committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-13--Michael Moore pulls back the curtain, exposes “renewable” energy reality

PLANET OF THE HUMANS is a new movie linked below for all to see that at last pulls the curtain away from the scandalous manner in which solar , wind and biofuel energy has been sold to an unsuspecting public .
It is directed and narrated by former self described “ tree hugger ” Jeff Gibbs and financed and produced by the well known documentarist Michael Moore .
This 100 minute “ tour de force ” could deservingly win an academy award .
With the exception of a few interviews of verbose folks and the sad ending plight of baboons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be among the most educational and enlightening films anyone will ever see .
Director Gibbs meticulously tears down every misconception about wind and solar energy through onsite interviews with the people managing the systems .
At a Michigan corporation with a solar array we were told that its 64,000 kilowatt hours per year capacity would actually only power 10 homes in the community .
At General Motors near Lansing the promotion of the Volt electric car was said to get its energy from the buildings wall outlet .
When asked where the building @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Lansing Power company which they assumed used coal or natural gas but were not sure .
In Vermont where a mountain was being denuded to build wind turbines , supporters of the project said if they could take down mountains in West Virginia to mine coal why not take them down in Vermont to build wind turbines .
Every where Jeff Gibbs took his camera , what was said to be “ green was not ” .
A zoo he visited was called the Elephant Poo Zoo because it was said to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elephant ’ s caretaker said the elephants did not make enough poo to light more than their confinement area .
Ozzie Zehner , visiting scholar at both UC Berkeley and NorthWestern University and author of Green Illusions accompanied Gibbs on many visits to green energy sites .
At one of the largest arrays of solar collectors Zehner explained that the idea that photvoltaic cells are made from inexpensive abundant sand was entirely untrue .
The impurities in sand make it unusable .
Pure quartz must be mined and heated with coal to 1800 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for PVC to obtain energy from the sun .
The sheets we were told capture only 8 % of the available solar energy .
It is possible to collect nearly all that energy as NASA does it on the MARS rovers but at a cost of a $ million per share inch .
Arnold Schwarzenegger makes a video appearance from his days as Governor of California speaking at the opening of the Ivanpah $ 2 billion solar energy farm .
He announced how “ we are now farming the desert for energy “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entire system did not work without using natural gas to power everything up where they use mirrors to heat oil in a container high off the ground .
The system was producing a small fraction of its design capacity and mirrors were broken all over the grounds .
A variety of companies such as Apple announced they were now operating entirely on renewable energy .
Behind the curtain the movie exposed the lies every time .
One of the funniest was an outdoor concert celebrating Earth Day .
It was advertised to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gibbs talked the sound crew into exposing the diesel generators actually sitting behind a curtain .
The workers said they could not afford to have the amplifiers stop in the middle of one of the band ’ s songs .
Perhaps the most outstanding parts of the movie was a fast forward moving picture of every aspect of the mining of materials and construction of every aspect of what is called renewable energy .
In two minutes you see the mining of silver , cobalt , graphite , coal , tin , steel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lithium , tin , galium arsenide , the operation of smelters , the movement of ships and trucks and the construction sites where solar arrays and wind turbines rise from the ground .
It is nothing short of amazing to see that so called green energy requires advanced industry and gigantic quantities of materials from the earth .
Some of the mining was done by hand by children in Africa .
Among the sadder if not most despicable portions of the movie was the denuding of vast forests to feed an electric generating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , burning thousands of cords of wood each day .
The radical environmentalists have brought this on by supporting government funding for the use of any fuel considered renewable .
In fact the burning of any biomass should top the list of the filthiest way to make electricity .
What were once well meaning if misguided environmentalists promoting renewable energy , are now driven by the greenest aspect in their movement which is now money .
Jeff Gibbs and his camera crew made every effort to tell all sides of the renewable energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He was able to obtain interviews and or news clips of many of the biggest names in what must now be called the renewable energy industry .
A sample of these include Dennis Hayes , the founder of Earth Day , Robert Kennedy Jr. , Bill McKibben of 350.org ( who humorously could not think of any groups that fund him ) , Michael Brune , President of The Sierra Club .
All speaking their own apparent sincere beliefs explaining that it is now necessary to wean our selves off of fossil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for energy in a sustainable renewable manner .
While they may be delusional they all seemed sincere , even the money moguls like Michael Bloomberg .
Recently this author combined with scientist/engineer Terigi Ciccone to create a light hearted book for parents , grandparents and the young published in March of this year titled The Hitchhikers Journey Through Climate Change .
In the book we discovered that we can sum up the renewable energy debate with a simple Rule of Thumb which states “ in every community electric grid an amount of fossil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the ready to go on line in seconds , that is equal to the potential output of all intermittent wind , solar and biomass energy considered a portion of the grids electric capacity ” When the viewer digests this simple rule of thumb , he or she will wonder that the pro/con arguments over renewables has stumbled along for decades without facing the only reality that can ever allow wind and solar energy to be an important part of our energy portfolio .
Sadly .
however , you may recognize that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and solar collectors in your energy arsenal is to build them but not use them .
Then you do not need to build extra fossil fuel capacity standing by at nearly full throttle but creating no electricity .

PLANET OF THE HUMANS is a new movie linked below for all to see, that at last pulls the curtain away from the scandalous manner in which solar, wind and biofuel energy has been sold to an unsuspecting public. It is directed and narrated by former self described “tree hugger” Jeff Gibbs and financed and produced by the well known documentarist Michael Moore. This 100 minute “tour de force” could deservingly win an academy award. With the exception of a few interviews of verbose folks and the sad ending plight of baboons left without a forest, it should be among the most educational and enlightening films anyone will ever see.
Director Gibbs meticulously tears down every misconception about wind and solar energy through onsite interviews with the people managing the systems.
At a Michigan corporation with a solar array we were told that its 64,000 kilowatt hours per year capacity would actually only power 10 homes in the community. At General Motors near Lansing the promotion of the Volt electric car was said to get its energy from the buildings wall outlet. When asked where the building got its power we were told from the Lansing Power company which they assumed used coal or natural gas but were not sure.
In Vermont where a mountain was being denuded to build wind turbines, supporters of the project said if they could take down mountains in West Virginia to mine coal why not take them down in Vermont to build wind turbines.
Every where Jeff Gibbs took his camera, what was said to be “green was not”. A zoo he visited was called the Elephant Poo Zoo because it was said to be run on burning poo. The elephant’s caretaker said the elephants did not make enough poo to light more than their confinement area.
Ozzie Zehner, visiting scholar at both UC Berkeley and NorthWestern University and author of Green Illusions accompanied Gibbs on many visits to green energy sites. At one of the largest arrays of solar collectors Zehner explained that the idea that photvoltaic cells are made from inexpensive abundant sand was entirely untrue. The impurities in sand make it unusable. Pure quartz must be mined and heated with coal to 1800 degrees to create the useful silica sheets for PVC to obtain energy from the sun. The sheets we were told capture only 8% of the available solar energy. It is possible to collect nearly all that energy as NASA does it on the MARS rovers but at a cost of a $million per share inch.
Arnold Schwarzenegger makes a video appearance from his days as Governor of California speaking at the opening of the Ivanpah $2 billion solar energy farm. He announced how “we are now farming the desert for energy “. Gibbs and Zehner showed that the entire system did not work without using natural gas to power everything up where they use mirrors to heat oil in a container high off the ground. The system was producing a small fraction of its design capacity and mirrors were broken all over the grounds.
A variety of companies such as Apple announced they were now operating entirely on renewable energy. Behind the curtain the movie exposed the lies every time. One of the funniest was an outdoor concert celebrating Earth Day. It was advertised to be powered by wind and solar energy. Gibbs talked the sound crew into exposing the diesel generators actually sitting behind a curtain. The workers said they could not afford to have the amplifiers stop in the middle of one of the band’s songs.
Perhaps the most outstanding parts of the movie was a fast forward moving picture of every aspect of the mining of materials and construction of every aspect of what is called renewable energy. In two minutes you see the mining of silver, cobalt, graphite, coal, tin, steel, concrete, sulfurhexafluoride, copper, lithium, tin, galium arsenide, the operation of smelters, the movement of ships and trucks and the construction sites where solar arrays and wind turbines rise from the ground. It is nothing short of amazing to see that so called green energy requires advanced industry and gigantic quantities of materials from the earth. Some of the mining was done by hand by children in Africa.
Among the sadder if not most despicable portions of the movie was the denuding of vast forests to feed an electric generating plant operating on timber and wood chips, burning thousands of cords of wood each day. The radical environmentalists have brought this on by supporting government funding for the use of any fuel considered renewable. In fact the burning of any biomass should top the list of the filthiest way to make electricity. What were once well meaning if misguided environmentalists promoting renewable energy, are now driven by the greenest aspect in their movement which is now money.
Jeff Gibbs and his camera crew made every effort to tell all sides of the renewable energy story as he traveled across the nation. He was able to obtain interviews and or news clips of many of the biggest names in what must now be called the renewable energy industry. A sample of these include Dennis Hayes, the founder of Earth Day, Robert Kennedy Jr., Bill McKibben of 350.org (who humorously could not think of any groups that fund him), Michael Brune, President of The Sierra Club. All speaking their own apparent sincere beliefs explaining that it is now necessary to wean our selves off of fossil fuels and to fulfill all our needs for energy in a sustainable renewable manner. While they may be delusional they all seemed sincere, even the money moguls like Michael Bloomberg.
Recently this author combined with scientist/engineer Terigi Ciccone to create a light hearted book for parents, grandparents and the young published in March of this year titled The Hitchhikers Journey Through Climate Change. In the book we discovered that we can sum up the renewable energy debate with a simple Rule of Thumb which states “in every community electric grid an amount of fossil fuel or nuclear power must be available at the ready to go on line in seconds, that is equal to the potential output of all intermittent wind, solar and biomass energy considered a portion of the grids electric capacity”
When the viewer digests this simple rule of thumb, he or she will wonder that the pro/con arguments over renewables has stumbled along for decades without facing the only reality that can ever allow wind and solar energy to be an important part of our energy portfolio. Sadly. however, you may recognize that the least costly manner to have wind turbines and solar collectors in your energy arsenal is to build them but not use them. Then you do not need to build extra fossil fuel capacity standing by at nearly full throttle but creating no electricity.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-14--A billion dollar solar boondoggle in Vegas

