They will be supercharged with storage batteries and they will fail with spectacular short falls , short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extend this warning signal to the delusional virtue-signaling do-gooders and Sierra Club hypocrites in hiding , who are all well over their ski tips on these misadventures .
The government has approved a billion dollar solar energy facility in the Mohave Desert 30 miles from Las Vegas .
Warren Buffett has signed a contract to buy the energy from it for his energy company at a price of 4 cents per Kw for 25 years based on the costs estimated for the facility at , $ 1,000,000,000 .
When you get to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ costs we estimate for the solar facility , if it is ever completed , ( which is doubtful ) , you will no doubt break out laughing .
But the citizens of Las Vegas will not be laughing .
They will be crying as they see their electric bills triple .
For the same cost we estimate for the Gemini Solar plant , Mr. Buffett and friends could build a nuclear power plant on less ground in the Mohave Desert that would produce four times more energy that would be fully reliable and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nuclear power plant costs have increased to the level of our solar plant estimate due to the exorbitant costs and risks of decade-long licensing restrictions and litigations .
Lithium ion batteries in the desert will never have an equal safety assurance .
In Part I of this series , we demonstrated the planet-scale environmental destruction done in the name of “ save the planet : ” first by switching to wind and solar power then made all the worse by the addition of storage batteries .
In this concluding Part II , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the public resulting from the addition of these lithium-ion storage batteries .
We also look at their cost impact that the taxpayers and customers will have to bear .
Perhaps we can inspire Michael Moore to make a sequel to his outstanding movie “ THE PLANET FOR THE HUMANS ” to bring these real costs out in the open .
Here ’ s what we are talking about .
Figure 1 is an illustration of a typical electrical generating plant .
In item A , we have a fossil plant providing power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ item D. The idea now is to add a solar or wind plant , item B , to replace a portion of the power when the wind is blowing , or the sun is shining , thus “ reducing ” the fossil-fuels burned by item A for a few hours a day .
But because solar and wind are intermittent and unreliable , item A can not be turned off .
Instead , it is powered down and kept running on standby in case it has to be brought back to full power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blackout .
In this standby mode , item A is still burning about 90-95 % of the same fuel and still producing about the same CO2 and pollutants as if the wind/solar plants were not there .
Now the sought-after goal is to try to eliminate the item A generator altogether and have the sun/wind first charge the item C batteries and , at the same time , produce some electricity for the customers , item D. When they are fully charged , the sun/wind will provide electricity to item D customers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the back up so the fossil plant can be eliminated .
But what if there ’ s no wind or sun for several days and batteries are good for 2 , 3 m aybe 4 hours a day ?
Meanwhile .
The homes , businesses , offices , hospitals still need electricity to be safe and stay alive .
So , we have all of the ingredients for the formerly famous Rube Goldberg to find an engineering solution with one of his strange complex machines .
But it doesn ’ t end here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are reminded of the many warnings we have seen and heard on the use , storage , and safe disposal of electric lithium-ion batteries .
Safety and health concerns .
In Engineering school , we were taught about Murphy ’ s Law !
If anything can go wrong , it will , and at the worst time , and in the worst direction .
If you need a reminder , here are some headlines from around the world .
· Bloomberg , [ ii ] “ Another lithium-ion battery has exploded , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US By Brian Eckhouse and Mark Chediak .
April 23 , 2019 , updated on April 24 , 2019 : Battery exploded at plant in Arizona ; two others were shut .
Arizona utility regulator calls for ‘ thorough investigation.
” “ At least 21 fires had already occurred at battery projects in South Korea , according to Bloomberg NEF .
But this latest one , erupting on Friday at a facility owned by a Pinnacle West Capital Corp. utility in Surprise , Arizona , marked the first time it has happened in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ From around the world • South Korea : 3-years ago passed new regulation To Strengthen Battery Safety Rules After 7 Fires.
