committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-19--Energy density and the electric car charging dilemma

Given all the hype over renewable sources to generate intermittent electricity , the numbers from the Energy Information Administration ( EIA ) support none of the biased hype .
Fossil fuels dominate the energy mix today and are projected to do so for at lest a decade as shown in the figure below .
Yet over the past four decades billions have been spent on solar , wind , corn and other biofuels , not to mention electric cars which I will cover shortly .
The result of all this investment been only a modest gain in market share .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of other lifestyle products derived from petroleum .
EIA has calculated that they number over 6000 .
An added disadvantage is that renewables have no role in the military , or for airlines , cruise ships or supertankers .
While conspiracy theorists may prefer to believe that big oil , coal and nuclear have stifled the growth of renewables , it is not so .
Only coal , oil , natural gas and nuclear can satisfy the four energy imperatives , power density , energy density , cost and scale .
Renewables fall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The biggest impediment to the growth of electricity generated by wind and solar is the newly coined Ciccione/Lehr Rule of Thumb which states “ All wind and solar power on the electric grid must be backed up by an equal or greater amount of fossil fuel power running on standby 100 % of the time ” It has been described in detail in numerous previous articles by this author at CFACT.org .
Let ’ s turn our attention to the most over looked source of energy coming to the fore daily , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plans to have over 25 million such vehicles in the not too distant future .
The utility companies have thus far had little to say about the alarming cost projections or the certain increased rates that will be required to charge their customers .
It is not just the total amount of electricity required but the transmission lines and fast charging capacity that must be built at existing filling stations .
Neither wind or solar can support any of it .
A Canadian engineer recently ran the numbers involved in the switchover to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to match the 2000 cars that a typical filling station can service in a busy 12 hours , the filling station would require 600 , 50 watt chargers at an estimated cost of $ 24 million and a supply of 30 megawatts of power from the grid which would be enough to power 20,000 homes .
Unlike home recharging stations , these would be operating at peak usage hours where the rates are the highest .
Can you spell brownout and blackout .
Basically new grids will need to be built at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the fact that it can take between 30 minutes and 8 hours to recharge a vehicle , depending on it being empty or just topping off .
They will need lounge areas , holding areas for vehicles completed but waiting for owners to return from shopping or dining .
There is no question that electric vehicles have some positive attributes , low refueling costs , no air pollutants at the point of use and quiet operation , but are they actually clean an d green as their marketing insists .
They have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the car , but immense exhausts miles away .
Aren ’ t they really coal or natural gas cars ?
They are certainly not wind and solar cars .
Regardless of their promise they continue to be hampered by their long standing drawbacks , extra costs , limited range , slow recharge rates , lack of recharging stations and a relatively short battery life with a high replacement cost against the life cycle of the average internal combustion engined car .
Although the modern lithium-ion battery is four times better than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times the energy density .
The great lithium-ion battery in your cell phones weighs less than an ounce while the Tesla battery weighs 1000 pounds .
Do we still think electric cars are the wave of the future ?
Portions of this article have been excerpted from the book ENERGY MADE EASY with permission of the authors Ronald Stein and Todd Royal .
Their book is highly recommended for tremendous detail about the world ’ s energy .

Given all the hype over renewable sources to generate intermittent electricity, the numbers from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) support none of the biased hype. Fossil fuels dominate the energy mix today and are projected to do so for at lest a decade as shown in the figure below.
Yet over the past four decades billions have been spent on solar, wind, corn and other biofuels, not to mention electric cars which I will cover shortly. The result of all this investment been only a modest gain in market share. Part of this is the amazing number of other lifestyle products derived from petroleum. EIA has calculated that they number over 6000. An added disadvantage is that renewables have no role in the military, or for airlines, cruise ships or supertankers.
While conspiracy theorists may prefer to believe that big oil, coal and nuclear have stifled the growth of renewables, it is not so. Only coal, oil, natural gas and nuclear can satisfy the four energy imperatives, power density, energy density, cost and scale. Renewables fall woefully short of meeting these requirements.
The biggest impediment to the growth of electricity generated by wind and solar is the newly coined Ciccione/Lehr Rule of Thumb which states “All wind and solar power on the electric grid must be backed up by an equal or greater amount of fossil fuel power running on standby 100% of the time” It has been described in detail in numerous previous articles by this author at CFACT.org.
Let’s turn our attention to the most over looked source of energy coming to the fore daily, that which powers so-called electric cars. California plans to have over 25 million such vehicles in the not too distant future. The utility companies have thus far had little to say about the alarming cost projections or the certain increased rates that will be required to charge their customers. It is not just the total amount of electricity required but the transmission lines and fast charging capacity that must be built at existing filling stations. Neither wind or solar can support any of it.
A Canadian engineer recently ran the numbers involved in the switchover to electric vehicles and concluded that in order to match the 2000 cars that a typical filling station can service in a busy 12 hours, the filling station would require 600, 50 watt chargers at an estimated cost of $24 million and a supply of 30 megawatts of power from the grid which would be enough to power 20,000 homes. Unlike home recharging stations, these would be operating at peak usage hours where the rates are the highest. Can you spell brownout and blackout. Basically new grids will need to be built at the cost of billions.
No-one likely thinks about the fact that it can take between 30 minutes and 8 hours to recharge a vehicle, depending on it being empty or just topping off. They will need lounge areas, holding areas for vehicles completed but waiting for owners to return from shopping or dining.
There is no question that electric vehicles have some positive attributes, low refueling costs, no air pollutants at the point of use and quiet operation, but are they actually clean an d green as their marketing insists. They have no tailpipes, as we know, on the car, but immense exhausts miles away. Aren’t they really coal or natural gas cars? They are certainly not wind and solar cars .
Regardless of their promise they continue to be hampered by their long standing drawbacks, extra costs, limited range, slow recharge rates, lack of recharging stations and a relatively short battery life with a high replacement cost against the life cycle of the average internal combustion engined car.
Although the modern lithium-ion battery is four times better than the old lead-acid battery, gasoline holds 80 times the energy density. The great lithium-ion battery in your cell phones weighs less than an ounce while the Tesla battery weighs 1000 pounds.
Do we still think electric cars are the wave of the future?
Portions of this article have been excerpted from the book ENERGY MADE EASY with permission of the authors Ronald Stein and Todd Royal. Their book is highly recommended for tremendous detail about the world’s energy.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-19--Big tech censors flex their muscles

Big tech censors flex their muscles

In the late 19th century , John D. Rockefeller created the Standard Oil Company that at one point refined around 90 percent of oil sold in the United States .
He achieved this through ruthless business practices that bought out or bankrupted competitors .
The “ Titan ” became the wealthiest man on the planet .
It was all legal at the time .
Today , large technology companies are cornering the market of information and on-line advertising in increasingly ruthless fashion for profit and societal influence .
It always comes back to power .
By the early 20th century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a vital industries led to new laws and judicial rulings that broke up Standard Oil and other big business trusts into several smaller companies .
In the early 21st century , Google ( which owns YouTube ) , Twitter , and Facebook , among several Big Tech companies , are threatening Americans ’ First Amendment right to free speech , and their livelihoods .
Google dominates digital advertising platforms and has more than 90 percent of the search engine market share worldwide .
The latest prominent example of censorship was Google ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ websites shut down their public comments section , which included views disagreeable to Google , including about Black Lives Matter .
Refusal would result in Google banning the sites from its advertising platform .
“ Comments ” from website readers often are very objectionable , but are not those of the host organization .
Since Google dominates web advertising , the sites were in a financially vulnerable position to obey .
In fact , Google dropped ZeroHedge while The Federalist complied for the time being by removing its public comments .
YouTube last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenged the efficacy of economic shutdowns to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus – a challenge that has held up .
Google still deemed their views unworthy of public consideration .
Facebook , to its credit , retained the videos , yet imposes its own censorship , such as removing certain campaign ads and blocking organizing efforts to protest Covid lockdowns .
Big Tech censorship has become so commonplace , it ’ s passed the point of shocking .
Google , YouTube and Twitter are deleting messaging with which they disagree under the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ misinformation , ” which can be highly subjective .
Hate speech is indefensible , but how long before that label is used to silence mere political viewpoints , religious doctrine or scientific findings that depart from Big Tech ’ s orthodoxy ?
Answer : it already is occurring .
The late Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas , a staunch liberal and free speech advocate , famously wrote in the majority opinion in Terminello v. Chicago ( 1949 ) : [ A ] function of free speech under our system of government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest , creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are , or even stirs people to anger .
Speech is often provocative and challenging .
Arthur Terminello , the defendant , made a controversial speech that included bigoted statements against Jewish people .
Justice Douglas was not agreeing with him ; rather , he affirmed his First Amendment rights as the court overturned Chicago ’ s “ breach of peace ” ordinance that banned certain speech .
Censorship should be no less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cyberspace imposes it ( rather than a government entity ) , even as it enjoys legal immunity for posting any content .
The weapon against hate speech should not be the slippery slope of censorship , which has inchoate boundaries , but more speech to counteract and overwhelm falsehoods and bigotry .
It ’ s bad enough for a prominent newspaper media outlet like the New York Times to rule out publishing an issue objectionable to its snowflake reporters .
But , the Times is not a media monopoly ; there are oodles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opinion .
As a news junkie , I long ago expunged the Times from my snack bowl .
Big Tech companies are a different matter .
Google ’ s latest power play to threaten websites provides another red flag .
It ’ s time it got the Standard Oil treatment .
Will the government break Google ’ s monopoly , or eliminate its immunity from lawsuits for posted content ?
The Department of Justice and state attorneys general are reviewing the possibly .
Meanwhile , Google is playing for keeps in the political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parties defend the company .
If any entity , a government or monopolistic private company , can abridge First Amendment rights of citizens or organizations and nothing is done to stop it , the Constitution itself becomes a dead letter , an abstraction .
Then it gets more ugly , especially if you ’ re on the “ wrong ” side of the passions of the moment .