On May 12 the Interior Department gave approval for the largest solar power project in the U.S. to be built by Warren Buffett ’ s NV Energy company on 7100 acres of Federal lands in the Mohave Desert .
At a cost of one billion dollars , it pales into insignificance on the days we read of the trillions of dollars being spent battling the corona virus economic destruction .
But a boondoggle by any other name remains a boondoggle .
The plan for this three year project is very specific and quite ambitious and will never fulfill even close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are said will power 260,000 homes , provide 900 jobs , with a massive battery backup to replace the solar system at night , and emit no carbon dioxide .
Had the government seen Michael Moore ’ s brilliant new movie Planet For The Humans before approving the project they may not have approved it .
The film illustrates on the ground at various sites , how and why every major solar project in the country has failed miserably .
In just a few sentences we can explain the futility of this mammoth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forever , while pulling the curtain down on the futility of attempting to obtain dependable power from the sun unless it is on your roof top .
We have been lying to ourselves about this potential for over three decades .
In a new book light-heartedly titled The Hitchhikers Journey Through Climate Change one discovers that the renewable energy debate can be summed up with a simple Rule of Thumb which states “ in every communities electric grid , an excess amount of fossil fuel or nuclear power must be available at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that is equal to the potential output of all intermittent solar energy considered a portion of the grids electric capacity ” .
No batteries exist on earth that could take up the load when the sun is not shining .
If they could it would likely only be for a single night for how would then recharge them .
This is a fairy tale of absurdity being sold to Las Vegas just as the snake oil salesmen of the old west plied their trade .
When you digest this simple rule , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over solar energy have gone on for so long without facing the only reality that can ever allow solar energy to be an important part of our energy portfolio .
It must have 100 % back up with fossil fuel or nuclear power to insure that the communities electric grid can not let them down .
Las Vegas of all places can not afford a blackout .
Thinking that some special new battery is going to maintain as much power as the absent sun , has been and will be an impossibility for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up fossil fuel must stand by running near full out and emitting carbon dioxide and producing no electricity until the sun can not fill the bill and it must step in .
The excess cost for the excess backup power will show up in the electric bills of the residents of Las Vegas as sure as night shall follow day .

On May 12 the Interior Department gave approval for the largest solar power project in the U.S. to be built by Warren Buffett’s NV Energy company on 7100 acres of Federal lands in the Mohave Desert. At a cost of one billion dollars, it pales into insignificance on the days we read of the trillions of dollars being spent battling the corona virus economic destruction. But a boondoggle by any other name remains a boondoggle.
The plan for this three year project is very specific and quite ambitious and will never fulfill even close to its targets of 690 megawatts that are said will power 260,000 homes, provide 900 jobs, with a massive battery backup to replace the solar system at night, and emit no carbon dioxide. Had the government seen Michael Moore’s brilliant new movie Planet For The Humans before approving the project they may not have approved it. The film illustrates on the ground at various sites, how and why every major solar project in the country has failed miserably.
In just a few sentences we can explain the futility of this mammoth project that will blight this great desert forever, while pulling the curtain down on the futility of attempting to obtain dependable power from the sun unless it is on your roof top. We have been lying to ourselves about this potential for over three decades.
In a new book light-heartedly titled The Hitchhikers Journey Through Climate Change one discovers that the renewable energy debate can be summed up with a simple Rule of Thumb which states “in every communities electric grid, an excess amount of fossil fuel or nuclear power must be available at the ready to go on line in seconds, that is equal to the potential output of all intermittent solar energy considered a portion of the grids electric capacity”. No batteries exist on earth that could take up the load when the sun is not shining. If they could it would likely only be for a single night for how would then recharge them. This is a fairy tale of absurdity being sold to Las Vegas just as the snake oil salesmen of the old west plied their trade.
When you digest this simple rule, you will wonder that the pro/con arguments over solar energy have gone on for so long without facing the only reality that can ever allow solar energy to be an important part of our energy portfolio. It must have 100% back up with fossil fuel or nuclear power to insure that the communities electric grid can not let them down. Las Vegas of all places can not afford a blackout. Thinking that some special new battery is going to maintain as much power as the absent sun, has been and will be an impossibility for the foreseeable future. The mandatory back up fossil fuel must stand by running near full out and emitting carbon dioxide and producing no electricity until the sun can not fill the bill and it must step in. The excess cost for the excess backup power will show up in the electric bills of the residents of Las Vegas as sure as night shall follow day.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-14--Japanese scientists use high-res mapping to tackle plastic pollution

To be sure , plastic is an important part of our daily lives .
Yet when that plastic gets tossed into the ocean , it can become an environmental menace .
Recent studies indicate that upwards of 0.27 million tons of plastic are adrift on our oceans .
This is not good news for marine life which can consume it or get tangled in it .
Consequently , some have sought to ban the use of certain plastics outright – such as with straws and shopping bags .
Unfortunately , these campaigns in the U.S. tend to have little global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is derived from Asia .
But it ’ s not all bad news coming from the Far East with respect to plastic .
A helpful solution might now be in hand courtesy of some hard work being done in the Land of the Rising Sun — Japan .
Recently a team of researchers , led by Professor Yasuo Nihei of the Tokyo University of Science , have developed a new method of combatting plastic emissions using high resolution mapping .
As reported in the University ’ s online website , this technique can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being put into waterways : The scientists followed a three-step process to map plastic emissions .
First , they measured MicP concentration across 70 rivers and 90 sites in Japan and examined the relation between MicP concentration and land characteristics .
They collected the ratio of MacP/MicP concentrations to evaluate the MacP concentration from the MicP concentration .
Next , to obtain outflow discharge at 1 km grids , they performed a “ water balance analysis ” in which they measured precipitation of water , distributed into three categories : evaporation , surface @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they calculate total plastic emission , which is the product of MicP and MacP concentrations and outflow discharge .
Their findings revealed that MicP concentrations and basin characteristics were significantly correlated , meaning that the physical features of water bodies dictate the amount of plastic waste accumulated .
Not just this , their analysis helped the scientists to estimate the annual plastic emission in Japan , which ranged from 210 to 4,776 tons/year of total plastic .
The scientists then evaluated a high-resolution map of plastic emission over 1 km grids across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where plastic emissions were the highest .
Their analysis showed that these emissions were high in rivers near urbanized areas , with a high population density .
Among these , cities like Tokyo , Nagoya , and Osaka were found to be hotspots for plastic emissions .
Thus , this method was useful in understanding exactly where strict countermeasures should be enforced .
For more information , you can read the entirety of the original article here .

