Week in Review
There have been a lot of movies showing how fracking is polluting our groundwater. Giving people cancer. Causing fire to blow out of people’s water faucets. Makers of movies appear on The Daily Show and The Colbert Report talking about how horrible and dangerous fracking is. So the evils of fracking are all around us. But, strangely, these dangers are conspicuous by their absence in one area. Actual news stories.
We hear about how global warming is getting worse. We hear example after example of how Republicans hate the poor and women and want to take away health insurance from everyone. We are bombarded with news about how the rich aren’t paying their fair share and how Republicans are trying to buy elections. But we don’t see reporters filming fire shooting out of a water faucet. And we don’t see the CDC in fracking areas responding to soaring cancer rates. Or fracking fields being turned into superfund cleanup sites.
It’s odd because when Malaysian Airways Flight 370 went missing 4 weeks ago CNN covered the missing airplane 24/7. Even though they had nothing to report. They just brought in experts (and a physic) and theorized about what might have happened. The other news channels covered the non-news with nearly the same fervor as CNN. So you would think that if fracking was causing fire to shoot out of water faucets and was giving everyone cancer they would be covering that 24/7. For most of these news channels are liberal. And liberals hate fracking. But they don’t go to North Dakota to report the abject misery fracking has brought them. Probably because they don’t want to show the economic boom going on in North Dakota. Where people are going to for jobs. Where the unemployment rate there (2.6% as of February 2014) is the lowest in the nation. Perhaps that’s why they don’t report the abject misery fracking is causing in North Dakota. Because there is none.
So if the media isn’t in North Dakota is the government? Is the EPA documenting the abject misery fracking is causing the good people of North Dakota? No. Instead, they’re purposely trying to give people cancer (see What’s more dangerous to your health than fracking? The EPA, apparently by Ashe Schow posted 4/2/2014 on the Washington Examiner).
An EPA inspector general’s report found that the agency did obtain approval to conduct five “human research studies” exposing “81 human study subjects to” toxic pollutants including diesel exhaust…
So the EPA asked people to expose themselves to dangerous pollutants — some at levels 50 times greater than what is safe — but didn’t tell them about the dangers.
Why would the EPA, which supposedly cares so much about the public’s health, do this, especially to people who already had health problems?
To justify more regulations and funding, of course.
They are desperately trying to kill people by exposing them to something they can later call a toxic pollutant. So they can “justify more regulations and funding.” And they will tell the people they kill, “Fear not, you shall not have died in vain. Your horrible death will bring about the greatest kind of good there is. It will enable us to expand the size of the federal government. Allowing it to reach further into your lives. Well, not yours per se because you’ll be dead. Thanks to us. But other people will know the joy of having the federal government intruding further into their private lives. Until one day there are no more private lives.”
This is what the federal government thinks is good. Not a 2.6% unemployment rate. Like they have in North Dakota. Thanks to fracking. Which the people living there don’t seem to mind. As the people moving there don’t seem to mind. Interestingly, the blue states with higher concentrations of liberals aren’t enjoying such economic prosperity. The unemployment rate in New York is 6.8%. In Illinois it’s 8.7%. And in California it’s 8%. So they’re doing something right in North Dakota. And something very wrong in New York, Illinois and California. Perhaps committing too many resources on liberal policies. Instead of creating an economic climate that will give people the thing they want most. A job.
Tags: cancer, EPA, federal government, fire, fracking, funding, job, liberal, North Dakota, regulations, toxic pollutant, unemployment rate, water faucets
Week in Review
Green energy investments are a horrible investment. The only reason why anyone is building green energy projects is because of taxpayer subsidies. If you take away the subsidies the green energy industry is just going to stop building these bad energy projects. Which is what’s happening now (see Here Are The 10 Best States For Clean Energy Jobs In 2013 by Aaron Tilley posted 3/12/2014 on Forbes).
Clean energy investments had it rough in 2013, and US job growth in that sector is having a bit of trouble too.