In the late 19th century, John D. Rockefeller created the Standard Oil Company that at one point refined around 90 percent of oil sold in the United States. He achieved this through ruthless business practices that bought out or bankrupted competitors. The “Titan” became the wealthiest man on the planet. It was all legal at the time.
Today, large technology companies are cornering the market of information and on-line advertising in increasingly ruthless fashion for profit and societal influence. It always comes back to power.
By the early 20th century, public policy concerns about monopolistic control of a vital industries led to new laws and judicial rulings that broke up Standard Oil and other big business trusts into several smaller companies.
In the early 21st century, Google (which owns YouTube), Twitter, and Facebook, among several Big Tech companies, are threatening Americans’ First Amendment right to free speech, and their livelihoods. Google dominates digital advertising platforms and has more than 90 percent of the search engine market share worldwide.
The latest prominent example of censorship was Google’s demand that The Federalist and ZeroHedge websites shut down their public comments section, which included views disagreeable to Google, including about Black Lives Matter. Refusal would result in Google banning the sites from its advertising platform.
“Comments” from website readers often are very objectionable, but are not those of the host organization. Since Google dominates web advertising, the sites were in a financially vulnerable position to obey. In fact, Google dropped ZeroHedge while The Federalist complied for the time being by removing its public comments.
YouTube last April removed videos of two doctors who challenged the efficacy of economic shutdowns to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus – a challenge that has held up. Google still deemed their views unworthy of public consideration. Facebook, to its credit, retained the videos, yet imposes its own censorship, such as removing certain campaign ads and blocking organizing efforts to protest Covid lockdowns.
Big Tech censorship has become so commonplace, it’s passed the point of shocking. Google, YouTube and Twitter are deleting messaging with which they disagree under the canopy of “hate speech” or “misinformation,” which can be highly subjective. Hate speech is indefensible, but how long before that label is used to silence mere political viewpoints, religious doctrine or scientific findings that depart from Big Tech’s orthodoxy? Answer: it already is occurring.
The late Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, a staunch liberal and free speech advocate, famously wrote in the majority opinion in Terminello v. Chicago (1949):
[A] function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging.
Arthur Terminello, the defendant, made a controversial speech that included bigoted statements against Jewish people. Justice Douglas was not agreeing with him; rather, he affirmed his First Amendment rights as the court overturned Chicago’s “breach of peace” ordinance that banned certain speech.
Censorship should be no less permissible when a monopolistic private company in cyberspace imposes it (rather than a government entity), even as it enjoys legal immunity for posting any content. The weapon against hate speech should not be the slippery slope of censorship, which has inchoate boundaries, but more speech to counteract and overwhelm falsehoods and bigotry.
It’s bad enough for a prominent newspaper media outlet like the New York Times to rule out publishing an issue objectionable to its snowflake reporters. But, the Times is not a media monopoly; there are oodles of other options to access news and opinion. As a news junkie, I long ago expunged the Times from my snack bowl.
Big Tech companies are a different matter. Google’s latest power play to threaten websites provides another red flag. It’s time it got the Standard Oil treatment.
Will the government break Google’s monopoly, or eliminate its immunity from lawsuits for posted content? The Department of Justice and state attorneys general are reviewing the possibly. Meanwhile, Google is playing for keeps in the political sandbox as Congress members of both political parties defend the company.
If any entity, a government or monopolistic private company, can abridge First Amendment rights of citizens or organizations and nothing is done to stop it, the Constitution itself becomes a dead letter, an abstraction. Then it gets more ugly, especially if you’re on the “wrong” side of the passions of the moment.


Virginia’s massive mistake

Want to increase the cost of electricity with no benefit to anyone but investors ?
Wind power is for you !
Europeans wasted vast sums on wind farms , wreaking havoc on the ability of the businesses to be competitive , driving people into energy poverty , with no decrease in emissions ( if that ’ s your thing ) .
Now those turbines are aging past their useful life and have to be replaced .
Wind turbines can ’ t be recycled .
All that waste and redistribution sound like just the thing to the people running the Commonwealth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sorry details at CFACT.org : Virginia ’ s green electric power plan calls for 5,000 MW of offshore wind generating capacity to be built in the next decade or so .
This is a huge amount given that the worldwide total is just around 15,000 MW .
We are talking about something like 800 giant windmills , embedded in the ocean floor and sticking hundreds of feet into the air above the water .
They will be on the order of one and a half times taller than the Washington Monument , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Virginia has that Europe does not ?
Hurricanes : One thing that is certain is that if Virginia goes ahead , in effect playing chicken with cat 5 storms , these hundreds of towers will have to be far stronger than standard European designs .
Stronger means more expensive .
The standard cost is around $ 1.5 million per MW , which would be $ 7.5 billion in Virginia ’ s case .
If hurricane proofing doubles the cost that puts a monstrous $ 15 billion at risk of destruction .
Offshore wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raise costs for rate and taxpayers , do not reduce emissions , and benefit no one , but the people cashing in on government subsidies and mandates .
As a Virginian myself , I say stop this folly before it ’ s too late !

Want to increase the cost of electricity with no benefit to anyone but investors? Wind power is for you!
Europeans wasted vast sums on wind farms, wreaking havoc on the ability of the businesses to be competitive, driving people into energy poverty, with no decrease in emissions (if that’s your thing).
Now those turbines are aging past their useful life and have to be replaced. Wind turbines can’t be recycled.
All that waste and redistribution sound like just the thing to the people running the Commonwealth of Virginia.
David Wojick lays out the sorry details at CFACT.org:
Virginia’s green electric power plan calls for 5,000 MW of offshore wind generating capacity to be built in the next decade or so. This is a huge amount given that the worldwide total is just around 15,000 MW. We are talking about something like 800 giant windmills, embedded in the ocean floor and sticking hundreds of feet into the air above the water. They will be on the order of one and a half times taller than the Washington Monument, which is really tall.
One thing Virginia has that Europe does not? Hurricanes:
One thing that is certain is that if Virginia goes ahead, in effect playing chicken with cat 5 storms, these hundreds of towers will have to be far stronger than standard European designs. Stronger means more expensive. The standard cost is around $1.5 million per MW, which would be $7.5 billion in Virginia’s case. If hurricane proofing doubles the cost that puts a monstrous $15 billion at risk of destruction.
Offshore wind farms carry a massive environmental footprint, raise costs for rate and taxpayers, do not reduce emissions, and benefit no one, but the people cashing in on government subsidies and mandates.
As a Virginian myself, I say stop this folly before it’s too late!


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-20--Is STEM inherently racist?

Is STEM inherently racist?