” From this one web page , you see the many reports on the fire and explosion records in S. Korea related to Lithium-Ion Batteries .
Especially check out the YouTube videos .
“ Lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage Systems – The risks and how to manage them.
” [ vi ] • Safety is a relative term , and in these many articles , it ’ s used in comparative terms , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” or ” It is repeated so often by the many authors that they seem compelled to convince us that the Lithium-Ion batteries are safe .
Electrical utility storage batteries are not unique , and all are built with the same underlying architecture .
For example , the latest/most powerful Tesla battery , 102KWh , is made up of about 8,200 individual batteries , each a bit larger than a standard A-A .
They are bundled and sealed into a subunit with a cooling system added for safety .
Eight or 12 or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stacked and connected to make up the required working units .
This illustrative 102KWh Tesla battery measures about 7 foot by 4 foot by 7 inches and weighs about 1,200 lbs .
They are costly .
For a typical application , say a 450 MW plant , and 1,500MWh , you would need about 16,000 of these Tesla batteries for a total battery weight of about 10,000 tons plus the housings , structures , connecting , and controlling equipment .
Then depending on how they are used/cycled , they may need replacement every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assume 3.5 services years and a plant is designed for 25-year service life , a total of more than 110,000 of these batteries will be needed .
Then comes the question , is Tesla using the Gillette model for the sale of the installation batteries , then make a fortune off the subsequent spare batteries ?
Let ’ s do some arithmetic : using Tesla [ xi ] and IAEA data , table 5.1 [ xii ] here ’ s what we get for the estimated 25 year life cycle cost ( cost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ variable operation and maintenance. )
.
We could provide the cost of electricity by about $ 2.5 Billion .
Then , if we add the solar panel , the cost increases by a factor of two to $ 5 Billion .
If we then add a battery backup , the cost goes up by more than three times to about $ 8 billion .
Let ’ s wrap up this insanity .
For this one typical plant , we have more than tripled the cost of electricity so that batteries can be used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a few hours per day .
Our industry leaders have doubled-tripled their sales , our politicians got re-elected , our delusional do-gooders are feeling noble , and what did we get for it ?
• · Maybe , a 0 % reduction in CO2 and pollution • · We lost about 3,000 to 4,000 acres of farmlands and wilderness • · We have increased the strip-mines by a factor of 10 • · We have increased the environmental damage , reduced public safety , and increased toxicity risk by a factor of 10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasted money Why ?
The increased health and safety risks We have all witnessed gigantic cost over runs on government projects , but overrunning the cost 8 fold may be a record .
We are quite certain of our numbers .
FOR THOSE OF YOU WONDERING HOW WE ARRIVED AT OUR FIGURES Here are the back up cost estimates – Cost of Battery system ; We start with a necessary solar plant , at about $ 130/KWh per KWh , and 1,500,000 KWh – the cost of capital is about $ 195 $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cost of about $ 1.2 Billion -When we now add the cost of the battery plant , controls , and management system , and maintenance for 25 years , and demolition costs , estimate a total cost of $ 2.5 to $ 3.5 Billion , use $ 3.0 Billion .
– Now add the cost of a solar PV plant [ xiii ] , at $ 2,650 per KW , ( $ 1.2 Billion ) plus installation , and O & M estimate a total $ 25-year life cycle cost and demolition of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a combined cycle gas plant : [ xiv ] at $ 1,000 $ /KW , estimate cost at $ 0.45 Billion plus fixed and variable O & M for 25 years ; approximately $ 2.0 Billion , for a total of about $ 2.5 Billion .
– The total life cycle cost for a combined cycle plant is $ 2 .
5 Billion , then to save about 3.5 hours/day of operation , we add a solar plant , and costs increase to $ 5 Billion with practically no reduction in O & @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – Then add a battery system as a backup and service , we add another $ 3 Billion for a total cost of about $ 8.0 Billion .
– Increase the cost of electricity by a factor of 8/2.5= about three times with no significant reduction in CO2 , pollution , or fossil fuel .