That’s at least according to evidence in a new report out today from Environmental Entrepreneurs (E2),an environmental advocacy organization for businesses. While the clean energy industry made plans to add an additional 78,000 new jobs at 260 projects in 2013, that’s a 30% dip from the 110,000 job announcements in the previous year. (E2 has only been tracking clean energy job growth for the past two years…)
The biggest reason for the 30% drop in job growth over last year is due to ongoing regulatory uncertainty around federal tax credits and state renewable energy mandates, says E2 communications director Bob Keefe. Congress let the generous tax credits the wind energy industry had enjoyed for more than two decades expire in December–and it looks unlikely they’ll be reinstated in 2014. And four major energy efficiency tax credits and initiatives expired at the end of last year too. On top of that, several states, including North Carolina and Kansas, have attempted to roll back mandates on renewable energy requirements for their utility grids.
If anyone bemoans a cut in government spending in some government program don’t blame the Republicans. Blame the Democrats. And their green energy cronies. The Democrats are taking money away from other programs to pay for these white elephants just so they and their crony friends can get rich.
These projects cost a fortune to build. And the return on investment just isn’t there. Which is why it takes hundreds of millions in taxpayer subsidies to build them. That’s a lot of money to spend when these projects accomplish nothing. They don’t allow us to shut down one coal-fired power plant. Because we’ll need those coal-fired power plants to provide electric power when the sun doesn’t shine and when the wind doesn’t blow. And they take up so much real estate that they’re displacing wildlife from their natural habitat. While wind farms are hacking American Bald Eagles and other birds to death. So they’re not helping the environment.
And they’re not improving the reliability of our electric power. Or lowering the cost. Every time they shut down a coal-fired power plant they increase our electric bills. And increase the brownouts and blackouts we have to endure when we have to rely on less reliable power that costs more (we have to pay more for our electric power to pay for those subsidies) than the more reliable power. This is our government when Democrats are in power. And just imagine how they will run our health care. Who do you think they’ll make rich? And how much will they increase our health care costs? While giving us an inferior health care system? It’s going to happen. Because that’s what happens when Democrats are in power.
Tags: clean energy, coal-fired power plant, Democrats, electric power, green energy, green energy industry, renewable energy mandates, subsidies, sun, tax credits, taxpayer subsidies, wind, wind farms
Week in Review
The problem with renewable energy sources is that they take up a lot of real estate. To save the environment they must take a big footprint in that environment. And big things cost a lot of money. Such as solar farms. Or wind farms. Even though the ‘fuel’ is free. Sun. And wind. Which is why free solar and wind power is some of the most costly power. And if that wasn’t bad enough we also have to evict some of the indigenous life from their natural habitat (see Sunflower mirrors power California’s desert farm by Rowan Hooper posted 2/13/2014 on New Scientist).
IT TAKES a couple of seconds to work out what’s going on in this photo. You’re looking at a pair of heliostat mirrors – sunflower-like reflectors that turn to track the sun during the day. These are just two of hundreds of thousands such mirrors arranged in the Mojave Desert in California, all part of the Ivanpah solar power project.
Their job is to concentrate the sun’s rays onto boilers located on three central towers, turning water into steam that drives turbines. The site (below) covers 14 square kilometres and will produce at least 377 megawatts of electricity, not much below the summer output of a typical nuclear power station in the US and enough to power 140,000 homes in California…
The project has been controversial. Native American groups have objected, claiming it will impact burial grounds. The project was also held up while desert tortoises – a threatened species – were relocated away from the Ivanpah site. It highlights the fact that even renewable energy projects can have some adverse environmental impacts.
Hundreds of thousands of mirrors? That must have cost a pretty penny. I wonder what happens when the desert winds blow sand onto those mirrors. Either making them dirty and less reflective. Or dulling them by the natural sandblasting of the blowing sand that has worn away solid rock in the dessert. Making them less reflective. Requiring periodic cleaning of these mirrors. And their replacement over time. Thus making a very costly power generation system even more costly.
If we’re not hacking eagles to death with wind turbines we’re kicking another threatened species from its home. Neither of which happens when we burn coal in a coal-fired power plant. While there is only a theory that these coal-fired power plants are harming the wildlife on the planet it is a fact that renewable energy is. So one can only conclude that wildlife like eagles and desert tortoises prefer coal-fired power plants over solar and wind power. Which isn’t harming them. As is evidenced by their being around after centuries of burning coal only to suffer harm from solar and wind power.