To be sure, plastic is an important part of our daily lives. Yet when that plastic gets tossed into the ocean, it can become an environmental menace.
Recent studies indicate that upwards of 0.27 million tons of plastic are adrift on our oceans. This is not good news for marine life which can consume it or get tangled in it.
Consequently, some have sought to ban the use of certain plastics outright – such as with straws and shopping bags. Unfortunately, these campaigns in the U.S. tend to have little global impact, as much of the problem is derived from Asia.
But it’s not all bad news coming from the Far East with respect to plastic. A helpful solution might now be in hand courtesy of some hard work being done in the Land of the Rising Sun — Japan.
Recently a team of researchers, led by Professor Yasuo Nihei of the Tokyo University of Science, have developed a new method of combatting plastic emissions using high resolution mapping. As reported in the University’s online website, this technique can help identify sources of where plastic is being put into waterways:
The scientists followed a three-step process to map plastic emissions. First, they measured MicP concentration across 70 rivers and 90 sites in Japan and examined the relation between MicP concentration and land characteristics. They collected the ratio of MacP/MicP concentrations to evaluate the MacP concentration from the MicP concentration. Next, to obtain outflow discharge at 1 km grids, they performed a “water balance analysis” in which they measured precipitation of water, distributed into three categories: evaporation, surface runoff, and underground infiltration. Finally, they calculate total plastic emission, which is the product of MicP and MacP concentrations and outflow discharge. Their findings revealed that MicP concentrations and basin characteristics were significantly correlated, meaning that the physical features of water bodies dictate the amount of plastic waste accumulated. Not just this, their analysis helped the scientists to estimate the annual plastic emission in Japan, which ranged from 210 to 4,776 tons/year of total plastic.
The scientists then evaluated a high-resolution map of plastic emission over 1 km grids across Japan. They identified the critical areas where plastic emissions were the highest. Their analysis showed that these emissions were high in rivers near urbanized areas, with a high population density. Among these, cities like Tokyo, Nagoya, and Osaka were found to be hotspots for plastic emissions. Thus, this method was useful in understanding exactly where strict countermeasures should be enforced.
For more information, you can read the entirety of the original article here.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-15--The Left shouldn’t be cheering for energy industry demise

Petroleum and natural gas industries that provide about 85 % of America ’ s energy ( with wind and solar constituting barely over 3 % ) is under siege by adversaries — both foreign and domestic .
The first major assault was launched by a no-winner dispute between Russia and Saudi Arabia that flooded the global market with underpriced petroleum that overflowed U.S. storage capacities .
A double-whammy occurred at a time when a COVID-19 pandemic eviscerated energy demand , driving Exxon ’ s stock value below that of Netflix .
If all that wasn ’ t bad enough , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ front are attempting to execute a final coupe de grace , seizing upon a the crisis as a “ kick ’ em while they are down ” opportunity that is too valuable to waste .
Until we somehow learn how to power naval ships by windmills and sails , fly aircraft with solar panel-powered propellers , or power everything else ranging from industrial plants to cellphones and light bulbs on cloudy , windless days — we ’ ve got a very serious problem ahead .
On the national security front alone , briefly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lessons from the past .
Recall a time when Jimmy Carter — no raging imperialist — proclaimed by presidential decree that the U.S. would use military force , if necessary , to defend America ’ s vital national interests in the Persian Gulf .
This was prior to a fracking revolution when decades of wars , terrorist attacks , and the rise of global jihadist violence kept our country tied by dependence to the region .
Remember times when the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries ( OPEC ) collaborated to keep oil prices @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soaring energy costs to drag down global economies .
The consequences slowed America ’ s growth , placing special pressures on American wages and living standards of blue-collar workers , lower-middle class families , and all others who depended upon affordable fuel and electricity .
Thanks greatly to the hydraulic fracking oil shale revolution , America is now a net petroleum and gas exporter , no longer subject to the mercy of OPEC , Saudi Arabia , Russia , Iran , or never-ending Middle East conflicts .
This independence not only ensures secure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provides negotiating leverage to secure peacetime benefits .
Coronavirus impacts on energy demand in combination with a cheap oil supply glut have taken a particularly devastating toll on American shale producers , many of whom may never recover .
If this occurs , many years may pass before the industry can regain its strength to return America to its very recent time of unparalleled economic and social prosperity .
Tragically , some vocal Democrats are advocating and cheering such prospective industry demise .
Driven by grossly exaggerated claims regarding prospective “ renewable energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate and environmental benefits , their determined efforts are unrelenting .
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , D-N.Y. , cheered a drop in oil prices below zero as a positive development to advance the Green New Deal .
She tweeted : “ You absolutely love to see it .
Fossil fuels are in long-term structural decline .
This along w/ low interest rates means it ’ s the right time to create millions of jobs transitioning to renewable and clean energy.
” Presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee Joe Biden has declared that if elected , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fracking on public lands .
Biden has also been citing “ environmental justice ” issues purporting to link fossil fuel “ PM 2.5 ” particulate emissions to increased coronavirus death statistics disproportionately affecting areas with predominate minority populations .
The claims were based upon what Wall Street Journal editors characterized as a “ sloppy study ” published by Harvard ’ s T.H Chan School of Public Health that correlated elevated PM 2.5 levels with higher incidences of death from respiratory lung diseases .
Among numerous variables not addressed were how death rates differ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ levels of PM 2.5 , or how pollution levels vary across neighborhoods in cities .
Canadian epidemiologists Paul Villeneuve at Carleton University and Mark Goldberg at McGill University weren ’ t impressed .
They told the Journal , “ When we looked closely at the research , we saw so many shortcoming that we were not convinced of the results.
” Also , PM 2.5 levels across the U.S. have fallen 40 % since 2000 , thanks in large part to transitions from coal to cleaner-burning natural gas .
Former Texas Governor and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fox News host Tucker Carlson that America is “ on the verge of a massive collapse of an industry that we worked awfully hard , over the course of the last three or four years , to build up to the number one oil and gas producing country in the world , giving Americans some affordable energy resources.
” Perry added , “ If we woke up a year from now , and there were five big companies because all of these independents were gone out of business .
.
.
I would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans really nervous.
” Let ’ s all wake up long before that frightful day of energy insecurity arrives .

Petroleum and natural gas industries that provide about 85% of America’s energy (with wind and solar constituting barely over 3%) is under siege by adversaries — both foreign and domestic.
The first major assault was launched by a no-winner dispute between Russia and Saudi Arabia that flooded the global market with underpriced petroleum that overflowed U.S. storage capacities.
A double-whammy occurred at a time when a COVID-19 pandemic eviscerated energy demand, driving Exxon’s stock value below that of Netflix.
If all that wasn’t bad enough, Green New Deal activists on the home front are attempting to execute a final coupe de grace, seizing upon a the crisis as a “kick ’em while they are down” opportunity that is too valuable to waste.
Until we somehow learn how to power naval ships by windmills and sails, fly aircraft with solar panel-powered propellers, or power everything else ranging from industrial plants to cellphones and light bulbs on cloudy, windless days — we’ve got a very serious problem ahead.
On the national security front alone, briefly reflect for a moment to replay some lessons from the past.
Recall a time when Jimmy Carter — no raging imperialist — proclaimed by presidential decree that the U.S. would use military force, if necessary, to defend America’s vital national interests in the Persian Gulf. This was prior to a fracking revolution when decades of wars, terrorist attacks, and the rise of global jihadist violence kept our country tied by dependence to the region.
Remember times when the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) collaborated to keep oil prices at the highest feasible levels, causing soaring energy costs to drag down global economies. The consequences slowed America’s growth, placing special pressures on American wages and living standards of blue-collar workers, lower-middle class families, and all others who depended upon affordable fuel and electricity.
Thanks greatly to the hydraulic fracking oil shale revolution, America is now a net petroleum and gas exporter, no longer subject to the mercy of OPEC, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran, or never-ending Middle East conflicts. This independence not only ensures secure military and domestic supplies, but also provides negotiating leverage to secure peacetime benefits.
Coronavirus impacts on energy demand in combination with a cheap oil supply glut have taken a particularly devastating toll on American shale producers, many of whom may never recover. If this occurs, many years may pass before the industry can regain its strength to return America to its very recent time of unparalleled economic and social prosperity.
Tragically, some vocal Democrats are advocating and cheering such prospective industry demise.
Driven by grossly exaggerated claims regarding prospective “renewable energy” capacities, and touting wantonly illusory climate and environmental benefits, their determined efforts are unrelenting.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., cheered a drop in oil prices below zero as a positive development to advance the Green New Deal. She tweeted:
“You absolutely love to see it. Fossil fuels are in long-term structural decline. This along w/ low interest rates means it’s the right time to create millions of jobs transitioning to renewable and clean energy.”
“A key opportunity,” she added.
Presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee Joe Biden has declared that if elected, he will ban all new drilling and fracking on public lands.
Biden has also been citing “environmental justice” issues purporting to link fossil fuel “PM 2.5” particulate emissions to increased coronavirus death statistics disproportionately affecting areas with predominate minority populations.
The claims were based upon what Wall Street Journal editors characterized as a “sloppy study” published by Harvard’s T.H Chan School of Public Health that correlated elevated PM 2.5 levels with higher incidences of death from respiratory lung diseases.
Among numerous variables not addressed were how death rates differ among individuals who are exposed to different levels of PM 2.5, or how pollution levels vary across neighborhoods in cities.
Canadian epidemiologists Paul Villeneuve at Carleton University and Mark Goldberg at McGill University weren’t impressed. They told the Journal, “When we looked closely at the research, we saw so many shortcoming that we were not convinced of the results.”
Incidentally, Dr. Goldberg has supported a fracking moratorium.
Also, PM 2.5 levels across the U.S. have fallen 40% since 2000, thanks in large part to transitions from coal to cleaner-burning natural gas.
Former Texas Governor and U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry recently told Fox News host Tucker Carlson that America is “on the verge of a massive collapse of an industry that we worked awfully hard, over the course of the last three or four years, to build up to the number one oil and gas producing country in the world, giving Americans some affordable energy resources.”
Perry added, “If we woke up a year from now, and there were five big companies because all of these independents were gone out of business . . . I would suggest that would make a lot of Americans really nervous.”
Let’s all wake up long before that frightful day of energy insecurity arrives.
This article originally appeared at NewsMax