You may have missed this .
On June 10 , groups named Shut Down STEM and Particles for Justice led nearly 6,000 scientists – and even journals like Nature — in a stop work day to protest “ systemic racism in STEM ” ( science , technology , engineering and math ) professions .
“ In the wake of the most recent murders of Black people in the U.S. , it is clear that white and other non-Black people have to step up and do the work to eradicate anti-Black racism , ” the website Shut Down STEM said in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ website stated , “ Therefore , as physicists , we believe an academic strike is urgently needed : to hit pause , to give Black academics a break , and to give others an opportunity to reflect on their own complicity in anti-Black racism in academia and their local and global communities.
” Their website also blares : “ We recognize that our academic institutions and research collaborations — despite big talk about diversity , equity , and inclusion — have ultimately failed Black people… .
Black representation among physics faculty is non-existent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ widely known that Black students often feel unwelcome , unsupported , and even unsafe in their physics departments and predominantly white campuses.
” Supporting evidence for this dates at least to a 2006 article in Physics Today by Shirley Malcom , who at the time was the director of the education and human resources programs at the American Association for the Advancement of Science .
Malcom reported that in 2003 , while women received only 22 percent of bachelor ’ s degrees and 18 percent of PhDs awarded in physics by U.S. colleges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3.5 percent and 2.3 percent of those degrees that went to Black Americans .
In 2004 , the numbers were even worse – women received 15.5 percent and Black Americans about 1 percent of physics doctorates .
Now , a brand new report from a task force organized by the American Institute for Physics ( AIP ) calls for “ systemic changes ” to increase the number of Black Americans obtaining bachelor ’ s degrees in physics .
The TEAM-UP report states that “ African American students have the same drive , motivation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ physics and astronomy degrees as students of other races and ethnicities.
” Their persistent underrepresentation in these fields , the report concludes , is due to ( 1 ) the lack of a supportive environment in many departments and ( 2 ) the enormous financial challenges .
The first cause , they noted , can be addressed by creating a “ sense of belonging ” in an academic environment that is all too often plagued by “ identity-based harassment including microaggressions and acts motivated by bias and racism.
” “ Physics identity ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they have same-race role models in the faculty , are routinely invited and financially supported to participate in the established activities of the profession , and are able to connect their physics education to activities that benefit their communities.
” One goal is to allocate $ 1.2 million to encourage 150 African American students a year – across all historically black colleges and universities – to earn a bachelor ’ s degree in physics .
The report noted that HBCUs saw a 42 percent decline in federal funding for each full-time student from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to note a bipartisan 2019 law , signed by President Trump , that will permanently provide more than $ 250 million a year to HBCUs and other institutions that serve large numbers of minority students .
Not that long ago , there was a national hue and cry over the lack of women in professional STEM jobs , especially in certain fields .
While women today earn a majority of bachelor ’ s and master ’ s degrees ( and nearly half of PhDs ) in biological sciences , social sciences , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impressive for computer sciences ( 20 percent of doctorates ) , engineering ( 23 percent ) , and physical sciences ( 19 percent ) .
Just 15 percent of U.S. direct science and engineering jobs are held by women .
Western Governors University found that “ young women see few women going into science , technology , engineering , and math fields , so they have fewer role models and examples to follow… .
Most young people share their experiences finding someone they look up to and admire and pursuing a career path @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AIP ’ s reason number one for the shortfall of Black Americans in these fields .
WGU acknowledges that the long-term dominance of men in STEM fields has created a taboo for women scientists and technologists and notes that women in these fields can be stereotyped .
Sexism may be the underlying raison d ’ etre for the anti-female bias that haunts STEM professions , despite the fact that “ research has shown that young women perform just as well as men in these fields.
” [ Sound familiar ? ]
WGU offered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women in STEM fields : highlight women scientists ; engage young girls to get excited about STEM ; and fight sexism .
Not oddly at all , these are almost identical [ exchanging racism for sexism ] to the AIP recommendations for encouraging more Black Americans to enter STEM professions .
What IS odd , however , is that none of the STEM stop work scientist groups ever brought up the elephant in the room – the poor performance of Black American students in far too many of our urban high schools ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with any lack of inherent ability and everything to do with the racism of big city political machines ) .
A 2016 report from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics found that while boys and girls score similarly on many state tests , boys are much more likely than girls to pursue careers in some math-intensive fields , such as engineering and computer science .
More significantly , researchers consistently found that gender gaps are larger among higher-performing students who are more likely to pursue advanced degrees .
By contrast , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that only 19 percent of African American fourth graders and 13 percent of eighth graders were proficient in math – compared to the national averages of 40 percent and 33 percent for all students .
The NAEP also found that only three states saw more than 5 percent of African-American students in their graduating class pass at least one Advanced Placement test in a STEM subject during high school , and four states saw less than 1 percent of African-American students graduate having passed one STEM subject exam .
The numbers are even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analyzed 2017 testing data and found that 13 of the city ’ s 39 high schools had not a single student proficient in math .
[ Just as sadly , only 10 percent of black boys in Baltimore City were reading at grade level . ]
These results are even sadder than U.S. Department of Education data from 2011 , which found that only 20 percent of Chicago ’ s public school eighth graders ( of any race ) were grade-level proficient in math .
Given the well-established fact ( see above ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drive , motivation , intellect , and capability to achieve academic excellence even in STEM subjects , two things stick out .
First and foremost is that while science , technology , engineering and math are NOT inherently racist , bringing more Black Americans into the field will require creating a supportive environment in these schools and the communities they serve .
Second , these students – beginning very early in life — will need better tools and resources to counter the widespread financial and emotional poverty many face .
The rub here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open and may not even open this fall , depending on both the corona virus outbreak and the ongoing civil unrest — which is aimed at improving the lives and elevating the general perception of the value of the lives of African Americans .
On the upside , however , many students stuck at home have been provided with laptop computers by their schools – providing opportunities for tutoring by both their teachers and the many millions of protesters who have at least PROFESSED a their belief that black lives matter .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who “ look like you ” may be a bonus , it is not and has not ever been a necessity .
To demand that students of color desiring to enter STEM fields where there are today very few professionals of color and at the same time to demand that only professionals of color be their mentors is virtually impossible .
What matters most is that the tutor or mentor believes in the ability and the bright future of the student and that the student grows in that same belief and hope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the talk for decades , but the evidence of their failure to bring about real change lies smoldering in the streets and in the hearts of millions who are now demanding real change .
And while real change begins with removing the old stereotypes imprinted in the minds of far too many of us , it will require a joint effort of all of us to invest our time and treasure in the lives of young people seeking a better , more fulfilling life and career .