We have all witnessed gigantic cost over runs on government projects , but overrunning the cost eight fold might be a record .
We know of what we speak .

Joy and Celebration: In his Laudeat et Jubilat, Mozart gave specific instructions to the conductor; “Allegro ma non troppo,” or play it happily, but not so much.
In this second and concluding part on backing up inconsistent wind and solar energy with battery storage, we give these same instructions to the Governors, Utility, and Industry captains. They will joyfully receive the mega-billion dollar contracts for the solar and wind plants. They will be supercharged with storage batteries and they will fail with spectacular short falls, short of tripling customer costs. We also extend this warning signal to the delusional virtue-signaling do-gooders and Sierra Club hypocrites in hiding, who are all well over their ski tips on these misadventures.
The government has approved a billion dollar solar energy facility in the Mohave Desert 30 miles from Las Vegas. Warren Buffett has signed a contract to buy the energy from it for his energy company at a price of 4 cents per Kw for 25 years based on the costs estimated for the facility at, $1,000,000,000. When you get to the end of this article and see the costs we estimate for the solar facility, if it is ever completed, (which is doubtful), you will no doubt break out laughing . But the citizens of Las Vegas will not be laughing. They will be crying as they see their electric bills triple.
For the same cost we estimate for the Gemini Solar plant, Mr. Buffett and friends could build a nuclear power plant on less ground in the Mohave Desert that would produce four times more energy that would be fully reliable and the safest for mankind and the environment. Nuclear power plant costs have increased to the level of our solar plant estimate due to the exorbitant costs and risks of decade-long licensing restrictions and litigations. Lithium ion batteries in the desert will never have an equal safety assurance.
In Part I of this series, we demonstrated the planet-scale environmental destruction done in the name of “save the planet:” first by switching to wind and solar power then made all the worse by the addition of storage batteries. In this concluding Part II, we demonstrate the health and safety risks to the public resulting from the addition of these lithium-ion storage batteries. We also look at their cost impact that the taxpayers and customers will have to bear. Perhaps we can inspire Michael Moore to make a sequel to his outstanding movie “THE PLANET FOR THE HUMANS” to bring these real costs out in the open.
Here’s what we are talking about. Figure 1 is an illustration of a typical electrical generating plant. In item A, we have a fossil plant providing power to the homes and business shown as item D. The idea now is to add a solar or wind plant, item B, to replace a portion of the power when the wind is blowing, or the sun is shining, thus “reducing” the fossil-fuels burned by item A for a few hours a day. But because solar and wind are intermittent and unreliable, item A cannot be turned off. Instead, it is powered down and kept running on standby in case it has to be brought back to full power in a few seconds to prevent a blackout. In this standby mode, item A is still burning about 90-95% of the same fuel and still producing about the same CO2 and pollutants as if the wind/solar plants were not there.
Now the sought-after goal is to try to eliminate the item A generator altogether and have the sun/wind first charge the item C batteries and, at the same time, produce some electricity for the customers, item D. When they are fully charged, the sun/wind will provide electricity to item D customers. The item C batteries would ideally provide the back up so the fossil plant can be eliminated. But what if there’s no wind or sun for several days and batteries are good for 2, 3 m aybe 4 hours a day? Meanwhile. The homes, businesses, offices, hospitals still need electricity to be safe and stay alive. So, we have all of the ingredients for the formerly famous Rube Goldberg to find an engineering solution with one of his strange complex machines.
But it doesn’t end here? Looking at Figure 2, we are reminded of the many warnings we have seen and heard on the use, storage, and safe disposal of electric lithium-ion batteries.
Safety and health concerns. In Engineering school, we were taught about Murphy’s Law! If anything can go wrong, it will, and at the worst time, and in the worst direction. If you need a reminder, here are some headlines from around the world.