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-15--Tell EPA to end secrecy in science

Tell EPA to end secrecy in science

For scientific analysis to have validity it must be transparent .
This is particularly crucial when that analysis will form the basis upon which we are asked to subordinate individual choice to bureaucratic regulation , or when large sums of money are in play .
EPA has had a conflicted , cozy relationship with certain researchers and pressure groups for too long .
EPA continually prevents unbiased experts from reviewing and testing the science it relies upon for its rulemaking .
EPA wants your help to reform its process at last .
This is long overdue .
Will you take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end secret science and make transparency SOP ?
Click here and add your comment to ours right now .
Don ’ t be put off by the April 17 posted deadline .
The deadline was extended to May 18 due to COVID-19 shutdowns .
We posted CFACT ’ s full comment and its addendum to CFACT.org .
Here ’ s the intro : Simply put , ending secretive science is basic common sense .
It is an essential step in ensuring that evidence-based science supports policies and regulations that protect public health and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosperity , and preserving public support for and confidence in government agencies and regulations .
Indeed , without transparency at every step in the process , abuses , fraud , and unnecessarily expensive and burdensome regulations are inevitable .
CFACT therefore agrees with the Environmental Protection Agency ’ s proposal to : • Apply this rulemaking to both influential scientific information and significant regulatory decisions ; • Clarify that the rule does apply to data , models and other evidence employed in support of pivotal science , pivotal regulatory science , influential scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Clarify that the EPA Administrator has the authority to grant exemptions under certain circumstances .
The scientific method demands that researchers ’ work be fully transparent .
Data must be made available for examination .
Theories must be open to challenge .
Disproven theories must be altered or set aside .
Barriers must be removed that would prevent valid conclusions from rising to the top .
Factually correct is the way to go .
Act by May 18th , forward this to your friends , and together let ’ s tell EPA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good science .

For scientific analysis to have validity it must be transparent.
This is particularly crucial when that analysis will form the basis upon which we are asked to subordinate individual choice to bureaucratic regulation, or when large sums of money are in play.
EPA has had a conflicted, cozy relationship with certain researchers and pressure groups for too long. EPA continually prevents unbiased experts from reviewing and testing the science it relies upon for its rulemaking. EPA wants your help to reform its process at last. This is long overdue.
Will you take action and help CFACT tell EPA to end secret science and make transparency SOP?
Click here and add your comment to ours right now.
Don’t be put off by the April 17 posted deadline. The deadline was extended to May 18 due to COVID-19 shutdowns.
We posted CFACT’s full comment and its addendum to CFACT.org. Here’s the intro:
Simply put, ending secretive science is basic common sense. It is an essential step in ensuring that evidence-based science supports policies and regulations that protect public health and welfare, while safeguarding our freedoms and prosperity, and preserving public support for and confidence in government agencies and regulations. Indeed, without transparency at every step in the process, abuses, fraud, and unnecessarily expensive and burdensome regulations are inevitable.
CFACT therefore agrees with the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to:
Apply this rulemaking to both influential scientific information and significant regulatory decisions;
Clarify that the rule does apply to data, models and other evidence employed in support of pivotal science, pivotal regulatory science, influential scientific information and significant regulatory decisions; and
Clarify that the EPA Administrator has the authority to grant exemptions under certain circumstances.
The scientific method demands that researchers’ work be fully transparent. Data must be made available for examination. Theories must be open to challenge. Disproven theories must be altered or set aside. Barriers must be removed that would prevent valid conclusions from rising to the top.
Politically correct science is an oxymoron.
Factually correct is the way to go.
Act by May 18th, forward this to your friends, and together let’s tell EPA we will settle for no less than good science.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-15--Buffet’s billion dollar subsidy farm

Buffet’s billion dollar subsidy farm

Warren Buffet just got the go ahead to spend over one billion dollars to construct America ’ s largest ever solar installation in Nevada ’ s Mojave desert .
An energy corporation owned by America ’ s third richest man is planning to rake in the solar subsidies .
You may recall that Buffet has been candid with his investors as to why he invests in so-called “ renewables.
” Here ’ s what he infamously said about wind turbines : “ For example , on wind energy , we get a tax credit if we build a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only reason to build them .
They don ’ t make sense without the tax credit.
” Dr. Jay Lehr outlines “ the futility of this mammoth project that will blight this great desert forever , while pulling the curtain down on the futility of attempting to obtain dependable power from the sun unless it is on your roof top .
We have been lying to ourselves about this potential for over three decades.
” Read his full commentary here at CFACT.org .
Green ideologues resort to magical thinking when it comes time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schemes .
Corporate investors are certainly not going to correct them .
Thinking that some special new battery is going to maintain as much power as the absent sun , has been and will be an impossibility for the foreseeable future .
The mandatory back up fossil fuel must stand by running near full out and emitting carbon dioxide and producing no electricity until the sun can not fill the bill and it must step in .
The excess cost for the excess backup power will show up in the electric bills of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as night shall follow day .
So there we have it .
Investors collect the subsidies , while rate and taxpayers get fleeced .
CO2 emissions don ’ t budge ( if that ’ s your thing ) while vast natural lands are turned into solar wastelands .
Green Robin Hoods steal from the poor and the planet to give to the rich .

Warren Buffet just got the go ahead to spend over one billion dollars to construct America’s largest ever solar installation in Nevada’s Mojave desert.
An energy corporation owned by America’s third richest man is planning to rake in the solar subsidies.
You may recall that Buffet has been candid with his investors as to why he invests in so-called “renewables.” Here’s what he infamously said about wind turbines: “For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.”
Dr. Jay Lehr outlines “the futility of this mammoth project that will blight this great desert forever, while pulling the curtain down on the futility of attempting to obtain dependable power from the sun unless it is on your roof top. We have been lying to ourselves about this potential for over three decades.” Read his full commentary here at CFACT.org.
Green ideologues resort to magical thinking when it comes time to rationalize their “renewable” energy schemes. Corporate investors are certainly not going to correct them.
Dr. Lehr further explains:
Thinking that some special new battery is going to maintain as much power as the absent sun, has been and will be an impossibility for the foreseeable future. The mandatory back up fossil fuel must stand by running near full out and emitting carbon dioxide and producing no electricity until the sun cannot fill the bill and it must step in. The excess cost for the excess backup power will show up in the electric bills of the residents of Las Vegas as sure as night shall follow day.
So there we have it. Investors collect the subsidies, while rate and taxpayers get fleeced. CO2 emissions don’t budge (if that’s your thing) while vast natural lands are turned into solar wastelands.
Green Robin Hoods steal from the poor and the planet to give to the rich.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-16--Study finds oyster farming poses no threat to shorebirds

Can oyster farmers and shorebirds live together in peaceful harmony ?
Well according to a new study published in the journal Ecosphere , the answer appears to be “ Yes.
” This is good news not just for the birds , but for also what is becoming a burgeoning cottage industry along the Delaware shore .
Although just starting to bubble up as a business , there has been an growing interest in so-called “ boutique oysters ” on the half shell market , and the “ low-tech ” nature of this particular type of oyster farming makes it an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oyster farming has many ecological benefits and is widely recognized as one of the most ecologically sustainable forms of food production , ” said study co-author David Bushek , a professor and director of Rutgers ’ Haskin Shellfish Research Laboratory .
“ Farmers appreciate the ecology around them as they depend on it to produce their crop .
The idea that oyster farming might be negatively impacting a threatened species concerns them deeply , so they ’ ve voluntarily taken on many precautionary measures .
They ’ d like to know which of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t as they all inhibit their ability to operate efficiently.
” Fortunately , according to the findings in this latest study , it doesn ’ t appear as though there needs to be many ( if any ) measures undertaken by farmers to protect threatened species — especially shore birds .
As reported in the Rutgers University publication Rutgers Today : Researchers assessed the impact of oyster aquaculture along the Delaware Bay on red knots and three other migratory birds of conservation concern : ruddy turnstones , semipalmated sandpipers and sanderlings .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probability of shorebird presence by 1 percent to 7 percent , while untended aquaculture structures had no detectable impact .
The study showed foraging rates were mostly influenced by environmental conditions , especially the presence of gulls or other shorebirds .
None of the four bird species of concern substantially altered their foraging behavior due to the presence of tended or untended oyster aquaculture .
For more information , read the full article in Rutgers Today here .