You may have missed this. On June 10, groups named Shut Down STEM and Particles for Justice led nearly 6,000 scientists – and even journals like Nature — in a stop work day to protest “systemic racism in STEM” (science, technology, engineering and math) professions.
“In the wake of the most recent murders of Black people in the U.S., it is clear that white and other non-Black people have to step up and do the work to eradicate anti-Black racism,” the website Shut Down STEM said in a statement.
The Particles for Justice website stated, “Therefore, as physicists, we believe an academic strike is urgently needed: to hit pause, to give Black academics a break, and to give others an opportunity to reflect on their own complicity in anti-Black racism in academia and their local and global communities.”
Their website also blares: “We recognize that our academic institutions and research collaborations — despite big talk about diversity, equity, and inclusion — have ultimately failed Black people…. Black representation among physics faculty is non-existent at most institutions, and it is widely known that Black students often feel unwelcome, unsupported, and even unsafe in their physics departments and predominantly white campuses.”
Supporting evidence for this dates at least to a 2006 article in Physics Today by Shirley Malcom, who at the time was the director of the education and human resources programs at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Malcom reported that in 2003, while women received only 22 percent of bachelor’s degrees and 18 percent of PhDs awarded in physics by U.S. colleges and universities, that number dwarfed the 3.5 percent and 2.3 percent of those degrees that went to Black Americans. In 2004, the numbers were even worse – women received 15.5 percent and Black Americans about 1 percent of physics doctorates.
Now, a brand new report from a task force organized by the American Institute for Physics (AIP) calls for “systemic changes” to increase the number of Black Americans obtaining bachelor’s degrees in physics. The TEAM-UP report states that “African American students have the same drive, motivation, intellect, and capability to obtain physics and astronomy degrees as students of other races and ethnicities.”
Their persistent underrepresentation in these fields, the report concludes, is due to (1) the lack of a supportive environment in many departments and (2) the enormous financial challenges. The first cause, they noted, can be addressed by creating a “sense of belonging” in an academic environment that is all too often plagued by “identity-based harassment including microaggressions and acts motivated by bias and racism.”
“Physics identity” is strengthened in Black American students when they have same-race role models in the faculty, are routinely invited and financially supported to participate in the established activities of the profession, and are able to connect their physics education to activities that benefit their communities.”
One goal is to allocate $1.2 million to encourage 150 African American students a year – across all historically black colleges and universities – to earn a bachelor’s degree in physics. The report noted that HBCUs saw a 42 percent decline in federal funding for each full-time student from 2003 to 2015, yet it failed to note a bipartisan 2019 law, signed by President Trump, that will permanently provide more than $250 million a year to HBCUs and other institutions that serve large numbers of minority students.
Not that long ago, there was a national hue and cry over the lack of women in professional STEM jobs, especially in certain fields. While women today earn a majority of bachelor’s and master’s degrees (and nearly half of PhDs) in biological sciences, social sciences, and psychology, their numbers are far less impressive for computer sciences (20 percent of doctorates), engineering (23 percent), and physical sciences (19 percent). Just 15 percent of U.S. direct science and engineering jobs are held by women.
Western Governors University found that “young women see few women going into science, technology, engineering, and math fields, so they have fewer role models and examples to follow…. Most young people share their experiences finding someone they look up to and admire and pursuing a career path because of them.” Sounds just like AIP’s reason number one for the shortfall of Black Americans in these fields.
WGU acknowledges that the long-term dominance of men in STEM fields has created a taboo for women scientists and technologists and notes that women in these fields can be stereotyped. Sexism may be the underlying raison d’etre for the anti-female bias that haunts STEM professions, despite the fact that “research has shown that young women perform just as well as men in these fields.” [Sound familiar?]
WGU offered three ways to increase the number of women in STEM fields: highlight women scientists; engage young girls to get excited about STEM; and fight sexism. Not oddly at all, these are almost identical [exchanging racism for sexism] to the AIP recommendations for encouraging more Black Americans to enter STEM professions.
What IS odd, however, is that none of the STEM stop work scientist groups ever brought up the elephant in the room – the poor performance of Black American students in far too many of our urban high schools (which has little or nothing to do with any lack of inherent ability and everything to do with the racism of big city political machines).
A 2016 report from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics found that while boys and girls score similarly on many state tests, boys are much more likely than girls to pursue careers in some math-intensive fields, such as engineering and computer science. More significantly, researchers consistently found that gender gaps are larger among higher-performing students who are more likely to pursue advanced degrees.
By contrast, the 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress found that only 19 percent of African American fourth graders and 13 percent of eighth graders were proficient in math – compared to the national averages of 40 percent and 33 percent for all students.
The NAEP also found that only three states saw more than 5 percent of African-American students in their graduating class pass at least one Advanced Placement test in a STEM subject during high school, and four states saw less than 1 percent of African-American students graduate having passed one STEM subject exam.
The numbers are even worse in inner cities. Project Baltimore analyzed 2017 testing data and found that 13 of the city’s 39 high schools had not a single student proficient in math. [Just as sadly, only 10 percent of black boys in Baltimore City were reading at grade level.] These results are even sadder than U.S. Department of Education data from 2011, which found that only 20 percent of Chicago’s public school eighth graders (of any race) were grade-level proficient in math.
Given the well-established fact (see above) that Black American students have the same drive, motivation, intellect, and capability to achieve academic excellence even in STEM subjects, two things stick out. First and foremost is that while science, technology, engineering and math are NOT inherently racist, bringing more Black Americans into the field will require creating a supportive environment in these schools and the communities they serve. Second, these students – beginning very early in life — will need better tools and resources to counter the widespread financial and emotional poverty many face.
The rub here is that schools today are not even open and may not even open this fall, depending on both the corona virus outbreak and the ongoing civil unrest — which is aimed at improving the lives and elevating the general perception of the value of the lives of African Americans.
On the upside, however, many students stuck at home have been provided with laptop computers by their schools – providing opportunities for tutoring by both their teachers and the many millions of protesters who have at least PROFESSED a their belief that black lives matter.
And while having tutors and mentors who are people who “look like you” may be a bonus, it is not and has not ever been a necessity. To demand that students of color desiring to enter STEM fields where there are today very few professionals of color and at the same time to demand that only professionals of color be their mentors is virtually impossible.
What matters most is that the tutor or mentor believes in the ability and the bright future of the student and that the student grows in that same belief and hope. Politicians of all stripes have talked the talk for decades, but the evidence of their failure to bring about real change lies smoldering in the streets and in the hearts of millions who are now demanding real change.
And while real change begins with removing the old stereotypes imprinted in the minds of far too many of us, it will require a joint effort of all of us to invest our time and treasure in the lives of young people seeking a better, more fulfilling life and career.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-20--America leads the world in pollution reduction

The constant hammering by the left at climate change is driven by a desire to destroy the very foundations that drive our economy .
How can one come to any other conclusion when w e look at these charts ?
Guess who leads the world in the reduction of ocean pollution ?
THE USA .
Look at China , the worlds biggest polluter .
Now look at Carbon emissions , Who is one of the greenest countries on the planet ?
The USA .
So why are we being subjected to a collective guilt trip on destroying the planet , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true , it ’ s large areas of the rest of the world that is doing it ?
Does it even phase them that prosperity leads to better living conditions ?
Here is the reason .
Its not a concern about CO2 destroying the planet .
How could it be when our capitalistic system has developed a way to reduce that for those that fear it ?
And guess what , there are more things that can be done that would ENHANCE , not destroy our way of life in this matter .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
.
Because its not the real agenda .
They know darn well that though climate change is down on the list of most importance to most people , there is a bloc of INDOCTRIANATED VOTERS , that have no idea that their country is the leader because of its system , that can turn an election .
We have enough swing states that if you have a bloc voting on their fears because they believe their country and way of life is evil , you get pushed over the edge .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statistics , whether you believe CO2 is the devil or not .
They are unaware that the USA is doing its share , in fact , more than our share if this is the real matter .
But it is not .
Like so many things , there are informational predatory practices designed to prey on people to sway them , with no regard for other sides of the issue .
They know few will actually look .
So they hide information and push a missive to achieve another goal to seek a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no dissent .
Those very tactics are an attack on our way of life .
So what can this possibly be driven by ?
And here is what is so maddening .
They seek to destroy the very system that could actually get rid of this if it was a problem .
The problem now is not the climate , it ’ s the perception that an atmospheric apocalypse is on the way and you must in essence , commit economic suicide to stop it .
Yet if that ’ s true , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop that .
Simple logic dictates that if our way of life is leading the world in this matter .
While a socialist/communist giant like China is at the bottom , why would anyone want to destroy the very nation leading the way and move toward a system that does not ?
The real reason can not be , for most , a true concern for climate , but instead to push the perception that we are not a force for good in the world , and that our way of life must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the good of the world , but it ’ s the opposite .
This nation better wake up to the idea that this has very little to with science , but ulterior motives that run counter to what made this nation the envy of the world .
Which if climate change was the real issue , the US already is in that matter !

The constant hammering by the left at climate change is driven by a desire to destroy the very foundations that drive our economy. How can one come to any other conclusion when w e look at these charts? Guess who leads the world in the reduction of ocean pollution?
THE USA. Look at China, the worlds biggest polluter.
Now look at Carbon emissions, Who is one of the greenest countries on the planet?
The USA. So why are we being subjected to a collective guilt trip on destroying the planet, when, if what they say is true, it’s large areas of the rest of the world that is doing it?
Does it even phase them that prosperity leads to better living conditions?
Here is the reason. Its not a concern about CO2 destroying the planet. How could it be when our capitalistic system has developed a way to reduce that for those that fear it? And guess what, there are more things that can be done that would ENHANCE, not destroy our way of life in this matter. So why would anyone hammer the USA?. Because its not the real agenda. They know darn well that though climate change is down on the list of most importance to most people, there is a bloc of INDOCTRIANATED VOTERS, that have no idea that their country is the leader because of its system, that can turn an election. We have enough swing states that if you have a bloc voting on their fears because they believe their country and way of life is evil, you get pushed over the edge. That bloc has no idea on the exact statistics, whether you believe CO2 is the devil or not. They are unaware that the USA is doing its share, in fact, more than our share if this is the real matter.
But it is not. Like so many things, there are informational predatory practices designed to prey on people to sway them, with no regard for other sides of the issue. They know few will actually look. So they hide information and push a missive to achieve another goal to seek a mass group think, where there is no dissent. Those very tactics are an attack on our way of life. So what can this possibly be driven by? And here is what is so maddening.
They seek to destroy the very system that could actually get rid of this if it was a problem. The problem now is not the climate, it’s the perception that an atmospheric apocalypse is on the way and you must in essence, commit economic suicide to stop it. Yet if that’s true, the USA is doing our part to stop that.
Simple logic dictates that if our way of life is leading the world in this matter. While a socialist/communist giant like China is at the bottom, why would anyone want to destroy the very nation leading the way and move toward a system that does not? The real reason can not be, for most, a true concern for climate, but instead to push the perception that we are not a force for good in the world, and that our way of life must be dismantled. They claim its for the good of the world, but it’s the opposite. This nation better wake up to the idea that this has very little to with science, but ulterior motives that run counter to what made this nation the envy of the world. Which if climate change was the real issue, the US already is in that matter!


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-21--Another Covid-19 silver lining – hygienic wipes beat the sewer fascists!