Tags: coal-fired power plant, desert tortoises, eagles, environment, Ivanpah, mirrors, natural habitat, renewable energy, solar, solar farm, threatened species, turbines, wind, wind farm
Week in Review
We have spent billions building wind farms all over the world. To fight the rise of manmade global warming. By replacing dirty, filthy, polluting, carbon-producing, global-warming-generating coal-fired power plants. Which haven’t replaced many if any coal-fired power plants. Because we still need those coal-fired power plants to provide electric power when the wind doesn’t blow. Or blows too strong. Making the whole wind power industry a costly joke. Well, a costly sad joke. As those great spinning killing machines are killing some of our most precious natural resources. American Bald Eagles (see Energy company to pay out $1m over eagle deaths at wind farms by AP posted 11/23/2013 on The Telegraph).
The U.S. government for the first time has enforced environmental laws protecting birds against wind energy facilities, winning a $1 million settlement from a power company that pleaded guilty to killing 14 eagles and 149 other birds at two wind farms in the western state of Wyoming.
The Obama administration has championed pollution-free wind power and used the same law against oil companies and power companies for drowning and electrocuting birds. The case against Duke Energy Corp. and its renewable energy arm was the first prosecuted under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act against a wind energy company…
An investigation by The Associated Press in May revealed dozens of eagle deaths from wind energy facilities, including at Duke’s Top of the World farm outside Casper, Wyoming, the deadliest for eagles of 15 such facilities that Duke operates nationwide. The other wind farm included in the settlement is in nearby Campbell Hill…
A study in September by federal biologists found that wind turbines had killed at least 67 bald and golden eagles since 2008. That did not include deaths at Altamont Pass, an area in northern California where wind farms kill an estimated 60 eagles a year.
Until Friday’s announcement, not a single wind energy company had been prosecuted for a death of an eagle or other protected bird – even though each death is a violation of federal law…
Wind farms are clusters of turbines as tall as 30-story buildings, with spinning rotors as wide as a passenger jet’s wingspan. Though the blades appear to move slowly, they can reach speeds up to 170mph at the tips, creating tornado-like vortexes.
Flying eagles behave like drivers texting on their cellphones; they don’t look up. As they scan for food, they don’t notice the industrial turbine blades until it’s too late…
Once a wind farm is built, there is little a company can do to stop the deaths. Some firms have tried using radar to detect birds and to shut down the turbines when they get too close. Others have used human spotters to warn when birds are flying too close to the blades. Another tactic has been to remove vegetation to reduce the prey the birds like to eat.
As part of the agreement, Duke will continue to use field biologists to identify eagles and shut down turbines when they get too close. It will install new radar technology, similar to what is used in Afghanistan to track missiles. And it will continue to voluntarily report all eagle and bird deaths to the government.
Here’s a thought. Instead of spending billions to build wind turbines. And additional God knows how much more for radar technology and human bird spotters to shut down the wind turbines when birds are near. Or razing the earth to kill the ecosystem for the wildlife that eagles feed on. Instead of doing these things why not just use coal-fired power plants? After all, what do you think will provide our electric power when radar or those human spotters shut down those wind turbines? That’s right. Coal-fired power plants.
Of course the environmentalists hate the modern industrial world. And using energy to raise our standard of living. They’d like to go back to a time when we grew our own food. And spun our own clothing. For them the modern world is an obscene abomination to them. With America being the worst. As we are the most advanced nation in the world.
It’s bad enough the environmentalists are raising the cost of electric power with their renewable energy nonsense. But they’re also killing American Bald Eagles. Sure, the glorious American Bald Eagle may not be as important to them as a forest rodent (preventing the cutting of firebreaks in forests to prevent the spread of forest fires) or delta smelt (shutting down the irrigation pumps in California’s Central Valley that provides much of our food), but they are a living creature, too. And should be allowed to live freely in their habitat. Then again, perhaps they don’t care about the American Bald Eagle. As it is America’s national bird. And they just hate America so much that they hate our national bird, too.