Can oyster farmers and shorebirds live together in peaceful harmony?
Well according to a new study published in the journal Ecosphere, the answer appears to be “Yes.” This is good news not just for the birds, but for also what is becoming a burgeoning cottage industry along the Delaware shore.
Although just starting to bubble up as a business, there has been an growing interest in so-called “boutique oysters” on the half shell market, and the “low-tech” nature of this particular type of oyster farming makes it an attractive investment for small-business entrepreneurs.
“Oyster farming has many ecological benefits and is widely recognized as one of the most ecologically sustainable forms of food production,” said study co-author David Bushek, a professor and director of Rutgers’ Haskin Shellfish Research Laboratory. “Farmers appreciate the ecology around them as they depend on it to produce their crop. The idea that oyster farming might be negatively impacting a threatened species concerns them deeply, so they’ve voluntarily taken on many precautionary measures. They’d like to know which of these measures help and which don’t as they all inhibit their ability to operate efficiently.”
Fortunately, according to the findings in this latest study, it doesn’t appear as though there needs to be many (if any) measures undertaken by farmers to protect threatened species — especially shore birds. As reported in the Rutgers University publication Rutgers Today:
Researchers assessed the impact of oyster aquaculture along the Delaware Bay on red knots and three other migratory birds of conservation concern: ruddy turnstones, semipalmated sandpipers and sanderlings. The scientists found that oyster tending reduced the probability of shorebird presence by 1 percent to 7 percent, while untended aquaculture structures had no detectable impact.
The study showed foraging rates were mostly influenced by environmental conditions, especially the presence of gulls or other shorebirds. None of the four bird species of concern substantially altered their foraging behavior due to the presence of tended or untended oyster aquaculture.
For more information, read the full article in Rutgers Today here.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-17--Red team the science used for radical policies

While we are still in the middle of the corona crisis , supranational organizations of the UN are already busy in making top-down recovery plans they want to impose on national governments .
All these experimental plans go for a utopic economy that they justify by doubtful scientific models being still under development .
Nowadays these models are very complex and run on super computers , impressing politicians and citizens .
However , believing these computer models means trusting the makers .
The time has come to ‘ red team ’ the models .
Red teaming means that before implementing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team of world-renowned scientists the task of establishing which aspects of the involved models are confirmed by reality ( ‘ evidence-based part ’ ) and which parts are still speculative .
Only then will governments have a balanced scientific basis for making responsible policy decisions .
We increasingly see that radical policies are promoted on a very one-sided view of scientific models .
Many model makers have become activists .
Two representative examples are climate and corona models .
Red Teaming fits today ’ s big issues .
In fact we already have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ table at the UN .
The Climate Intelligence Foundation ( CLINTEL ) has sent a registered letter to UN Secretary General António Guterres , specifically asking for a red teaming of UN climate policy .
Here is the specific text from the request , sent by CLINTEL president Professor Guus Berkhout : “ We repeat our invitation to you to organize with CLINTEL a constructive high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the debate on your green plans .
A ‘ Red Team Meeting ’ will give effect to the sound @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be fully and fairly heard .
Audiatur et altera pars !
” The Latin is a legal maxim that means “ Let the other side also be heard “ .
This surely is the essence of red teaming .
CLINTEL ’ s scientific concern is that the hypothesis of human ’ s preventing climate change is scientifically unsound .
It will require huge investments , but may not achieve anything .
The Guterres letter puts it in a very clear way : “ Please be also aware that mankind is incapable to stop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the climate .
Instead of fighting against these causes ( ‘ mitigation ’ ) , we should timely act against the consequences whenever they become a threat ( ‘ adaptation ’ ) .
In past decades UN ’ s IPCC mitigation policy has never spared one life , while adaptation has saved the lives of hundreds of thousands.
” Professor Berkhout has already pointed out on many occasions that experience in the past warns us that there is a definite limit to what mankind can do to control our planet .
Continuing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempts to re-engineer nature with super computers and green deals in the hope of preventing natural change are pointless .
Mankind can not prevent or control the occurrence of natural events such as earthquakes , tsunamis , volcanic eruptions , extreme weather , global warming and cooling , virus mutations , etc .
When such ‘ Black Swans ’ occur , we should identify them early and adapt to them promptly.
” Indeed , history tells us that the success of civilization depends on our ability to adapt to inevitable change .
Adaptation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Forms of life that could not adapt did not survive .
Continuing once more with the Guterres Letter : To get the economy on its feet again , please stop preaching doom and gloom .
Stop promising the impossible a perfect Earth .
With all due respect , your green deal plans are scientifically and economically far from realistic .
They will lead to a deeper recession and an unprecedented poverty.
” Summarizing , the world needs a Red Team event urgently .
Here are the main points in CLINTEL ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) : Both sides of the debate bring a group of world-renowned scientists in the team ; Together these scientists decide whether the underlying scientific models provide enough certainties to justify the execution of UN ’ s green plans ; If the evaluation would be negative , the team may come up with the outline of an alternative path , promising more perspective and less risk .
To get the economy on its feet again , please stop the doom and gloom stories and offer citizens hope on a speedy recovery .
Be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scientific and economic realities at all times .
Therefore , let us give worldwide support to CLINTEL ’ s initiative and organize with them a Red Team Meeting to establish the validity of UN ’ s green deals and , if necessary , to formulate an alternative path .
Particularly now , citizens don ’ t need any top-down idealistic experiment , but they need concrete plans to get out of the current misery soon .
Restoring democracy is a must to successfully do this .
Red Teaming is the tool to use @

While we are still in the middle of the corona crisis, supranational organizations of the UN are already busy in making top-down recovery plans they want to impose on national governments. All these experimental plans go for a utopic economy that they justify by doubtful scientific models being still under development.
Nowadays these models are very complex and run on super computers, impressing politicians and citizens. However, believing these computer models means trusting the makers. The time has come to ‘red team’ the models.
Red teaming means that before implementing revolutionary, science-based policies we assign a team of world-renowned scientists the task of establishing which aspects of the involved models are confirmed by reality (‘evidence-based part’) and which parts are still speculative. Only then will governments have a balanced scientific basis for making responsible policy decisions.
We increasingly see that radical policies are promoted on a very one-sided view of scientific models. Many model makers have become activists. Two representative examples are climate and corona models. Red Teaming fits today’s big issues.
In fact we already have a timely red team request on the table at the UN. The Climate Intelligence Foundation (CLINTEL) has sent a registered letter to UN Secretary General António Guterres, specifically asking for a red teaming of UN climate policy. Here is the specific text from the request, sent by CLINTEL president Professor Guus Berkhout:
“We repeat our invitation to you to organize with CLINTEL a constructive high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the debate on your green plans. A ‘Red Team Meeting’ will give effect to the sound and ancient principle that both sides should be fully and fairly heard. Audiatur et altera pars!”
The Latin is a legal maxim that means “Let the other side also be heard“. This surely is the essence of red teaming.
CLINTEL’s scientific concern is that the hypothesis of human’s preventing climate change is scientifically unsound. It will require huge investments, but may not achieve anything. The Guterres letter puts it in a very clear way:
“Please be also aware that mankind is incapable to stop the big natural forces that cause changes in the climate. Instead of fighting against these causes (‘mitigation’), we should timely act against the consequences whenever they become a threat (‘adaptation’). In past decades UN’s IPCC mitigation policy has never spared one life, while adaptation has saved the lives of hundreds of thousands.”
Professor Berkhout has already pointed out on many occasions that experience in the past warns us that there is a definite limit to what mankind can do to control our planet. Continuing with the Guterres Letter:
“Idealistic attempts to re-engineer nature with super computers and green deals in the hope of preventing natural change are pointless. Mankind cannot prevent or control the occurrence of natural events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, extreme weather, global warming and cooling, virus mutations, etc. When such ‘Black Swans’ occur, we should identify them early and adapt to them promptly.”
Indeed, history tells us that the success of civilization depends on our ability to adapt to inevitable change. Adaptation works and mankind is good at it. Forms of life that could not adapt did not survive. Continuing once more with the Guterres Letter:
To get the economy on its feet again, please stop preaching doom and gloom. Stop promising the impossible a perfect Earth. With all due respect, your green deal plans are scientifically and economically far from realistic. They will lead to a deeper recession and an unprecedented poverty.”
Summarizing, the world needs a Red Team event urgently. Here are the main points in CLINTEL’s ‘Red Team Initiative’ (RTA):
Both sides of the debate bring a group of world-renowned scientists in the team;
Together these scientists decide whether the underlying scientific models provide enough certainties to justify the execution of UN’s green plans;
If the evaluation would be negative, the team may come up with the outline of an alternative path, promising more perspective and less risk.
To get the economy on its feet again, please stop the doom and gloom stories and offer citizens hope on a speedy recovery. Be aware that all recovery policies must respect scientific and economic realities at all times. Therefore, let us give worldwide support to CLINTEL’s initiative and organize with them a Red Team Meeting to establish the validity of UN’s green deals and, if necessary, to formulate an alternative path.
Particularly now, citizens don’t need any top-down idealistic experiment, but they need concrete plans to get out of the current misery soon. Restoring democracy is a must to successfully do this. Red Teaming is the tool to use.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-18--Do lockdowns stop viruses?