As I ’ ve written here before while COVID-19 has been an unmitigated disaster for all that classical liberals hold dear ( little things like personal liberty and autonomy , privacy , a functional market economy… ) it ’ s important to focus on the small positive effects of the 2020 pandemic .
Among them , we ’ ve probably seen the end of the taxi-cartel grip ( and government ’ s grip ) on personal mobility and delivery .
I don ’ t think there ’ s any putting the genie of “ add wine to my delivery order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bottle .
Another bright spot is that the economy of work-styles might finally keep up more with technological progress .
It took a disaster like COVID-19 to really shatter the illusion that working in big , centralized offices was really necessary or desirable for businesses to get their ( white-collar ) work done .
The trend to decentralized work could benefit both workers ( more flexibility ) and the environment ( less commuting , less concentrated waste streams ) .
But another bright spot seems to have appeared in the battle for individual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hygiene : COVID-19 seems to have utterly destroyed the prospects of anti-wipe fascists who have been moaning about clogged sewers and contaminated recyclables .
Lest you think the anti-wipe fascists are just imaginary , a few examples : In the US , the trendy thing is to blame manufacturers for sewers and plumbing clogged up by wipes , by attacking them for labeling things flushable that , the sewer police say , are not really flushable .
That is , you can flush them down your toilet , but that does not flush @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead to super-gross clogs in sewer systems around the country .
A variety of lawsuits have been filed trying to get companies to stop labeling things flushable , or to make them pay for the added costs to the sewer system , or to change the composition of the products so that they truly dissolve in water , which , one can ’ t help but think , would defeat the entire purpose of wet wipes .
In the UK , Friends of the Earth wants to make wipes both less useful and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end to synthetic fibres , like plastic , in wet wipes ; Better , clearer messaging on wet wipes to prevent them from being flushed down toilets ; and a ban on the marketing of any single-use wipes as flushable.
” Things are so bad in the UK , that the war against wipes has even been likened to the war over climate change .
“ A new report by AMs has accused ministers of “ not getting to grips with the scale of the problem.
” A poor choice of words .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ into plastic , the assembly ’ s climate change committee said it had been “ disappointed ” by the actions ministers had taken so far.
” Meanwhile up here in Canada , “ Markham Councillor Jack Heath wants to flush out what you ’ re putting down the toilet .
He ’ s floating the idea of having York Region crack down on products sold as flushable , such as baby wipes and hand wipes .
After all , it ’ s costing the region more than $ 1 million a year to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not number one , number two or toilet paper bunging up the sewers.
” [ NB : Yes , they actually speak that way in Canada . ]
“ Why don ’ t we take the outrageous step and say they ( flushable products ) are banned and go have our staff start removing them ( from stores ) ?
” Meanwhile , demand for flushable wipes is soaring in the COVID-19 world .
One wipe manufacturer in the US notes , “ Demand is completely unprecedented , unlike anything we ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the store now and find a wipes shelf stocked , it ’ s because it was just stocked , ” Menache says .
“ By the end of the day it will be empty.
” This doesn ’ t mean the war on wiping your heinie is over , as the ecofascists and sewer fascists will always put consumer choice last on their list of important values , but the massive explosion in people ’ s consumption of wet wipes in the COVID-19 world is unlikely to be restrained by those more concerned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear in the future .
My suggestion for those folks is , instead of trying to tell consumers what to like , why not tell waste disposal utilities ( almost always governmentaly run ) to upgrade their equipment to handle the new consumer demand safely .
Would that raise sewage costs ?
Probably , but making that decision to pay more should belong to the consumer , not the government .
After all , it is your tush at stake .

As I’ve written here before while COVID-19 has been an unmitigated disaster for all that classical liberals hold dear (little things like personal liberty and autonomy, privacy, a functional market economy…) it’s important to focus on the small positive effects of the 2020 pandemic. Among them, we’ve probably seen the end of the taxi-cartel grip (and government’s grip) on personal mobility and delivery. I don’t think there’s any putting the genie of “add wine to my delivery order” on Uber Eats back into the bottle.
Another bright spot is that the economy of work-styles might finally keep up more with technological progress. It took a disaster like COVID-19 to really shatter the illusion that working in big, centralized offices was really necessary or desirable for businesses to get their (white-collar) work done. The trend to decentralized work could benefit both workers (more flexibility) and the environment (less commuting, less concentrated waste streams).
But another bright spot seems to have appeared in the battle for individual liberty, consumer choice, and personal hygiene: COVID-19 seems to have utterly destroyed the prospects of anti-wipe fascists who have been moaning about clogged sewers and contaminated recyclables. Lest you think the anti-wipe fascists are just imaginary, a few examples:
In the US, the trendy thing is to blame manufacturers for sewers and plumbing clogged up by wipes, by attacking them for labeling things flushable that, the sewer police say, are not really flushable. That is, you can flush them down your toilet, but that does not flush them out of existence, and they lead to super-gross clogs in sewer systems around the country. A variety of lawsuits have been filed trying to get companies to stop labeling things flushable, or to make them pay for the added costs to the sewer system, or to change the composition of the products so that they truly dissolve in water, which, one can’t help but think, would defeat the entire purpose of wet wipes.
In the UK, Friends of the Earth wants to make wipes both less useful and less available, calling for “an end to synthetic fibres, like plastic, in wet wipes; Better, clearer messaging on wet wipes to prevent them from being flushed down toilets; and a ban on the marketing of any single-use wipes as flushable.” Things are so bad in the UK, that the war against wipes has even been likened to the war over climate change. “A new report by AMs has accused ministers of “not getting to grips with the scale of the problem.” A poor choice of words. And “After carrying out an inquiry into plastic, the assembly’s climate change committee said it had been “disappointed” by the actions ministers had taken so far.”
Meanwhile up here in Canada, “Markham Councillor Jack Heath wants to flush out what you’re putting down the toilet. He’s floating the idea of having York Region crack down on products sold as flushable, such as baby wipes and hand wipes. After all, it’s costing the region more than $1 million a year to get rid of stuff that’s not number one, number two or toilet paper bunging up the sewers.” [NB: Yes, they actually speak that way in Canada.] “Why don’t we take the outrageous step and say they (flushable products) are banned and go have our staff start removing them (from stores)?”
Meanwhile, demand for flushable wipes is soaring in the COVID-19 world. One wipe manufacturer in the US notes, “Demand is completely unprecedented, unlike anything we’ve ever seen. If you go to the store now and find a wipes shelf stocked, it’s because it was just stocked,” Menache says. “By the end of the day it will be empty.”
This doesn’t mean the war on wiping your heinie is over, as the ecofascists and sewer fascists will always put consumer choice last on their list of important values, but the massive explosion in people’s consumption of wet wipes in the COVID-19 world is unlikely to be restrained by those more concerned with limiting waste production and keeping sewers clear in the future.
My suggestion for those folks is, instead of trying to tell consumers what to like, why not tell waste disposal utilities (almost always governmentaly run) to upgrade their equipment to handle the new consumer demand safely. Would that raise sewage costs? Probably, but making that decision to pay more should belong to the consumer, not the government. After all, it is your tush at stake.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-21--China’s illegal jaguar trade “spotted” by scientists

UAs the world reels from virus shutdowns , economic uncertainty , and now protests and riots , China is working hard to secure the interests of the ruling Communist Party .
One major component of China ’ s foreign policy is to provide loans and workers to help nations in Africa and Central and South America develop .
In return , China receives unfettered access to natural resources from around the world and vast political leverage over many nations .
But what is also of concern is the demand for illicit jaguar products from Chinese workers abroad in South America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation facing jaguars is becoming dire .
“ These countries that have stronger ties with China , combined with weak governance , combined with high levels of corruption—it ’ s almost like a recipe for an increase in illegal wildlife trade , ” says Vincent Njiman , a co-author and anthropologist who studies wildlife trade .
Their research found that Brazil , Bolivia , and Peru were among the countries that fit that description .
In China , tiger products are very popular , and it is a status symbol to be able @ @ @ @ @ @ @ furniture made from tiger teeth , bone , or fur .
There is also a widespread belief in China that tiger bone has great medicinal and vitality properties .
There ’ s no “ wasting away again in Margaritaville ” here .
On the contrary , tiger bone wine is believed to give the drinker the power of a tiger .
While markets have been set up that allow for the legal trade of tigers , the problem is that wild tigers are still held in high demand as they are deemed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studies seem to show that jaguar products are now replacing tiger products .
More concerningly , it seems a new and independent trade has sprung up surrounding jaguars .
The new study finds that jaguar teeth are the most commonly seized parts going to China , with records showing nearly 2,000 intercepted by law enforcement between 2012 and early 2018 .
The paper concludes that jaguars , therefore , aren ’ t necessarily a substitute for tigers , otherwise there would be a lot more jaguar bones in the trade—a pattern seen with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for example .
Scientists and researchers are still trying to catch up with the new findings .
Right now , there simply isn ’ t enough infrastructure or research teams in place to know exactly how or to what extent jaguar products are being smuggled out of South and Central America .
Yet , researchers know it is happening , and as Chinese investment in the region is certain to grow , so will the illegal jaguar trade , it is reasoned .
You can read more about this story in National @ @