Tags: American Bald Eagle, coal-fired power plants, eagle deaths, eagles, electric power, Global Warming, human spotters, manmade global warming, modern world, radar, renewable energy, wind energy, wind farm, wind power, wind turbines
Week in Review
The American left is hell-bent on forcing national health care onto the American people. Just like the European social democracies have. Why? Power. They want to micromanage people’s lives. Just as the European socialists want to do. Because they are so much smarter than we are. And know what’s best for us. But it’s a slippery slope. Today it’s our health care. Tomorrow it may be our poop (see The Euro-flush: European Union to standardize toilets’ flush, set maximum volume of six litres by Bruno Waterfield, The Telegraph, posted 10/30/2013 on the National Post).
The European Union will unveil rules next week to standardize the flush on toilets, despite the admission that there are “very significant variations” on flushing habits across Europe “including cultural aspects…”
The EU standard follows almost three years of work by civil servants and difficulties in the workability of a one-size-fits-all rule for drains that vary greatly across the continent.
Do we really want people running our health care system that spent almost three years studying the optimum amount of water needed to flush poop? What’s next? Regulations defining the maximum permissible amount of toilet paper squares for wiping per defecation? It sounds silly. But you know there is a liberal somewhere thinking about it. Sheryl Crow thought about it enough to make a joke about it.
Crow has suggested using “only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required”.
So it’s coming if we keep sliding down this slippery slope. The potty police. Once they dictate the amount of water we may use to flush with they’ll be mandating a new toilet paper dispenser that will issue only one square per poop. Perhaps with an Internet connection to the IRS for enforcement. A subdivision of the Obamacare taskforce. Whose motto will be ‘one poop one square’. And woe to anyone who dares use a second square. For they will feel the full wrath of the IRS.
Low-flow toilets are a top priority for the nanny state. To save the environment. By reducing our use of water. But the solution of one problem leads to a new problem. One of the unintended consequences liberals are so well known for. Low-flow toilets use more water. Because of multiple flushes. For sometimes one flush just isn’t enough. So what then? A new toilet. Perhaps one that that only allows three flushes per person per home. One flush not enough? Too bad. Unless you can get someone else to give up one of their flushes. Or you want to pee in the backyard to save your flushes to keep your house from smelling like a backed-up toilet in a filthy public restroom. You know there is a liberal somewhere thinking about this. For they are studying the optimum amount of water needed to flush poop in the European Union. And everything the European socialists do American liberals want to do, too.
Tags: European socialists, European Union, flush, flush poop, liberal, low-flow toilets, National health care, Obamacare, poop, toilet, toilet paper
Week in Review
We’ve been hearing ‘paper or plastic’ at the grocery store for awhile now. Soon it will be ‘paper, plastic or food-borne illness’ (see Tax on shopping bags ‘will lead to more food poisoning’ by Graeme Paton posted 10/27/2013 on The Telegraph).
An increase in the use of “bags for life” could lead to a spike in illness rates as shoppers place new items in bags already used to store fresh meat and raw vegetables, it was claimed.
The comments come amid growing pressure on families to reuse plastic bags as part of an environmental drive.
Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, announced plans to charge 5p for plastic bags in England from 2015 to discourage the use of multiple bags…
But leading scientists are warning that the move represents a serious risk to public health because reused bags are often “heavily contaminated” with bacteria.
“Vegetables that come into contact with the inside of the bags could easily be contaminated,” he said.
He said many shoppers stored empty bags in the boot of the car but added: “The warm environment of cars make them the worst place as far as bacteria is concerned.
“One bacteria cell will quickly become thousands.
“If people are going to have to pay for bags and re-use them my concern is we’re creating a high risk of food poisoning. At the very least people have to be given advice to clean these bags every time they use them.”
The conclusions follow research by Pennsylvania University, which found a 25 per cent increase hospital admissions for bacterial infections such as E. coli after San Francisco banned plastic bags.
The study said: “The San Francisco ban is associated with a 46 per cent increase in deaths from food-borne illness to a rate of approximately 12 deaths per year.”
If we use the left’s logic in the gun control debate then we must continue to use single-use plastic bags. Because they say we should ban guns even if it saves only one life. Well, using single-use plastic bags will save up to 12 lives a year in San Francisco. So keep on using plastic. Based on the left’s logic.