Do lockdowns stop viruses?

Imposing lockdown policies to protect public health and mitigate death is increasingly looking overwrought .
New data makes continuing these lockdowns downright destructive .
Stay-at-home lockdowns imposed by most states have slowed the coronavirus .
This has prevented too many people from being simultaneously infected to the point of overwhelming the hospital system .
That critical time , in early spring , is past .
The continued lockdowns are unwarranted and ineffective in preventing deaths from Covid-19 .
Lockdowns have spread out the number of deaths over a longer time period .
Still , the number of people getting infected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the number of deaths , during which most states where in lock-down .
It was recently reported in New York State that 66 percent of patients with Covid symptoms who checked into hospitals were individuals who “ locked down ” at home .
They were not “ essential workers.
” They caught it from home , with many such people either retired or unemployed .
These results came from a New York State commissioned three-day survey of patients hospitalized with Covid-like symptoms .
Meanwhile , the state of Georgia in late April @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cacophony of opposition that it was too soon , and infection and death rates would spike .
Neither has occurred .
There have been a costly lessons brewing for some time .
The initial coronavirus models predicting imminent death caused massive societal changes to save lives .
The New York survey and the infinitesimal death rates in all but five states now cast serious doubt on lockdowns and the modeling itself , and the now literal guesswork about a second wave .
These initial lockdown policies was imposed based on the fear that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million Americans based on what turned out to be outlandish modeling from the Royal College of London .
This is a microcosm of the climate industry ’ s use of similarly bogus climate change models to predict a much more distant future catastrophe .
They in turn should be scrutinized and not permitted by politicians to transform the entire society by locking down our lifestyles and destroying our occupations for what are illusory gains for the Earth and humanity .
The coronavirus has , at this writing , taken nearly 90,000 lives in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be exaggerated ) .
It has been incorrectly described as the worst pandemic since the 1918 Spanish flu that claimed 675,000 lives in the U.S. and 50 million worldwide .
Rather , Covid-19 so far is the worst since the 1968 “ Hong Kong flu ” that killed 100,000 Americans and 4 million people globally – with no lockdowns .
The year 1968 was one of the most turbulent in the United States , with war , assassinations , and urban riots .
The 100,000 deaths from the Hong Kong influenza was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 200 million .
As with Covid-19 , the ’ 68 influenza was highly contagious and would have led to more deaths but for the fact that millions of Americans were immune from exposure to another pandemic flu from the prior decade .
The 1957-58 influenza killed 116,000 Americans out of a population of nearly 175 million ( 0.07 % ) .
With thousands of Americans dead from Covid-19 , it is no comfort to those who have suffered the loss of loved ones and colleagues to assert that it is not as bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100 years ago .
The present day coronavirus , as tragic as it is from a health standpoint , nonetheless remains below the absolute numbers from the late ‘ 50s and ‘ 60s , and far below the percentages of Americans who died .
A total of 217,000 Americans would have to die from Covid-19 to match the rate suffered in the 1958 pandemic , and 165,000 would have to die to reach the 1968 percentage .
Meanwhile , we have added $ 4 trillion and counting to the national debt in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans have been forced into unemployment .
Ongoing protests and lawsuits against lockdowns are burgeoning .
I ’ ve been calling since mid-April for the opening of the country , back when “ only ” 10 million people had lost their jobs .
We have not reached pandemic death rates near what was suffered in 1958 and 1968 , yet in 2020 America civil liberties and livelihoods have been attacked under the guise of public health .
Encouragingly , stay-at-home lockdowns have been finally easing in numerous states .
Economic lockdowns may have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but longer-term are ineffective and counterproductive .
It is long past time to get back to work .

Imposing lockdown policies to protect public health and mitigate death is increasingly looking overwrought. New data makes continuing these lockdowns downright destructive.
Stay-at-home lockdowns imposed by most states have slowed the coronavirus. This has prevented too many people from being simultaneously infected to the point of overwhelming the hospital system. That critical time, in early spring, is passed.
The continued lockdowns are unwarranted and ineffective in preventing deaths from Covid-19. Lockdowns have spread out the number of deaths over a longer time period. Still, the number of people getting infected with coronavirus has steadily increased, as have the number of deaths, during which most states where in lockdown.
It was recently reported in New York State that 66 percent of patients with Covid symptoms who checked into hospitals were individuals who “locked down” at home. They were not “essential workers.” They caught it from home, with many such people either retired or unemployed. These results came from a New York State commissioned three-day survey of patients hospitalized with Covid-like symptoms.
Meanwhile, the state of Georgia in late April, began to reopen businesses against a cacophony of opposition that predicted it was too soon, and infection and death rates would spike. Neither has occurred.
There have been a costly lessons brewing for some time. The initial coronavirus models predicting imminent death caused massive societal changes to save lives. The New York survey and the infinitesimal death rates in all but five states now cast serious doubt on lockdowns, the modeling itself, and the now literal guesswork about a second wave.
These initial lockdown policies were imposed based on the fear that this pandemic could kill more than 2 million Americans based on what turned out to be outlandish modeling from the Royal College of London.
This is a microcosm of the climate industry’s use of similarly bogus climate change models to predict a much more distant future catastrophe. They in turn should be scrutinized and not permitted by politicians to transform the entire society by locking down our lifestyles and destroying our occupations for what are illusory gains for the Earth and humanity.
The coronavirus has, at this writing, taken nearly 90,000 lives in the United States (a number that may be exaggerated). It has been incorrectly described as the worst pandemic since the 1918 Spanish flu that claimed 675,000 lives in the U.S. and 50 million worldwide. Rather, Covid-19 so far is the worst since the 1968 “Hong Kong flu” that killed 100,000 Americans and 4 million people globally – with no lockdowns.
The year 1968 was one of the most turbulent in the United States, with war, assassinations, and urban riots. The 100,000 deaths from the Hong Kong influenza was 0.05 percent of the U.S. population of 200 million.
As with Covid-19, the ’68 influenza was highly contagious and would have led to more deaths but for the fact that millions of Americans were immune from exposure to another pandemic flu from the prior decade. The 1957-58 influenza killed 116,000 Americans out of a population of nearly 175 million (0.07%).
With thousands of Americans dead from Covid-19, it is no comfort to those who have suffered the loss of loved ones and colleagues to assert that it is not as bad as a previous pandemic from 50 or 100 years ago.
The present day coronavirus, as tragic as it is from a health standpoint, nonetheless remains below the absolute numbers from the late ‘50s and ‘60s, and far below the percentages of Americans who died. A total of 217,000 Americans would have to die from Covid-19 to match the rate suffered in the 1958 pandemic, and 165,000 would have to die to reach the 1968 percentage.
Meanwhile, we have added $4 trillion and counting to the national debt in a single year, and now 36 million Americans have been forced into unemployment. Ongoing protests and lawsuits against lockdowns are burgeoning.
I’ve been calling since mid-April for the opening of the country, back when “only” 10 million people had lost their jobs.
We have not reached pandemic death rates near what was suffered in 1958 and 1968, yet in 2020 America civil liberties and livelihoods have been attacked under the guise of public health. Encouragingly, stay-at-home lockdowns have been finally easing in numerous states.
Economic lockdowns may have helped initially to slow the coronavirus, but longer-term are ineffective and counterproductive. It is long past time to get back to work.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-18--The dark side of renewable electricity