UAs the world reels from virus shutdowns, economic uncertainty, and now protests and riots, China is working hard to secure the interests of the ruling Communist Party.
One major component of China’s foreign policy is to provide loans and workers to help nations in Africa and Central and South America develop. In return, China receives unfettered access to natural resources from around the world and vast political leverage over many nations.
But what is also of concern is the demand for illicit jaguar products from Chinese workers abroad in South America.
According to National Geographic, the situation facing jaguars is becoming dire.
“These countries that have stronger ties with China, combined with weak governance, combined with high levels of corruption—it’s almost like a recipe for an increase in illegal wildlife trade,” says Vincent Njiman, a co-author and anthropologist who studies wildlife trade. Their research found that Brazil, Bolivia, and Peru were among the countries that fit that description.
In China, tiger products are very popular, and it is a status symbol to be able to display jewelry, fabrics, and furniture made from tiger teeth, bone, or fur. There is also a widespread belief in China that tiger bone has great medicinal and vitality properties.
There’s no “wasting away again in Margaritaville” here. On the contrary, tiger bone wine is believed to give the drinker the power of a tiger.
While markets have been set up that allow for the legal trade of tigers, the problem is that wild tigers are still held in high demand as they are deemed to be more rare and powerful.
Yet studies seem to show that jaguar products are now replacing tiger products. More concerningly, it seems a new and independent trade has sprung up surrounding jaguars.
The new study finds that jaguar teeth are the most commonly seized parts going to China, with records showing nearly 2,000 intercepted by law enforcement between 2012 and early 2018. The paper concludes that jaguars, therefore, aren’t necessarily a substitute for tigers, otherwise there would be a lot more jaguar bones in the trade—a pattern seen with lion skeletons coming out of South Africa, for example.
Scientists and researchers are still trying to catch up with the new findings. Right now, there simply isn’t enough infrastructure or research teams in place to know exactly how or to what extent jaguar products are being smuggled out of South and Central America. Yet, researchers know it is happening, and as Chinese investment in the region is certain to grow, so will the illegal jaguar trade, it is reasoned.
You can read more about this story in National Geographic.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-22--Greens promote child slave labor and ecological destruction

The US Supreme Court recently ruled 7-2 to reverse a lower court ruling that had invalidated a permit for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline , which will bring West Virginia natural gas to Virginia and North Carolina , for home heating , factory power , electricity generation and manufacturing petrochemical feedstocks .
Environmentalists had claimed the US Forest Service had no authority to issue the permit , because a 0.1-mile ( 530-foot ) segment would cross 600 feet below the 2,200-mile-long Appalachian Trail , which is administered by the National Park Service .
Justice Thomas ’ s majority opinion scuttled that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Duke Energy should receive the USFS and other permits relatively soon – and have the pipeline in operation by early 2022 – unless a Biden administration takes over in 2021 ( with AOC as woke climate and energy advisor to Biden and Democrats ) and imposes Green New Deal bans on drilling , fracking , pipelines , and eventually any use of natural gas , oil and coal .
Meanwhile , environmentalist groups plan more lawsuits .
They insist the pipeline would put rivers and streams at risk of increased sedimentation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ species .
These plans and assertions underscore how inflexible they have become in opposing any US fossil fuel use .
How incapable of recognizing or rationally discussing the far greater human and ecological impacts from energy systems they favor .
How reliant on blatant double standards and mob rule , instead of on rational , cohesive , persuasive discussion .
Barely a few years ago , the Sierra Club and allied groups gladly took $ 187 million and more from Michael Bloomberg , natural gas producers and other financiers to wage their War @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US coal mines and power plants , they then turned gas from a “ climate friendly bridge fuel ” to evil incarnate .
Today they to end fossil fuel use nationwide .
Via delusion , incantation and cancellation of debate , they have convinced themselves that wind , solar , battery and biofuel “ alternatives ” are somehow “ clean , green , renewable and sustainable.
” Reality says otherwise .
The Atlantic Coast Pipeline will be underground , mostly invisible beneath a grassy right-of-way .
Any sedimentation will occur during short term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be scared off or displaced for a spell .
Any threat to sensitive species , even in the event of a leak , will be minimal .
In stark contrast , their preferred energy systems will have massive , permanent impacts – in Virginia and far beyond its borders .
Virginia solar panels will blanket more than eight times the land area of Washington , DC .
Hundreds of 850-foot-tall bird-killing wind turbines will create an enormous obstacle course for whales , ships and planes off the Virginia Beach coast .
Many thousands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to replace coal and solar for a sunless , windless day or two .
Hundreds of miles of new transmission lines will soar into the sky and snake across the countryside .
Just bringing wind-based electricity from West Virginia to Blacksburg , Roanoke and Lynchburg , Virginia – and solar energy from all those Virginia panels to Staunton and Harrisonburg – will require several new transmission lines across the Appalachian Trail .
Not 600 feet below it ; right across it .
But somehow , we and our courts are supposed to believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the blasting , tree clearing , machinery , noise and other impacts associated with building and maintaining them – will cause no stream sedimentation , landscape scarring or harm to sensitive species .
In reality , the radical greens , utility companies and Democrats promoting these projects under the Virginia “ Clean ” Economy Act will simply demand that courts ignore the arguments they raised and environmental laws they cited when they raged against coal and gas power plants and the pipelines and transmission lines associated with them .
They ’ ll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ monstrous wind , solar and battery complexes be thrown out of court .
They ’ ll want the same double standards applied nationally .
Eliminating fossil fuels would mean America would have to replace 100 % of its gasoline and all its oil and natural gas feed stocks for pharmaceuticals , cosmetics , paints , synthetic fibers , fertilizers – and plastics for cell phones , computers , car bodies , packaging , wind turbine blades , solar panel films and countless other products .
That would require turning some 700 million acres @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four times the land area of Texas ) into biofuel corn , sugarcane and canola plantations for ethanol and biodiesel .
More extreme versions of the Green New Deal would eliminate coal , gas and nuclear electricity and backup power , gas for home heating , coal and gas for factories , and internal combustion vehicles .
We ’ d replace it all with wind or solar – and use wind or solar on good days to generate enough extra electricity to charge batteries for seven windless , sunless days .
That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we used in 2018 !
We ’ d need some 75 billion solar panels … or 4.2 million 1.8-MW onshore wind turbines … or 320,000 10-MW offshore wind turbines … and some 3.5 billion 100-kWh backup batteries .
The concrete , steel , copper , lithium , rare earth elements , aluminum , cobalt , plastic and other materials to build them would require vastly more mining and manufacturing than the world has ever seen – nearly all of it with fossil fuels .
Environmentalists oppose almost all mining anywhere in the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ operating overseas under rigorous Western rules .
That means essential metals and minerals get mined and processed in places like Baotou , Inner Mongolia , Bolivia , and the Democratic Republic of Congo , mostly under Chinese control , under minimal to nonexistent labor , wage , environmental , reclamation , and worker health and safety regulations .
The mining and industrial areas have become vast toxic wastelands .
For cobalt alone , over 40,000 Congolese children , as young as four years old , slave away alongside their parents in mines , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cave-ins and being exposed constantly to filthy , toxic , radioactive mud , dust , water and air .
That ’ s today – for today ’ s battery , solar panel and wind turbine needs .
Imagine how many would be needed to serve the Green New Deal .
400,000 perhaps ?
4,000,000 ?
China alone will soon have 200 times more coal-fired generation than Virginia will be shutting down .
During 2020 , says consulting company Wood Mackenzie , Europe and the United States will close down 22,000 megawatts of coal-fired @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 49,000 megawatts of new coal-fired power plants , on top of those it already has and in addition to its growing fleet of gas-fired units .
China is building or financing numerous coal and gas power plants in Africa and Asia .
India already has hundreds of coal-fired units and is building or planning 400 more .
China and India are also building or planning hundreds of new airports , and putting millions of new cars and trucks on their roads .
That ( plus the GND mining , processing and manufacturing ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entire USA eliminated all fossil fuel use tomorrow – it wouldn ’ t make an iota of difference for global carbon dioxide levels .
These environmental and human rights travesties can happen only under a system of rampant double standards : the same kinds that excoriate and ban religious services and funerals , anti-lockdown protests and Trump rallies – while permitting , excusing and praising Black Lives Matter marches that have too often turned into anti-police mobs , riots , looting , arson , beatings , and murders of people like David Dorn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black lives certainly haven ’ t mattered much to this crowd .
They also require that the woke Campus Cancel Culture spread its intolerant , authoritarian rule to our cities , media , social media , and even legislative bodies and courts – to instill constant anger and anarchy , and silence , defame and punish anyone who dares to offer nuanced or contrarian viewpoints .
Every victory brings new demands , with no accountability for the mayhem and destruction they inflict .
Why should rural , poor , minority and working class @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ecological , health and economic damages inflicted in pursuit of this pseudo-renewable energy utopia ?
Why should Africans , Asians and Latin Americans have to accept slave status to advance this agenda ?
The situation is coming to a head .
Let ’ s hope the now-silent majority can restore law , order , civil debate , thoughtful reflection on our complex history , and rational resolution of these thorny problems .