Of course the left doesn’t care about people dying from bacterial infections. For they have no problem with people dying. For them it’s a small price to pay to advance their agenda. Which is the only thing important to them. Unless they back away from this policy agenda. And let people use safe shopping bags. Will they? Time will tell. But don’t hold your breath. For when it comes to the environment they pretty much live by the maxim ‘save the planet, kill man’. As they want us to drive tiny little cars that will get crushed by bigger vehicles. Use all-electric cars that may run out of charge in a bad neighborhood or in rush hour traffic during a blizzard. And reuse shopping bags that will give us fatal food poisoning.
Tags: bacteria, bacterial infection, contaminated, food poisoning, food-borne illness, paper or plastic, plastic bags, reused bags, shopping bags, single-use plastic bags
Week in Review
Oil fuels the modern economy. We use it everywhere. And can’t live without it. Even those people who hate it sipping their coffee while they surf the Internet and engage in social media in their favorite coffee shop. None of which they could do if it were not for oil. The coffee they drink crossed the ocean on a ship burning diesel refined from oil. The smartphone they use contains plastic. Made from oil. And these smartphones crossed the ocean on a ship burning diesel before they could use them. The cars in the drive-thru at the coffee shops are burning gasoline refined from oil. The freight trains and trucks burn diesel that deliver the goods these coffee shops sell.
Oil makes everything better in our lives. Without oil life expectancy would plummet. As hospitals wouldn’t have any life-saving equipment made from plastic. Ambulances couldn’t speed patients to the hospital. And there would be no backup generators during a power outage. As there would be no backup power available at our wastewater treatment plants. Or at our freshwater pumping stations. We would return to the 19th century. Using steam and water power in our factories. Horses in our cities. Doing our business in an outhouse. And drawing our water from a well. Except for the rich, of course. Who would be able to enjoy these luxuries. Luxuries that most of us take for granted today.
Oil is so important in our lives that we should be doing everything within our power to make it as inexpensive and plentiful as possible. Like building the Keystone XL pipeline. So we can transport oil safely in large quantities. Reducing the cost of transportation. Thus lowering the price at the pump. Which would also prevent things like this from happening (see What’s in rail tankers and why can’t we know? posted 9/27/2013 on CBC News).
Nearly three months after the Lac-Mégantic disaster, rail safety remains at the top of the national agenda with a meeting of federal and provincial transport ministers this week focusing on the question of what is in tanker cars and why provinces and municipalities can’t get that information.
After the conclusion of the meeting in Winnipeg, Manitoba’s transportation minister said the legacy of the Lac-Mégantic disaster in July must be safer rail system across Canada.
Steve Ashton said there is an urgent need to look comprehensively at rail safety at a time when more oil is being shipped by rail and the Lac Mégantic disaster is fresh in the public mind.
This is what happens when the environmentalists get their way. And President Obama secures their support. And their money. President Obama opposes the Keystone XL pipeline. And other pipelines where he can. Because his liberal base hates oil. Even though the lives they enjoy would not be possible without oil. So their opposition to oil and pipelines forces oil onto trains. That travel through our cities. Sometimes derail. And explode. Killing 47 in Lac-Mégantic. And destroying a part of that city.
With continued opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline more oil will travel by train. More trains will derail. And explode. But the Democrats will secure the support of their liberal base. And the environmentalists can claim a victory in the war against oil. While they enjoy their coffee and smartphones in their favorite coffee shop. That only oil makes possible.
Tags: coffee shop, diesel, Keystone XL, Keystone XL pipeline, Lac-Megantic, oil, pipeline, plastic, President Obama, train
Week in Review
You want to cut a firebreak in a forest? Sorry, you can’t do it. Because it will disturb the habitat of a dirty, filthy rodent. The kind that can transmit Hantaviruses to campers. You want to irrigate your farm in California’s central valley? Sorry, you can’t do it. Because the pumps will suck in delta smelt which will upset the ecosystem. But you say you want to kill golden and bald eagles with spinning death machines? Not a problem. At least with President Obama and his pals in the wind energy industry (see Study: Wind farms killed 67 eagles in 5 years by DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press, posted 9/11/2013 on Yahoo! News).
Wind energy facilities have killed at least 67 golden and bald eagles in the last five years, but the figure could be much higher, according to a new scientific study by government biologists.
