The Australians raise Electric Bills to pay for Solar Panels and to Punish Carbon Sinners

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 16th, 2012

Week in Review

The ‘dangerous rise’ in global temperatures roughly corresponds to our actions to lower global temperatures.  In particular our attack on coal.  First we put scrubbers on our coal-fired power plants.  Then we turned to shutting them down in favor of renewable energy.  Which may have been a mistake.  For those coal-fired power plant emissions actually cooled the planet.  Thanks to the soot, ash and sulfur they threw into the atmosphere.  Like a bunch of tiny volcanoes.  Which have been blamed for some cooling spells that have led to famines.  Because all of that soot, ash and sulfur in the atmosphere kept the sun from heating the planet.  And shortened growing seasons.  But this knowledge hasn’t changed anything.  Because the attack on coal is good for government coffers (see Renewables blowout as wind, solar hit harder than tax by Sid Maher and Michael Owen posted 6/16/2012 on The Australian).

SUBSIDIES for rooftop solar panels will cost consumers about $2.3 billion over the next year as the combination of a federal government solar subsidy program and state government feed-in tariffs add about $140 a year to household power bills.

The figures emerged as the South Australian government’s electricity regulator yesterday announced an 18 per cent rise in electricity prices for the state’s households, with the cost of the state’s solar feed-in tariff scheme outstripping that of the carbon tax. State and federal governments are facing calls for reform of the schemes as they are driving electricity prices higher, in addition to the increases associated with the carbon tax.

That’s billion with a ‘b’.  That’s a lot of money to spend.  And governments just love spending money.  So what if it raises our electricity prices?  As far as they are concerned burning coal is as bad as smoking a cigarette.  And this is just a sin tax for everyone.  For the sin of being human.  And taking control of our environment to create the modern world.  Which the environmentalists disapprove of.  We belong in caves.  Hunting and gathering like our ancestors.  Well, gathering, at least.  For the environmentalists would rather we coexist with our fellow animals.  Share our pristine environment.  And not eat them.  Of course, that wouldn’t stop them from trying to eat us.  But that would be okay.  For they could take control of their environment.  As long as they don’t burn coal.  Or are overly flatulent.  Because too much methane released into the atmosphere could raise global temperatures, too.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Solution to Global Warming is more Coal-Fired Power Plants

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 10th, 2012

Week in Review

Volcanoes are amazing things.  They can belch so much soot, ash and sulfur into the atmosphere they can lower global temperatures.  British Airways Flight 9 (callsign Speedbird 9) flew into a cloud of volcanic ash in June 1982 over the Indian Ocean.  In the black of night.  All four engines flamed out with the crew unable to figure out what was happening.  They continuously tried to restart the engine as the plane lost altitude.  When they saw they wouldn’t clear some high mountains on the island of Java they began turning the plane back over the ocean.  To try a water landing.  But then an engine sputtered to life.  Then another.  Till all four restarted.  They didn’t know it but as they passed through about 13,000 feet they emerged from the bottom of the ash cloud.  Which let them relight their engines.  Allowing them to fly the plane safely in.

Periods of high volcanic activity have cooled the earth so much that it has affected agriculture.  Colder and wetter growing seasons led to poorer crop yields.  And famine.  So volcanoes are powerful.  They can dramatically cool global temperatures.  Even kill us by reducing the length of our food growing season.  Now someone is thinking about deliberately pumping sulfur in the atmosphere to combat global warming (see The black sheep of climate engineering by Doug Craig posted 6/9/2012 on

In his book, Hack the Planet, Eli Kintsch explains “manually tinkering with Earth’s thermostat to reverse global warming” was seriously proposed in 1997 by Lowell Wood, also known by some as Dr. Evil, and the conservative Edward Teller, “the father of the hydrogen bomb,” because “geoengineering was a better way to tackle the climate crisis than the Kyoto accords.”

A decade later, Wood recommended burning sulfur and “then dumping the particles out of high-flying 747s, spraying them into the sky with long hoses or even shooting them up there with naval artillery. They’d be invisible to the naked eye, Wood argued, and harmless to the environment. Depending on the number of particles you injected, you could not only stabilize Greenland’s polar ice — you could actually grow it. Results would be quick: If you started spraying particles into the stratosphere tomorrow, you’d see changes in the ice within a few months. And if it worked over the Arctic, it would be simple enough to expand the program to encompass the rest of the planet. In effect, you could create a global thermostat, one that people could dial up or down to suit their needs (or the needs of polar bears).”

As I read this all I could think about was the attack on coal.  And the correlation between the rise in global temperatures and this assault on coal.  From adding scrubbers on coal-fired power plants to phasing out coal-fired power plants because they purportedly contribute to global warming.  But much like the volcano burning coal has a cooling affect on the planet.  For it throws up soot, ash and sulfur into the atmosphere just like a volcano.  Who’d a thunk it?

Funny, isn’t it?  By trying to save the planet from global warming they’ve actually caused global warming.  Perhaps we should fire up more coal-fired power plants.  And remove those scrubbers.  To cool the planet.  But not too much.  We wouldn’t want to cause a famine now, would we?


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,