The US Supreme Court recently ruled 7-2 to reverse a lower court ruling that had invalidated a permit for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, which will bring West Virginia natural gas to Virginia and North Carolina, for home heating, factory power, electricity generation and manufacturing petrochemical feedstocks.
Environmentalists had claimed the US Forest Service had no authority to issue the permit, because a 0.1-mile (530-foot) segment would cross 600 feet below the 2,200-mile-long Appalachian Trail, which is administered by the National Park Service. Justice Thomas’s majority opinion scuttled that assertion.
Pipeline project developers Dominion Resources and Duke Energy should receive the USFS and other permits relatively soon – and have the pipeline in operation by early 2022 – unless a Biden administration takes over in 2021 (with AOC as woke climate and energy advisor to Biden and Democrats) and imposes Green New Deal bans on drilling, fracking, pipelines, and eventually any use of natural gas, oil and coal.
Meanwhile, environmentalist groups plan more lawsuits. They insist the pipeline would put rivers and streams at risk of increased sedimentation, scar pristine landscapes, and harm sensitive species.
These plans and assertions underscore how inflexible they have become in opposing any US fossil fuel use. How incapable of recognizing or rationally discussing the far greater human and ecological impacts from energy systems they favor. How reliant on blatant double standards and mob rule, instead of on rational, cohesive, persuasive discussion.
Barely a few years ago, the Sierra Club and allied groups gladly took $187 million and more from Michael Bloomberg, natural gas producers and other financiers to wage their War on Coal. Having closed down most US coal mines and power plants, they then turned gas from a “climate friendly bridge fuel” to evil incarnate. Today they to end fossil fuel use nationwide. Via delusion, incantation and cancellation of debate, they have convinced themselves that wind, solar, battery and biofuel “alternatives” are somehow “clean, green, renewable and sustainable.” Reality says otherwise.
The Atlantic Coast Pipeline will be underground, mostly invisible beneath a grassy right-of-way. Any sedimentation will occur during short term construction operations, when some wildlife will be scared off or displaced for a spell. Any threat to sensitive species, even in the event of a leak, will be minimal.
In stark contrast, their preferred energy systems will have massive, permanent impacts – in Virginia and far beyond its borders. Virginia solar panels will blanket more than eight times the land area of Washington, DC. Hundreds of 850-foot-tall bird-killing wind turbines will create an enormous obstacle course for whales, ships and planes off the Virginia Beach coast. Many thousands of 1,200-pound batteries will provide backup power to replace coal and solar for a sunless, windless day or two.
Hundreds of miles of new transmission lines will soar into the sky and snake across the countryside. Just bringing wind-based electricity from West Virginia to Blacksburg, Roanoke and Lynchburg, Virginia – and solar energy from all those Virginia panels to Staunton and Harrisonburg – will require several new transmission lines across the Appalachian Trail. Not 600 feet below it; right across it.
But somehow, we and our courts are supposed to believe, all these enormous industrial facilities – and the blasting, tree clearing, machinery, noise and other impacts associated with building and maintaining them – will cause no stream sedimentation, landscape scarring or harm to sensitive species.
In reality, the radical greens, utility companies and Democrats promoting these projects under the Virginia “Clean” Economy Act will simply demand that courts ignore the arguments they raised and environmental laws they cited when they raged against coal and gas power plants and the pipelines and transmission lines associated with them. They’ll demand that citizen groups opposed to these monstrous wind, solar and battery complexes be thrown out of court. They’ll want the same double standards applied nationally.
Eliminating fossil fuels would mean America would have to replace 100% of its gasoline and all its oil and natural gas feed stocks for pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, paints, synthetic fibers, fertilizers – and plastics for cell phones, computers, car bodies, packaging, wind turbine blades, solar panel films and countless other products. That would require turning some 700 million acres of food crop and habitat land (four times the land area of Texas) into biofuel corn, sugarcane and canola plantations for ethanol and biodiesel.
More extreme versions of the Green New Deal would eliminate coal, gas and nuclear electricity and backup power, gas for home heating, coal and gas for factories, and internal combustion vehicles. We’d replace it all with wind or solar – and use wind or solar on good days to generate enough extra electricity to charge batteries for seven windless, sunless days. That’s 8.5 billion megawatts – twice what we used in 2018!
We’d need some 75 billion solar panels … or 4.2 million 1.8-MW onshore wind turbines … or 320,000 10-MW offshore wind turbines … and some 3.5 billion 100-kWh backup batteries. The concrete, steel, copper, lithium, rare earth elements, aluminum, cobalt, plastic and other materials to build them would require vastly more mining and manufacturing than the world has ever seen – nearly all of it with fossil fuels.
Environmentalists oppose almost all mining anywhere in the United States, and even by US companies operating overseas under rigorous Western rules. That means essential metals and minerals get mined and processed in places like Baotou, Inner Mongolia, Bolivia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, mostly under Chinese control, under minimal to nonexistent labor, wage, environmental, reclamation, and worker health and safety regulations. The mining and industrial areas have become vast toxic wastelands.
For cobalt alone, over 40,000 Congolese children, as young as four years old, slave away alongside their parents in mines, for a dollar a day, risking cave-ins and being exposed constantly to filthy, toxic, radioactive mud, dust, water and air. That’s today – for today’s battery, solar panel and wind turbine needs. Imagine how many would be needed to serve the Green New Deal. 400,000 perhaps? 4,000,000?
China alone will soon have 200 times more coal-fired generation than Virginia will be shutting down. During 2020, says consulting company Wood Mackenzie, Europe and the United States will close down 22,000 megawatts of coal-fired power capacity – even as Asia opens 49,000 megawatts of new coal-fired power plants, on top of those it already has and in addition to its growing fleet of gas-fired units.
China is building or financing numerous coal and gas power plants in Africa and Asia. India already has hundreds of coal-fired units and is building or planning 400 more. China and India are also building or planning hundreds of new airports, and putting millions of new cars and trucks on their roads. That (plus the GND mining, processing and manufacturing) means, even if Virginia or the entire USA eliminated all fossil fuel use tomorrow – it wouldn’t make an iota of difference for global carbon dioxide levels.
These environmental and human rights travesties can happen only under a system of rampant double standards: the same kinds that excoriate and ban religious services and funerals, anti-lockdown protests and Trump rallies – while permitting, excusing and praising Black Lives Matter marches that have too often turned into anti-police mobs, riots, looting, arson, beatings, and murders of people like David Dorn and Patrick Underwood, whose also precious black lives certainly haven’t mattered much to this crowd.
They also require that the woke Campus Cancel Culture spread its intolerant, authoritarian rule to our cities, media, social media, and even legislative bodies and courts – to instill constant anger and anarchy, and silence, defame and punish anyone who dares to offer nuanced or contrarian viewpoints. Every victory brings new demands, with no accountability for the mayhem and destruction they inflict.
Why should rural, poor, minority and working class families and communities have to accept the ecological, health and economic damages inflicted in pursuit of this pseudo-renewable energy utopia? Why should Africans, Asians and Latin Americans have to accept slave status to advance this agenda?
The situation is coming to a head. Let’s hope the now-silent majority can restore law, order, civil debate, thoughtful reflection on our complex history, and rational resolution of these thorny problems.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-22--Buying the farm vote with carbon credits