· Bloomberg,[ii] “Another lithium-ion battery has exploded, this time at an energy-storage complex in the US By Brian Eckhouse and Mark Chediak. April 23, 2019, updated on April 24, 2019: Battery exploded at plant in Arizona; two others were shut. Arizona utility regulator calls for ‘thorough investigation.” “At least 21 fires had already occurred at battery projects in South Korea, according to Bloomberg NEF. But this latest one, erupting on Friday at a facility owned by a Pinnacle West Capital Corp. utility in Surprise, Arizona, marked the first time it has happened in America since batteries took off globally.”
From around the world
South Korea: 3-years ago passed new regulation “ To Strengthen Battery Safety Rules After 7 Fires.” From this one web page, you see the many reports on the fire and explosion records in S. Korea related to Lithium-Ion Batteries. Especially check out the YouTube videos. [iii]
To Strengthen Battery Safety Rules After 7 Fires.” From this one web page, you see the many reports on the fire and explosion records in S. Korea related to Lithium-Ion Batteries. Especially check out the YouTube videos. Switzerland: [iv] May 17, 2018, “ Swiss prosecutors investigate fatal Tesla crash, suspect ‘thermal runaway’ of battery.”
May 17, 2018, Swiss prosecutors investigate fatal Tesla crash, suspect ‘thermal runaway’ of battery.” The USA, some recent events:
“Massive Lithium-Ion Battery Fire/Explosion Shows Challenges of Renewable Energy Storage” (apnews.com January 29. 2019)[v]
“Lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage Systems – The risks and how to manage them.” [vi]
“Hearing Aid Battery Technology Advances and Cautions,” [vii] and phones[viii]
Examining Lithium-Ion Battery Explosions, Stamford University, May 26, 2017[ix]
Lithium-ion Safety Concerns [x]
Safety is a relative term, and in these many articles, it’s used in comparative terms, such as “ to make it safer,” or “ to improve safety. ” It is repeated so often by the many authors that they seem compelled to convince us that the Lithium-Ion batteries are safe.
Electrical utility storage batteries are not unique, and all are built with the same underlying architecture. For example, the latest/most powerful Tesla battery, 102KWh, is made up of about 8,200 individual batteries, each a bit larger than a standard A-A. They are bundled and sealed into a subunit with a cooling system added for safety. Eight or 12 or any number of these subunits are then stacked and connected to make up the required working units. This illustrative 102KWh Tesla battery measures about 7 foot by 4 foot by 7 inches and weighs about 1,200 lbs.
They are costly. For a typical application, say a 450 MW plant, and 1,500MWh, you would need about 16,000 of these Tesla batteries for a total battery weight of about 10,000 tons plus the housings, structures, connecting, and controlling equipment. Then depending on how they are used/cycled, they may need replacement every 3 to 4 years. If we assume 3.5 services years and a plant is designed for 25-year service life, a total of more than 110,000 of these batteries will be needed. Then comes the question, is Tesla using the Gillette model for the sale of the installation batteries, then make a fortune off the subsequent spare batteries?
Let’s do some arithmetic: using Tesla[xi] and IAEA data, table 5.1[xii] here’s what we get for the estimated 25 year life cycle cost (cost of equipment, installation plus fixed and variable operation and maintenance.).
We could provide the cost of electricity by about $2.5 Billion. Then, if we add the solar panel, the cost increases by a factor of two to $5 Billion. If we then add a battery backup, the cost goes up by more than three times to about $8 billion.
Let’s wrap up this insanity. For this one typical plant, we have more than tripled the cost of electricity so that batteries can be used as back up to solar power for a few hours per day. Our industry leaders have doubled-tripled their sales, our politicians got re-elected, our delusional do-gooders are feeling noble, and what did we get for it?
· Maybe, a 0 % reduction in fossil fuel burned
· Maybe, a 0 % reduction in CO2 and pollution
· We lost about 3,000 to 4,000 acres of farmlands and wilderness
· We have increased the strip-mines by a factor of 10
· We have increased the environmental damage, reduced public safety, and increased toxicity risk by a factor of 10, or more ?