The dark side of renewable electricity

The “ Praise the Lord ” ( PTL ) empire that preacher Jim Bakker built with wife Tammy crumbled thirty years ago .
Today , it seems like we ’ re being mesmerized again in the press and social media with the rhetoric about dispensing with the thousands of products from petroleum derivatives so we can save the world from human destruction by switching to industrial wind and solar generated electricity .
Everyone knows that electricity is used extensively in residential , commercial , transportation , and the military , to power motors and lite the lights and make all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s the thousands of products that get manufactured from crude oil that are used to “ make ” those motors , lights , medications and electronics .
We ’ ve had almost 200 years to develop clones or generics to replace the products demanded by society that we get from crude oil .
The social needs of our materialistic societies are most likely going to remain for the products that have become part of our daily lifestyles , and for continuous uninterruptable electricity , not just intermittent electricity from wind and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ renewable saviors , it ’ s becoming obvious that due to their intermittency and unreliability , and their inability to replace any of the derivatives from petroleum that account for the all the products in our daily lives , societies around the world may not be too thrilled about needed social changes to live on just electricity .
Electricity is one of those products that came AFTER the discovery of oil .
All the mineral products and metals needed to make wind turbines and solar panels rely on worldwide mining and transportation equipment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fossil fuels and powered by the fuels manufactured from crude oil .
A single electric-car battery weighs about 1,000 pounds .
Fabricating one requires digging up , moving and processing more 500,000 pounds of raw materials somewhere on the planet .
Never discussed by the GND or Paris Accord sponsors are the questionable and non-transparent labor conditions and loose , or non-existing , environmental regulations at the mining sites around the world for the products and metals required for renewables .
To meet the goals to go “ green ” will most likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ green ” goals require a massive worldwide increase in mining for lithium , cobalt , copper , iron , aluminum , and numerous other raw materials such as .
• A list of the sixteen components needed to build wind turbines are : Aggregates and Crushed Stone ( for concrete ) , Bauxite ( aluminum , Clay and Shale ( for cement ) , Coal , Cobalt ( magnets ) , Copper ( wiring ) , Gypsum ( for cement ) , Iron ore ( steel ) , Limestone , Molybdenum ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( magnets ; batteries ) , Sand and Gravel ( for cement and concrete ) , and Zinc ( galvanizing ) .
• A list of the seventeen components needed to build solar panels are : Arsenic ( gallium-arsenide semiconductor chips ) , Bauxite ( aluminum ) , Boron Minerals , Cadmium ( thin film solar cells ) , Coal ( by-product coke is used to make steel ) , Copper ( wiring ; thin film solar cells ) , Gallium ( solar cells ) , Indium ( solar cells ) , Iron @ @ @ @ @ @ @ photovoltaic cells ) , Lead ( batteries ) , Phosphate rock ( phosphorous ) , Selenium ( solar cells ) , Silica ( solar cells ) , Silver ( solar cells ) , Tellurium ( solar cells ) , and Titanium dioxide ( solar panels ) .
• The origins of the products for wind and solar are mined throughout the world , inclusive of more than 60 countries of Algeria , Arabia , Argentina , Armenia , Australia , Belgium , Bolivia , Brazil , Canada , Chile , China , Congo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Finland , France , Germany , Greece , Guinea , Guyana , India , Indonesia , Iran , Ireland , Italy , Jamaica , Japan , Kazakhstan , Madagascar , Malaysia , Mexico , Mongolia , Morocco , Mozambique , New Caledonia , Oman , Pakistan , Papua New Guinea , Peru , Philippines , Poland , Republic of Korea , Russia , Saudi Arabia , Sierra Leone , Slovakia , South Africa , Spain , Suriname , Sweden , Thailand , Turkey , Ukraine , United Kingdom , United States , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sahara , and Zambia .
The signatories to the Green New Deal ( GND ) and Paris Accord , to sunset the fossil fuels industry for a world surviving on renewable electricity would also sunset its own renewable industry that ’ s supposed to be the salvation for the world , as there would be no components to build the turbines and panels !
All mining and processing activities to get the iron ore and other metals that go into turbine manufacturing , transporting the huge blade beasts to the sites , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activities that rely on fossil fuels and the products from crude oil and leave difficult wastes behind to dispose of during decommissioning .
The useful life of wind turbines is limited , generally from 15 to 20 years , but none of the decommissioning plans are public .
Mining projects , oil production sites , and nuclear generation sites are required to provide for decommissioning and restoration details down to the last dandelion .
Would governments and greenies allow a decommissioned mine , oil or nuclear site similar latitudes given to renewable sites @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about “ clean electricity ” messages , and bedazzle farmers with the prospects of on-going revenue from renewables .
However , the extensive mining worldwide for materials for millions of wind turbines and solar panels , and the decommissioning and restoration details , and the social changes that would be necessitated for societies to live without the thousands of products from petroleum derivatives remain the dark side of the unspoken realities of renewables .
The dark side of renewable wind , solar and biofuel energy is that they are not clean , green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are horrifically destructive to vital ecological values that will last for generations to come .

The “Praise the Lord” (PTL) empire that preacher Jim Bakker built with wife Tammy crumbled thirty years ago. Today, it seems like we’re being mesmerized again in the press and social media. The rhetoric is about dispensing with thousands of products from petroleum derivatives so we can save the world from human destruction by switching to industrial wind and solar generated electricity.
Everyone knows that electricity is used extensively in residential, commercial, transportation, and the military. All of which to power motors, lite the lights and make all our medications and medical equipment. Yet it’s the thousands of products that get manufactured from crude oil that are used to “make” those motors, lights, medications and electronics.
We’ve had almost 200 years to develop clones or generics to replace the products demanded by society that we get from crude oil. The social needs of our materialistic societies are most likely going to remain for the products that have become part of our daily lifestyles, and for continuous uninterruptable electricity, not just intermittent electricity from wind and solar.
Despite the preaching about these renewable saviors, it’s becoming obvious that due to their intermittency, unreliability, and their inability to replace any of the derivatives from petroleum, societies around the world may not be too thrilled about needed social changes to live on just electricity.
Electricity is one of those products that came AFTER the discovery of oil. All the mineral products and metals needed to make wind turbines and solar panels rely on worldwide mining and transportation equipment that are made with the products from fossil fuels and powered by the fuels manufactured from crude oil.
A single electric-car battery weighs about 1,000 pounds. Fabricating one requires digging up, moving and processing more 500,000 pounds of raw materials somewhere on the planet. Never discussed by the GND or Paris Accord sponsors are the questionable and non-transparent labor conditions and loose, or non-existing, environmental regulations at the mining sites around the world for the products and metals required for renewables. To meet the goals to go “green” will most likely cause a rare earth emergency as those “green” goals require a massive worldwide increase in mining for lithium, cobalt, copper, iron, aluminum, and numerous other raw materials such as.
A list of the sixteen components needed to build wind turbines are: Aggregates and Crushed Stone (for concrete), Bauxite (aluminum, Clay and Shale (for cement), Coal, Cobalt (magnets), Copper (wiring), Gypsum (for cement), Iron ore (steel), Limestone, Molybdenum (alloy in steel), Rare Earths (magnets; batteries), Sand and Gravel (for cement and concrete), and Zinc (galvanizing).
A list of the seventeen components needed to build solar panels are: Arsenic (gallium-arsenide semiconductor chips), Bauxite (aluminum), Boron Minerals, Cadmium (thin film solar cells), Coal (by-product coke is used to make steel), Copper (wiring; thin film solar cells), Gallium (solar cells), Indium (solar cells), Iron ore (steel), Molybdenum (photovoltaic cells), Lead (batteries), Phosphate rock (phosphorous), Selenium (solar cells), Silica (solar cells), Silver (solar cells), Tellurium (solar cells), and Titanium dioxide (solar panels).
The origins of the products for wind and solar are mined throughout the world, inclusive of more than 60 countries of Algeria, Arabia, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Congo (Kinshasa), Cuba, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guinea, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, New Caledonia, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Republic of Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam, Western Sahara, and Zambia.
The signatories to the Green New Deal (GND) and Paris Accord, to sunset the fossil fuels industry for a world surviving on renewable electricity would also sunset its own renewable industry that’s supposed to be the salvation for the world, as there would be no components to build the turbines and panels!
All mining and processing activities to get the iron ore and other metals that go into turbine manufacturing, transporting the huge blade beasts to the sites, and decommissioning them, are all energy intensive activities that rely on fossil fuels and the products from crude oil and leave difficult wastes behind to dispose of during decommissioning.
The useful life of wind turbines is limited, generally from 15 to 20 years, but none of the decommissioning plans are public. Mining projects, oil production sites, and nuclear generation sites are required to provide for decommissioning and restoration details down to the last dandelion. Would governments and greenies allow a decommissioned mine, oil or nuclear site similar latitudes given to renewable sites?
We can be preached to forever about “clean electricity” messages, and bedazzle farmers with the prospects of on-going revenue from renewables. However, the extensive mining worldwide for materials for millions of wind turbines and solar panels, and the decommissioning and restoration details, and the social changes that would be necessitated for societies to live without the thousands of products from petroleum derivatives remain the dark side of the unspoken realities of renewables.
The dark side of renewable wind, solar and biofuel energy is that they are not clean, green, renewable or sustainable. They are horrifically destructive to vital ecological values that will last for generations to come.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-05-19--Wind and solar weaknesses — Part I