The research represents one of the first tallies of eagle deaths attributed to the nation’s growing wind energy industry, which has been a pillar of President Barack Obama’s plans to reduce the pollution blamed for global warming. Wind power releases no air pollution.
But at a minimum, the scientists wrote, wind farms in 10 states have killed at least 85 eagles since 1997, with most deaths occurring between 2008 and 2012, as the industry was greatly expanding. Most deaths — 79 — were golden eagles that struck wind turbines. One of the eagles counted in the study was electrocuted by a power line.
The vice president of the American Bird Conservancy, Mike Parr, said the tally was “an alarming and concerning finding…”
It’s unclear what toll the deaths could be having on local eagle populations. And while the golden eagle population is stable in the West, any additional mortality to a long-lived species such as an eagle can be a “tipping point,” Millsap said.
The research affirms an AP investigation in May, which revealed dozens of eagle deaths from wind energy facilities and described how the Obama administration was failing to fine or prosecute wind energy companies, even though each death is a violation of federal law…
Meanwhile, the wind energy industry has pushed for, and the White House is currently evaluating, giving companies permission to kill a set number of eagles for 30 years. The change extends by 25 years the permit length in place now, but it was not subjected to a full environmental review because the administration classified it as an administrative change.
Yet another example of the Obama administration not enforcing a law they don’t like. Putting the Obama administration, and their cronies in the wind energy industry, above the law. Making a mockery of the rule of law. And turning the United States into a third-world banana republic.
The same people who say we can’t disturb the habitat of Hantavirus-carrying vermin or kill a smelt or two have no problem with killing the national bird/national animal of the United States. The bald eagle is a distinguished and noble creature. Which is why it is on the Great Seal of the United States. Instead of a rodent or a smelt. But it is those we can’t harm. While we can kill the bald eagle.
President Obama destroys our economy with his abysmal economic policies. Giving us unemployment that just won’t go away. He gave the Middle East to Russia and Iran with his blundering foreign policy. Creating a more dangerous world. And diminished America’s place in that world. And now he is encouraging the killing of America’s national symbol. Perhaps to do to it what he’s doing to the nation.
One can’t help but get the impression that the United States of America isn’t President Obama’s favorite country.
Tags: bald eagle, eagle, eagle deaths, Hantavirus, Obama administration, President Obama, rodent, smelt, wind energy industry, wind farms
Week in Review
PETA doesn’t want you eating meat. They say we should be vegetarians. Because it is healthier for us. And it will allow cows to live out their days naturally. The way God meant them to do. To graze, sleep and crap all over the land. Instead of eating meat we can eat stuff that grows. And dairy products from dairy cows. For they have a pretty good life. Food, shelter and a place to crap. And someone to milk them. Who could ask for anything more? A pretty plush life on a small farm. Not quite so nice on a large industrial farm. Of course, there are some who are unhappy with the ethical treatment of so many cows. Environmentalists. Because of the crap (see Cuomo in Billion-Pound Manure Fight as New York Promotes Yogurt by Freeman Klopott posted 8/22/2013 on Bloomberg).
All that stands between dairy farmer Kerry Adams and expanding her herd of cows to tap New York’s booming yogurt industry is 1 billion pounds of manure.
Adams was planning to take advantage of a change Governor Andrew Cuomo pushed through this year that allows farmers to increase their herds to 299 from 199 before permits are required, which can add more than $150,000 to expansion costs. Then environmental groups sued to block the move, saying expanding dairy production will add 1 billion pounds (454 million kilograms) of unregulated cow dung annually, damaging waterways…
As in some other states, milk prices in New York are set by federal regulators. Even with increased demand from yogurt producers, prices aren’t rising, according to Novakovic and the New York Farm Bureau. To increase profits, farmers need to produce more milk, which means adding cows…
A permit requires farmers to handle the increased manure load. They must pay a certified planner as much as $15,000, obtain engineering designs for new systems that can cost $50,000 and execute them for about $100,000, the review said. That’s in addition to the $382,000 needed for cows, land and holding pens…
Adams and Travis Rea, whose family has owned a dairy farm north of Albany in Cambridge for 215 years, said they’re planning to mitigate their manure as they grow anyway. Both, though, are holding off on expanding until they know the outcome of the lawsuit.