Why? Why the wasted money
Why? The destroyed environment
Why? The increased health and safety risks
Why? Why?
We have all witnessed gigantic cost over runs on government projects, but overrunning the cost 8 fold may be a record. We are quite certain of our numbers.
‘’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’
FOR THOSE OF YOU WONDERING HOW WE ARRIVED AT OUR FIGURES
Here are the back up cost estimates
– Cost of fossil plant $2.5 Billion, baseline costs
– Cost of solar plant $2.5Billion,
– Cost of batteries $3.0 Billion
Total $8.0 Billion
– Cost of Battery system; We start with a necessary solar plant, at about $130/KWh per KWh, and 1,500,000 KWh – the cost of capital is about $195$ Mil plus 6.15 spares for a total cost of about $1.2 Billion
-When we now add the cost of the battery plant, controls, and management system, and maintenance for 25 years, and demolition costs, estimate a total cost of $2.5 to $3.5 Billion, use $3.0 Billion.
– Now add the cost of a solar PV plant[xiii], at $2,650 per KW, ($1.2 Billion) plus installation, and O & M estimate a total $ 25-year life cycle cost and demolition of about $2.5 Billion
– Cost of a combined cycle gas plant: [xiv] at $1,000 $/KW, estimate cost at $0.45 Billion plus fixed and variable O&M for 25 years; approximately $2.0 Billion, for a total of about $2.5 Billion.
– The total life cycle cost for a combined cycle plant is $2. 5 Billion, then to save about 3.5 hours/day of operation, we add a solar plant, and costs increase to $5 Billion with practically no reduction in O&M cost of CO2 or pollution.
– Then add a battery system as a backup and service, we add another $3 Billion for a total cost of about $ 8.0 Billion.
– Increase the cost of electricity by a factor of 8/2.5= about three times with no significant reduction in CO2, pollution, or fossil fuel.
We have all witnessed gigantic cost over runs on government projects, but overrunning the cost eight fold might be a record. We know of what we speak.
[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-alone_power_system
[ii] [ii] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-23/explosions-are-threatening-lithium-ion-s-edge-in-a-battery-race
[iii] https://search.yahoo.comhttps://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=E211US105G0&p=south+korean+starage+battery+accidents/search?fr=mcafee&type=E211US105G0&p=south+korean+starage+battery+accidents
[iv] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-swiss-tesla-crash-idUSKCN1IH25G
[v] https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/19/06/29/0144251/massive-lithium-ion-battery-fireexplosion-shows-challenges-of-renewable-energy-storage
[vi] http://www.hazardexonthenet.net/article/171930/Lithium-ion-Battery-Energy-Storage-Systems-The-risks-and-how-to-manage-them.aspx
[vii] https://hearinghealthmatters.org/theaudiologycondition/2017/hearing-aid-batteries-still-threat-use-caution/
[viii] http://www.benzoenergy.com/blog/post/how-to-design-the-internal-structure-of-a-safe-lithium-battery.html
[ix] http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/sheu2/
[x] https://batteryuniversity.com/learn/archive/lithium_ion_safety_concerns
[xi] https://insideevs.com/news/400529/tesla-battery-costs-dropping/
[xii] https://cleantechnica.com/2018/06/09/100-kwh-tesla-battery-cells-this-year-100-kwh-tesla-battery-packs-in-2020/
[xiii] https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/powerplants/capitalcost/pdf/capcost_assumption.pdf, Table 1
[xiv] https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/powerplants/capitalcost/pdf/capcost_assumption.pdf, Table 1


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-12--Pandemic uncertainty means more campuses going digital

The COVID-19 pandemic is having virally disruptive impacts on traditional brick and mortar academic campuses – and with no assured relief any time soon .
As with businesses , universities across the U.S. have also been forced to shut down their campuses .