Wind and solar weaknesses — Part I

So-called “ Green energy ” threatens our culture , our freedoms and our pocketbooks , yet provides no net electricity to our electrical networks .
Zero-Zip-Nada .
They remain a Green delusion .
A bold statement , yes ?
Bolder still is the fact that wind and solar power plants are more efficient when they are not running and are the most efficient and eco-friendly when : • They are never bought , never installed , and never operated because they produce little or no net electrical power for a community ’ s electrical network , called the grid .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ CO2 emissions or pollution , and little reduction of fossil fuel burning .
• For the “ green-plants ” already bought and installed—the best option for an electrical utility and the community is to tear them down , recycle the materials , restore the wastelands , and give your wallet and the Earth a big green smile .
Those are the tips of the “ Inconvenient Fact ” icebergs and are fully documented in the newly published book A HITCHHIKER ’ S JOURNEY THROUGH CLIMATE CHANGE by Terigi Ciccone and Jay Lehr , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and substantiate these startling and other revelations in detail , after a brief sidestep to Mr. Michael Moore .
THE DAMAGES STARTS .
Michael Moore , of all people and a lifelong champion of humanity and the environment , has exposed the eco-charlatans in his newly released documentary PLANET FOR THE HUMANS .
This is a five-star , must-see movie destined for at least one Oscar .
In the process , Michael plants many gut-wrenching images in our psyche .
[ i ] • First , is the vast and extensive damage done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s bio-system to land strip , mine , produce , transport , install and operate these solar and wind plants .
We start with preparing the installation sites , where thousands of acres of trees are cut , [ ii ] and the landscape razed .
They bulldoze hills down and fill over the valleys and streams .
That is bad enough for the installation site , but… .
• But then , Michael pulls the curtain further back and attacks our senses with the stark images of the ecological and biodiversity damage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Open-pit mines gouged deep into the Earth all over the world to extract the steel , aluminum , copper , and other minerals needed for these solar/wind plants .
Hundreds of tons of cement produced to anchor the base of the hundreds of 300 to 500-foot towers and their 300-350 foot long wingspans .
• Untold tons of Earth and rocks are blasted with thousands of kilos of dynamite to extract a few kilos of rare earth metals .
Solar panels are not made from sand , as they lead us to believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will need hundreds of tons of coal to make solar cells .
• In a two-minute segment , Michael puts before our eye the millions of tons of coal , oil , and gas that are burned to mine , process , and transport the raw materials into solar and wind components .
All of them emitting billions of tons of CO2 and pollution .
Will these solar/wind plants ever recover the electrical energy that it took to Just build them ?
Most probably not , as detailed by C. Le Pair , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fuel consumption and CO2 emissions , ” Oct 2011 .
• You will never see the destruction of animals and the bio-system going on in these remote sites all over the world , or on a guided media/political/school-sponsor ed tour of your local electric installations .
The hundreds of birds , bats , and eagles killed by the turning blades [ iii ] will be picked up before you arrive .
But most egregious is that they will not show you the fossil-fuel power plants , hidden from view , that are needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and expensive solar and wind plants 100 % of the time .
THE DAMAGE DOESN ’ T STOP .
Most plants will never reach the advertised 20-year useful life but averaging in the 12 to 15-years .
But then , what , repeat the above costs and destruction to replace these monstrosities ?
The choices are few , and none are good .
Let us peek into our crystal ball : • Replace the machinery ?
As a minimum , we must tear down all the working components , haul them away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then , drop them into the oceans , releasing the toxins where one sees them ?
Or burn more fossil fuels to detox the egregious parts , recycle some parts or find a developing country desperate enough to take them in exchange for a few dollars .
• Tear everything down ?
Or , having seen the futility of the enterprise , do we tear everything down ?
Spend countless more tons of fossil fuels to break the many tons of steel-reinforced concrete , meltdown the metals , recycle the plastics and fiber @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but to where ?
• Abandon it and walk away ?
All too often , we have utilities conveniently declare bankruptcy and walk away , leaving behind rusting towers like headstones on endless cemeteries or in fields scattered with broken mirrors and solar collectors ?
LET ’ S SUMMARIZE : In this first of a three-part series , we examined the costs and environmental damage of deforestation , mining , production , transportation , and installation of these solar and wind plants .
For this , we say again , thank you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ green eyes , and wish you success with this outstanding movie .
Alarmingly we got a hint that after these costs , fossil fuels burned , CO2 released , and eco-damage , these machines may not even produce the energy that it took to build and install .
In the next segment , we dive deep into the science , engineering , economics and environmental impact of their operation and maintenance and see what the benefits at the end of the tunnel are , if any .
Spoiler alert , we find a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AND WIND POWER ON AN ELECTRIC GRID MUST BE BACKED UP WITH AN EQUAL OR GREATER AMOUNT OF FOSSIL FUEL POWER RUNNING ON STANDBY 100 % OF THE TIME .

So-called “Green energy” threatens our culture, our freedoms and our pocketbooks, yet provides no net electricity to our electrical networks. Zero-Zip-Nada. They remain a Green delusion.
A bold statement, yes? Bolder still is the fact that wind and solar power plants are more efficient when they are not running and are the most efficient and eco-friendly when:
They are never bought, never installed, and never operated because they produce little or no net electrical power for a community’s electrical network, called the grid.
They make no significant reduction in CO2 emissions or pollution, and little reduction of fossil fuel burning.
For the “green-plants” already bought and installed—the best option for an electrical utility and the community is to tear them down, recycle the materials, restore the wastelands, and give your wallet and the Earth a big green smile.
Those are the tips of the “Inconvenient Fact” icebergs and are fully documented in the newly published book A HITCHHIKER’S JOURNEY THROUGH CLIMATE CHANGE by Terigi Ciccone and Jay Lehr, now on Amazon/Kindle. We will preview and substantiate these startling and other revelations in detail, after a brief sidestep to Mr. Michael Moore.
THE DAMAGES STARTS. Michael Moore, of all people and a lifelong champion of humanity and the environment, has exposed the eco-charlatans in his newly released documentary PLANET FOR THE HUMANS. This is a five-star, must-see movie destined for at least one Oscar. In the process, Michael plants many gut-wrenching images in our psyche. [i]
First, is the vast and extensive damage done to our environment and the Earth’s bio-system to land strip, mine, produce, transport, install and operate these solar and wind plants. We start with preparing the installation sites, where thousands of acres of trees are cut,[ii] and the landscape razed. They bulldoze hills down and fill over the valleys and streams. That is bad enough for the installation site, but….
But then, Michael pulls the curtain further back and attacks our senses with the stark images of the ecological and biodiversity damage paid just to build these devil-machines. Open-pit mines gouged deep into the Earth all over the world to extract the steel, aluminum, copper, and other minerals needed for these solar/wind plants. Hundreds of tons of cement produced to anchor the base of the hundreds of 300 to 500-foot towers and their 300-350 foot long wingspans.
Untold tons of Earth and rocks are blasted with thousands of kilos of dynamite to extract a few kilos of rare earth metals. Solar panels are not made from sand, as they lead us to believe, but precious and purest quartz that will need hundreds of tons of coal to make solar cells.
earth metals. Solar panels are not made from sand, as they lead us to believe, but precious and purest quartz that will need hundreds of tons of coal to make solar cells. In a two-minute segment, Michael puts before our eye the millions of tons of coal, oil, and gas that are burned to mine, process, and transport the raw materials into solar and wind components. All of them emitting billions of tons of CO2 and pollution. Will these solar/wind plants ever recover the electrical energy that it took to Just build them? Most probably not, as detailed by C. Le Pair, in his article “Windmills increase fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions,” Oct 2011.
You will never see the destruction of animals and the bio-system going on in these remote sites all over the world, or on a guided media/political/school-sponsor ed tour of your local electric installations. The hundreds of birds, bats, and eagles killed by the turning blades[iii] will be picked up before you arrive. But most egregious is that they will not show you the fossil-fuel power plants, hidden from view, that are needed to back up the intermittent, unreliable, and expensive solar and wind plants 100% of the time.
THE DAMAGE DOESN’T STOP. Most plants will never reach the advertised 20-year useful life but averaging in the 12 to 15-years. But then, what, repeat the above costs and destruction to replace these monstrosities? The choices are few, and none are good. Let us peek into our crystal ball:
Replace the machinery? As a minimum, we must tear down all the working components, haul them away, load them on ships. What then, drop them into the oceans, releasing the toxins where one sees them? Or burn more fossil fuels to detox the egregious parts, recycle some parts or find a developing country desperate enough to take them in exchange for a few dollars.
Tear everything down? Or, having seen the futility of the enterprise, do we tear everything down? Spend countless more tons of fossil fuels to break the many tons of steel-reinforced concrete, meltdown the metals, recycle the plastics and fiber materials, and haul away the debris, but to where?
Abandon it and walk away? All too often, we have utilities conveniently declare bankruptcy and walk away, leaving behind rusting towers like headstones on endless cemeteries or in fields scattered with broken mirrors and solar collectors?
LET’S SUMMARIZE: In this first of a three-part series, we examined the costs and environmental damage of deforestation, mining, production, transportation, and installation of these solar and wind plants. For this, we say again, thank you, Michael Moore, for opening our green eyes, and wish you success with this outstanding movie. Alarmingly we got a hint that after these costs, fossil fuels burned, CO2 released, and eco-damage, these machines may not even produce the energy that it took to build and install.
In the next segment, we dive deep into the science, engineering, economics and environmental impact of their operation and maintenance and see what the benefits at the end of the tunnel are, if any.
Spoiler alert, we find a rule of thumb instead:
ALL SOLAR AND WIND POWER ON AN ELECTRIC GRID MUST BE BACKED UP WITH AN EQUAL OR GREATER AMOUNT OF FOSSIL FUEL POWER RUNNING ON STANDBY 100% OF THE TIME.