“We don’t have much money day to day and we’re up against groups that do,” Rea said by phone. “The environmentalists, they kind of scare me.”
You would think that the most damaged drinking water would be from the wells under those herds these dairy farmers draw their water from. Are they poisoning themselves? If they are they must be a glutton for punishment. Because they’re drinking the water their cows are pooping in.
Once the buffaloes roamed the Great Plains. And the Native Americans followed these great herds. Hunted them. And drank the water all that buffalo poop eventually washed into. With some estimates of those buffalo herds being as large as 30 million strong that must have been a lot of buffalo poop. Yet the Native Americans didn’t bitch about it damaging the waterways.
The only thing that will truly please PETA and the environmentalists is if the human race just died out and became extinct. But until we do they will make our lives as miserable as possible. Such as interfering with free markets. Raising the cost for anyone trying to do business. And then bitch about all the cow poop we’re producing because some other anti-business law put a ceiling on milk prices. Which made adding cows—and more manure—the only way to expand business.
It would be interesting to see what would happen if we pleased one of these leftist organizations. Say PETA. By freeing all captive farm animals. Letting them live free in the wild. Where they would all die from age. Eating and pooping to their hearts content. Which, of course, would draw the ire of that other leftist organization. The environmentalists. Because of all that poop entering our waterways. For with no one killing cattle for their meat the cattle populations would grow like the buffalo populations once did. So the environmentalists, of course, would call for the culling of those herds. Killing animals to save the planet. Wouldn’t those be interesting debates? Between PETA and the environmentalists? Two leftist groups attacking each other as if the other was a conservative.
Permit costs that can add $150,000 to a small family farm? Fear of environmentalists? What has this country come to?
Tags: buffaloes, cattle, cows, dairy farmer, environmentalists, herds, manure, milk, New York, permits, PETA, waterways, yogurt
Week in Review
One of the reasons the government tells us we must ‘invest’ in clean energy is to wean us off of costly foreign oil. To give us energy independence. And so we stop sending out money to nations in the world who don’t much care for us. That’s why we must spend enormous amounts of tax dollars on things like solar and wind power. Because we need them. But because they are such poor business models they can’t operate without government subsidies. So is there another option to give us that energy independence? That doesn’t require government subsidies? While even lowering our energy costs? Yes there is. And the British are now trying to play catch up to the United States (see The potential prize from fracking is huge by Michael Fallon posted 7/31/2013 on The Telegraph).
North, south, east and west, shale gas represents an exciting new potential resource for Britain that could contribute to our energy security, growth and jobs.
We only have to look across the Atlantic to see how it has reinvigorated the US economy: gas prices have halved, cutting costs for industry and consumers, and creating thousands of jobs and billions in new investment. Countries from India to Australia have looked on in envy at this boom – and are now joining in.
For its part, this Government is serious about shale. We are encouraging industry to find out how much is recoverable in all parts of the country. Given increasingly volatile international gas and oil prices, and our commitment to helping hard-pressed families with their bills, it would be irresponsible to ignore a new energy source right underneath our feet…
…residents understandably want reassurances that their water will not be contaminated. The facts are that around 2.5 million wells have now been fracked worldwide, more than 27,000 of them in the US in 2011. There is no evidence from America of fracking causing any groundwater contamination.
Other than in Hollywood movies. And on television shows. There it’s contaminating groundwater like there’s no tomorrow. But with all that fracking going on in the United States the news is surprisingly barren of contaminated groundwater reports. And you know they’d be leading all the news programs if there were. Because the left hates fracking. And the mainstream media leans left. Way left.
That energy boom is a private boom. It’s not because of the government. It’s in spite of the government. Who has launched a war on coal and oil. Shutting down oil production on the Gulf of Mexico. And on all federal lands. Or making it very difficult for those who try.
Much of the global warming nonsense came from the University of East Anglia. Making Britain near ground zero in the battle against global warming. And here they are. Wanting to frack to bring energy costs down for households. Create jobs. And reduce dependency on foreign oil. Pity the United States government doesn’t care enough about the American people to do the same.
Tags: Britain, energy costs, energy independence, foreign oil, frack, fracking, gas prices, government subsidies, groundwater, groundwater contamination, jobs, oil, shale, shale gas, subsidies, water
« Previous Entries