Many officials have yet to decide whether their institutions will be able to reopen in the fall .
Responsive policies and arrangements must address inevitable certainty that COVID-19 positive students will be identified in a college building , residence hall , or other facility .
Each institution must warn and inform applicants and their parents that such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasonable protections and emergency countermeasures have been established .
Over at least the next six to 18 months , universities and colleges of all sizes must prepare for a painful period of adjustment as the country struggles to get the virus under control .
For example , they will have to retrofit classrooms , residences and dining halls to allow students to return safely , just as cities must prepare their transit systems and office buildings .
Contingency plans will also need to be put in place to prepare for the very real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the fall-spring academic schedule after non-resident on-site students have arrived from other domestic and international origins .
Such circumstances will discourage many current students from returning , and likely even more otherwise prospective new ones , from applying .
Students and their families will increasingly wonder whether a particular on-site program is valuable enough to warrant the costs when the same course offerings and credentials – sometimes even better ones – can be accessed online from anywhere .
Competitive universities and colleges must ponder and respond to these questions as well – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accredited distance programs .
Harvard and Stanford , for example , offer graduate level degree-granting programs that are accessible entirely online .
Although for-profit universities have been the quickest to adopt and exploit Internet technology to offer online degrees , the majority of public colleges now offer some academic programs completely online as well .
Popular fields of remote study include business , criminal justice , health sciences , engineering , and computer science .
Recent COVID-19 building closures at the University of Houston have “ introduced ” me to the necessity of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ space architecture students using Zoom , telephone , and emails .
And it has actually worked out surprisingly well .
One of the unique advantages was that unlike being limited to on-site attendees at their final project presentation reviews , a much expanded audience included several NASA and other aerospace professionals from other locales .
Some reviewing jury participants connected in from Japan , France and Australia .
One graduating thesis project was presented from NASA ’ s Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama , and two others were Zoomed in from separate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ duly recognizing present necessities and benefits of online communication , I wish to soon reestablish the very special sort of interpersonal bond , understanding and discourse with my students that comes only with physically being with them .
Small group and individual conversations about their lives , ideas , aspirations , challenges , and progress are very gratifying to me , just as I believe they are helpful to them .
Remote options also deny students ( and faculty ) access to sophisticated research laboratories , project fabrication workshops , and other common-use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , however , where remote electronic communications are perfectly adequate .
Distance learning has been broadly adopted , for example , as the training and education method of choice among busy working professionals .
Remote teaching programs and methods can be custom-designed and tailored to various needs and circumstances .
Briefly summarized , there are three general models .
In “ synchronous distance learning , ” the simplest , all learners participate jointly in class lectures at the same scheduled time .
“ Asynchronous distance learning ” is the traditional model used by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provide more flexible and convenient opportunities to access course materials whenever they want , without fixed-schedule limitations .
Many higher education institutions combine asynchronous with synchronous methods .
Such “ blended ” or “ flipped ” programs are gaining special popularity for project-based experiences by enabling students to digest content at their own pace , and to use classroom time to attack difficult problems .
A flipped course , for example , might have students read over textbook pages , and then take an online quiz before class .
This frees class time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perform small-team tasks before receiving personalized face-to-face video collaboration with the instructor and other classmates .
As noted by Harvard Physics Professor Eric Mazur and former Nebraska governor and U.S .
Senator Bob Kerry in a May 5 Wall Street Journal piece , “ Higher Ed ’ s Coronavirus Opportunity , ” the entire purpose of a college education has come into question in recent years .
Mazur and Kerry observe , “ Almost all universities are treating the sudden forced movement online as a temporary problem .
The question is not how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how to return to normal as quickly as possible.
” I , for one , would very much like to return to that “ normal ” as well .
Perhaps sadly , possibly in many ways for the better , that old normal is now history .
Higher-education administrators and practitioners must seize upon this period of coronavirus upheaval and uncertainty as an incentive to apply and optimize benefits of virtual classrooms at every level to make learning more effective — both off campus or on .