Man caused climate change is probably the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on society .
While much of the public with little science education has been conned by the media and well financed model builders into believing the arrogant idea that man controls the thermostat of planet Earth , it is in fact a political not a scientific issue .
It is not about saving the planet .
The Climate change movement is political ideology .
The socialist leaders of the movement believe that the world and all people in it should be controlled by a massive government .
To these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enemy .
Personal freedom and democracy are evil .
Essentially the entire Democratic Party has tied itself to this movement and will stop at nothing to bring the country to the sadistic utopia they see in socialism .
Sadly they are joined by many in the Republican Party as well .
Now they are going after America ’ s farmers and ranchers by proposing to give them money for what they naturally do , draw upon photosynthesis to utilize carbon dioxide to grow their crops and forests , and ask those who raise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They are trying to push them into the global warming hysteria camp and buy their votes in the next election along the way .
A legislative bill has been introduced this month directing the US Department of Agriculture to help farmers , ranchers and landowners use carbon dioxide absorbing practices to generate carbon credits gaining access to revenue from the greenhouse gas offset credit market .
It is really a cruel joke when one realizes the last established values for decreasing carbon dioxide was $ 3 a ton .
Time and effort to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than that .
Hopefully the legislation will not pass , but if it does the USDA , once the greatest supporter of agriculture but now too often controlled by deep staters , will reject creating required protocols to qualify for this pitiful vote bribery .
Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition said “ That Congress wants to help farmers and ranchers during this difficult time is great , but just help them directly .
Don ’ t create a program that gives them financial support for doing something to promote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Terigi Ciccione , author of the new book , The Hitchhiker ’ s Journey Through Climate Change , said “ the Dems have laid a trap , put a little cheese on the mousetrap , and when the two faced Republicans embrace it with bipartisan love for the farmers , the Dems will spring their Trojan Horse trap much like Lucy telling Charlie Brown this time she will really hold the football steady “ .
It is crazy to think we are even debating the idea of limiting CO2 at a huge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually be promoting more CO2 .
This shows how persuasive the pro global warming movement has been with their sales pitch , organization and propaganda .
We should actually be doing the opposite of what they are hyping .
The global warming argument fails for lack of any real scientific observable evidence .
We should not regulate , nor tax CO2 , but rather put more of it into the atmosphere .
Patrick Moore , co-founder of Greenpeace , who now spends his time battling the lies put forth by the organization he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , predicts the day will come when we will be crushing limestone to put its carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere .
There is only 1/10,000 of a percent more CO2 in the atmosphere now than there was 260 years ago .
The socialist alarmists are desperately telling us this threatens to plunge the earth into catastrophe .
In total , CO2 comprises only .04 percent of our atmosphere and is a very weak greenhouse gas with no impact on the Earth ’ s temperature as compared to the real players , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vegetation and such .
Yet when it comes to biological processes , like plant photosynthesis , small amounts of CO2 do make a wonderful difference .

Man caused climate change is probably the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on society. While much of the public with little science education has been conned by the media and well financed model builders into believing the arrogant idea that man controls the thermostat of planet Earth, it is in fact a political not a scientific issue. It is not about saving the planet.
The Climate change movement is political ideology. The socialist leaders of the movement believe that the world and all people in it should be controlled by a massive government. To these people capitalism and free markets are the enemy. Personal freedom and democracy are evil.
Essentially the entire Democratic Party has tied itself to this movement and will stop at nothing to bring the country to the sadistic utopia they see in socialism. Sadly they are joined by many in the Republican Party as well.
America’s agriculture community has largely resisted this damaging ideology.
Now they are going after America’s farmers and ranchers by proposing to give them money for what they naturally do, draw upon photosynthesis to utilize carbon dioxide to grow their crops and forests, and ask those who raise our meat to capture their flatulence. They are trying to push them into the global warming hysteria camp and buy their votes in the next election along the way.
A legislative bill has been introduced this month directing the US Department of Agriculture to help farmers, ranchers and landowners use carbon dioxide absorbing practices to generate carbon credits gaining access to revenue from the greenhouse gas offset credit market.
It is really a cruel joke when one realizes the last established values for decreasing carbon dioxide was $3 a ton. Time and effort to make such a calculation would cost folks more than that.
Hopefully the legislation will not pass, but if it does the USDA, once the greatest supporter of agriculture but now too often controlled by deep staters, will reject creating required protocols to qualify for this pitiful vote bribery.
Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition said “That Congress wants to help farmers and ranchers during this difficult time is great, but just help them directly. Don’t create a program that gives them financial support for doing something to promote the nonsensical effort to stop climate change.
Terigi Ciccione, author of the new book, The Hitchhiker’s Journey Through Climate Change, said “the Dems have laid a trap, put a little cheese on the mousetrap, and when the two faced Republicans embrace it with bipartisan love for the farmers, the Dems will spring their Trojan Horse trap much like Lucy telling Charlie Brown this time she will really hold the football steady “.
It is crazy to think we are even debating the idea of limiting CO2 at a huge cost to society, when we should actually be promoting more CO2. This shows how persuasive the pro global warming movement has been with their sales pitch, organization and propaganda. We should actually be doing the opposite of what they are hyping. The global warming argument fails for lack of any real scientific observable evidence. We should not regulate, nor tax CO2, but rather put more of it into the atmosphere.
Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, who now spends his time battling the lies put forth by the organization he founded to save whales and harp seals, predicts the day will come when we will be crushing limestone to put its carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere.
There is only 1/10,000 of a percent more CO2 in the atmosphere now than there was 260 years ago. The socialist alarmists are desperately telling us this threatens to plunge the earth into catastrophe.
In total, CO2 comprises only .04 percent of our atmosphere and is a very weak greenhouse gas with no impact on the Earth’s temperature as compared to the real players, the sun, the oceans, clouds, vegetation and such. Yet when it comes to biological processes, like plant photosynthesis, small amounts of CO2 do make a wonderful difference.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-06-23--Employing thermoelectric “paper chips” to battle wildfires

Can “ potato chips ” be used to sniff out wildfires before they get out of control ?
Well , maybe not potato chips – but thermoelectric ones that are paper-based just might do the trick .
This according to researchers reporting in ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces who claim to have developed self-powered “ paper chips ” that have the ability to sense early fires and relay a signal to responders .
The importance of creating an early warning system has become a priority in the wake of devastating blazes in Australia and the Amazon .
Scientists believe that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that will be able to monitor changes in temperature , smoke and humidity , that will give them a leg up to spot and take action to address a potential wildfire threat .
Such a system , however , hasn ’ t yet seemed practical because all of the sensing components that require power .
Batteries that run them eventually go dead and need to be replaced .
Thermoelectric materials , which convert temperature differences into electricity , could simultaneously detect temperature increases from fires and power themselves .
However , most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which are often expensive .
The scientists advocating for paper chips , however , believe they have found an answer .
As reported by ACS : “ To make paper-based thermoelectric sensors , the researchers chose two ionic liquids that behaved differently when the temperature increased : One adsorbed to the surface of gold electrodes , while the other desorbed , producing opposite ( positive or negative ) voltages .
They deposited each ionic liquid like an ink between two gold electrodes that were sputtered onto a piece of ordinary paper .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liquids produced an electric signal when a large temperature difference occurred , as would happen in a fire .
In a pilot test of the new sensor , the researchers attached one to a houseplant .
When they placed a flaming cotton ball close to the plant ’ s roots , the temperature at the bottom of the sensor quickly increased , producing a voltage signal that an attached microcomputer chip wirelessly transmitted to a receiver .
Upon picking up the signal , the receiver activated a sound alarm and a red light @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( $ 0.04 ) , and the materials are eco-friendly , the researchers say.
” To read the article in its entirety on the ACS website , click here .

Can “potato chips” be used to sniff out wildfires before they get out of control?
Well, maybe not potato chips – but thermoelectric ones that are paper-based just might do the trick. This according to researchers reporting in ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces who claim to have developed self-powered “paper chips” that have the ability to sense early fires and relay a signal to responders.
The importance of creating an early warning system has become a priority in the wake of devastating blazes in Australia and the Amazon. Scientists believe that if they can place sensors on trees that will be able to monitor changes in temperature, smoke and humidity, that will give them a leg up to spot and take action to address a potential wildfire threat.
Such a system, however, hasn’t yet seemed practical because all of the sensing components that require power. Batteries that run them eventually go dead and need to be replaced. Thermoelectric materials, which convert temperature differences into electricity, could simultaneously detect temperature increases from fires and power themselves. However, most of these materials are solid inorganic semiconductors, which are often expensive.
The scientists advocating for paper chips, however, believe they have found an answer. As reported by ACS:
“To make paper-based thermoelectric sensors, the researchers chose two ionic liquids that behaved differently when the temperature increased: One adsorbed to the surface of gold electrodes, while the other desorbed, producing opposite (positive or negative) voltages. They deposited each ionic liquid like an ink between two gold electrodes that were sputtered onto a piece of ordinary paper. When connected in series, the two ionic liquids produced an electric signal when a large temperature difference occurred, as would happen in a fire.
In a pilot test of the new sensor, the researchers attached one to a houseplant. When they placed a flaming cotton ball close to the plant’s roots, the temperature at the bottom of the sensor quickly increased, producing a voltage signal that an attached microcomputer chip wirelessly transmitted to a receiver. Upon picking up the signal, the receiver activated a sound alarm and a red light. The thermoelectric paper chips are cheap ($0.04), and the materials are eco-friendly, the researchers say.”
To read the article in its entirety on the ACS website, click here.