Our only real choice now is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — into the future .

The COVID-19 pandemic is having virally disruptive impacts on traditional brick and mortar academic campuses – and with no assured relief any time soon.
As with businesses, universities across the U.S. have also been forced to shut down their campuses. Many officials have yet to decide whether their institutions will be able to reopen in the fall.
Responsive policies and arrangements must address inevitable certainty that COVID-19 positive students will be identified in a college building, residence hall, or other facility.
Each institution must warn and inform applicants and their parents that such risks exist, along with assurances that reasonable protections and emergency countermeasures have been established.
Over at least the next six to 18 months, universities and colleges of all sizes must prepare for a painful period of adjustment as the country struggles to get the virus under control.
For example, they will have to retrofit classrooms, residences and dining halls to allow students to return safely, just as cities must prepare their transit systems and office buildings.
Contingency plans will also need to be put in place to prepare for the very real possibility that a viral outbreak will reoccur during the fall-spring academic schedule after non-resident on-site students have arrived from other domestic and international origins.
Such circumstances will discourage many current students from returning, and likely even more otherwise prospective new ones, from applying.
Students and their families will increasingly wonder whether a particular on-site program is valuable enough to warrant the costs when the same course offerings and credentials – sometimes even better ones – can be accessed online from anywhere.
Competitive universities and colleges must ponder and respond to these questions as well – and many are. Most already offer accredited distance programs. Harvard and Stanford, for example, offer graduate level degree-granting programs that are accessible entirely online.
Although for-profit universities have been the quickest to adopt and exploit Internet technology to offer online degrees, the majority of public colleges now offer some academic programs completely online as well. Popular fields of remote study include business, criminal justice, health sciences, engineering, and computer science.
Recent COVID-19 building closures at the University of Houston have “introduced” me to the necessity of finishing up this semester with my graduate-level space architecture students using Zoom, telephone, and emails.
And it has actually worked out surprisingly well.
One of the unique advantages was that unlike being limited to on-site attendees at their final project presentation reviews, a much expanded audience included several NASA and other aerospace professionals from other locales. Some reviewing jury participants connected in from Japan, France and Australia.
One graduating thesis project was presented from NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama, and two others were Zoomed in from separate locations in Canada.
Nevertheless, while duly recognizing present necessities and benefits of online communication, I wish to soon reestablish the very special sort of interpersonal bond, understanding and discourse with my students that comes only with physically being with them.
Small group and individual conversations about their lives, ideas, aspirations, challenges, and progress are very gratifying to me, just as I believe they are helpful to them.
Remote options also deny students (and faculty) access to sophisticated research laboratories, project fabrication workshops, and other common-use facilities.
There are undoubtedly countless instances, however, where remote electronic communications are perfectly adequate. Distance learning has been broadly adopted, for example, as the training and education method of choice among busy working professionals.
Remote teaching programs and methods can be custom-designed and tailored to various needs and circumstances.
Briefly summarized, there are three general models.
In “synchronous distance learning,” the simplest, all learners participate jointly in class lectures at the same scheduled time.
“Asynchronous distance learning” is the traditional model used by most online colleges and universities seeking to provide more flexible and convenient opportunities to access course materials whenever they want, without fixed-schedule limitations.
Many higher education institutions combine asynchronous with synchronous methods. Such “blended” or “flipped” programs are gaining special popularity for project-based experiences by enabling students to digest content at their own pace, and to use classroom time to attack difficult problems.
A flipped course, for example, might have students read over textbook pages, and then take an online quiz before class. This frees class time to participate in peer discussion groups and perform small-team tasks before receiving personalized face-to-face video collaboration with the instructor and other classmates.
As noted by Harvard Physics Professor Eric Mazur and former Nebraska governor and U.S. Senator Bob Kerry in a May 5 Wall Street Journal piece, “Higher Ed’s Coronavirus Opportunity,” the entire purpose of a college education has come into question in recent years.
Mazur and Kerry observe, “Almost all universities are treating the sudden forced movement online as a temporary problem. The question is not how they could adapt and innovate, but how to return to normal as quickly as possible.”
I, for one, would very much like to return to that “normal” as well.
Perhaps sadly, possibly in many ways for the better, that old normal is now history.
Higher-education administrators and practitioners must seize upon this period of coronavirus upheaval and uncertainty as an incentive to apply and optimize benefits of virtual classrooms at every level to make learning more effective — both off campus or on.
Our only real choice now is to lead higher education — all education — into the future.
This article originally appeared at NewsMax


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-12--Shameless Gore goes woke

Shameless Gore goes woke

Never let a crisis go to waste .
As America confronts real issues of race , justice and civil order , global warming campaigners can ’ t resist shamelessly glomming on .
These issues are inextricably braided together…The one stupid trick that white supremacists have used for 150 years is to accentuate racial division in order to build support among lower-income , majority-white voters for a corporate agenda that actually hurts them .
It does this by increasing the amount of pollution in their communities… The training is about a good deal more than simply learning the facts and figures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It will have a deep and sustained emphasis on the nexus between racism and diversity and the climate challenge… I ’ m optimistic that joining together the climate movement and the racial equality movement will give us strength in numbers that will ultimately lead to success .
“ All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.
” Here ’ s the Sierra Club , which could be the poster child for once venerable organizations that have been co-opted by the Left and radicalized : We will never survive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Racism Is Killing the Planet : The ideology of white supremacy leads the way toward disposable people and a disposable natural world… When the United States pours carbon pollution into the air , knowing that people in countries that have contributed much less to the climate crisis will face the worst of the consequences , that is white supremacy… When big polluters try to buy our democracy so they can keep making money by devaluing the lives of people of color , that is white supremacy… When you come to see and understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ destruction , you ’ ll find yourself at a crossroads .
That crossroads will force you to decide which side you ’ re on .
Every person on Earth has a right to equal justice under law .
Keep your inaccurate climate computer models and inefficient , subsidized , “ renewable ” energy fortunes , and the energy poverty that flows from them , out of it .

Never let a crisis go to waste.
As America confronts real issues of race, justice and civil order, global warming campaigners can’t resist shamelessly glomming on.
CFACT’s Marc Morano has detailed coverage at Climate Depot.
Here’s Al Gore:
These issues are inextricably braided together…The one stupid trick that white supremacists have used for 150 years is to accentuate racial division in order to build support among lower-income, majority-white voters for a corporate agenda that actually hurts them. It does this by increasing the amount of pollution in their communities… The training is about a good deal more than simply learning the facts and figures and narratives that make up the slideshow. It will have a deep and sustained emphasis on the nexus between racism and diversity and the climate challenge… I’m optimistic that joining together the climate movement and the racial equality movement will give us strength in numbers that will ultimately lead to success.
Divide and conquer much?
Consider National Review’s John O’Sullivan’s first law:
“All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.”
Here’s the Sierra Club, which could be the poster child for once venerable organizations that have been co-opted by the Left and radicalized:
We will never survive the climate crisis without ending white supremacy… Racism Is Killing the Planet: The ideology of white supremacy leads the way toward disposable people and a disposable natural world… When the United States pours carbon pollution into the air, knowing that people in countries that have contributed much less to the climate crisis will face the worst of the consequences, that is white supremacy… When big polluters try to buy our democracy so they can keep making money by devaluing the lives of people of color, that is white supremacy… When you come to see and understand these intersections between white supremacy and environmental destruction, you’ll find yourself at a crossroads. That crossroads will force you to decide which side you’re on.
Every person on Earth has a right to equal justice under law.
That’s worth fighting for.
Keep your inaccurate climate computer models and inefficient, subsidized, “renewable” energy fortunes, and the energy poverty that flows from them, out of it.