BREAKING: Released Emails Show Wind Lobby, Soros Group Helped with White House PR (PJM Exclusive — Read the Emails Here)
Emails recently obtained under the Freedom of Information Act — seen here for the first time — show how political influence and lobbyists are shaping Obama administration policy and public relations.
Click the links below to read the FOIA request and the emails:
Advertisement
The emails show that the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) coordinated their response to a damning Spanish report on “green jobs” with wind industry lobbyists and the Center for American Progress (the progressive think tank founded by John Podesta and funded by George Soros).
The report from Spain’s Universidad Rey Juan Carlos — which was the subject of a George Will column in the Washington Post on June 25, 2009 — showed each “green job” that had been added by Spain’s aggressive wind energy program cost Spain nearly $800,000 and resulted in the loss of 2.2 jobs elsewhere in the economy.
Eight times, Obama had publicly referred to Spain’s program as being a model for a U.S. wind energy program.
The 900 pages of emails, obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Christopher C. Horner, show staff members from the DoE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and the EPA developing a response to the report. They also show them coordinating the response with the Center for American Progress, plus the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) and the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) — two wind industry lobbyist groups.
What the emails show runs contrary to statements made to Congress by the Assistant Secretary of Energy Cathy Zoi — the Obama administration response to the Spanish report was in fact instigated at the request of the AWEA. It was then written with the close cooperation of the AWEA, the Center for American Progress, and the Union of Concerned Scientists.
The emails concentrate on the political implications of the Spanish study — and how to discredit it.
There also appears to have been significant pressure to publish an internal report from the NREL as a DoE report — bypassing the internal review and publication procedures — and to do so quickly.
The emails suggest that wind industry lobbyists and political organizations have significant behind-the-scenes influence on scientific reports from the Obama administration. This contradicts Obama’s insistence that his administration would get the politics out of science. It also calls into question the objectivity and quality of the information they provided to Congress.
Stay tuned to PJM and PJTV: Christopher Horner will break down the contents and the implications of the emails.
Charlie – Are you surprised? This is not about science or the production of more energy. It is simply furthering the Democrat Party’s hold on the economy and on American citizens. It is part and parcel of the EPA’s legislation of cap ‘n trade by regulation.
Most ethical administration EVAH.
This is just further proof of the total corruption of Obama and his handlers and the fact that truth, transparency have nothing to do with their character. This is all about power, not about the environment or as in the case of Obamacare, about healthcare. We need to be worried, really worried, and realize that next November could be our last best chance to stop their wishes for an authoritarian, Stalinist state. Personally, I could not believe that anyone would vote for that empty suit in the first place and now I am even more bewildered that there are still so many who have not caught on yet.
Right wingers: always, always up to no good.
4. BC:
Right wingers: always, always up to no good.
The communist troll can’t respond to corruption so he points us to some left wing smear job that amounts to “…the study fails to establish cause and effect.”
I mean, like, wow, like, you totally, like changed my mind.
BC:
Does that mean you think $800,000 spent per one job created is viable?
What percentage of the income of how many people went to paying for each job that was created? I’d be very interested in seeing a breakdown of numbers to that effect.
“Wind Industry” lobbyists – you’re kidding right. There is a British soccer player who has learned to live with the surname “Windass”, but he didn’t choose it. These geniuses chose “Wind Industry?” There IS truth in advertising.
BC, you’ve been exposed. You’re pissing into the wind, my friend. Or should I say “comrade.” Do us all a favor and crawl back under your rock.
So, BC, you point would appear to be that the study was published, but that someone also published the AWEA and CAP talking points against it?
Goodness, there’s a surprise.
In the mean time, are you suggesting it’s okay for EPA and DoE to turn their scientific process over to industry lobbying groups? And to lie to Congress?
Soros is a big investor in Petrobra, the Brazilian super oil. By limiting our own oil drilling, he guarantees an oil price higher than it should be, a bigger profit for Petrobra and himself. The Obama administration allocated hundreds of millions to subsidize Petrobra’s drilling, paying back sugar daddy Soros with our tax dollars to fleece us again with his green jobs. Nice, isn’t it?
The emails concentrate on the political implications of the Spanish study — and how to discredit it.
Where have I heard that before ? email exchanges revealing an orchestrated agenda to control information that wasn’t friendly to a pre-selected agenda ?
It was something about suppressing criticism, hiding the decline, not letting dissenting “peers” have exposure in the scientific journals…
Where was it ?
What are the odds of anything being true these days ?
Where isn’t Soros money inserting itself these days ?
The EPA is likely hellbent on not losing its potential leverage to institute a version of cap ‘n trade & circumventing the stalled congressional process.
Many of the greens look like reds in disguise, Van Jones the poster child.
Other than trying to discredit the assumptions made, this BC points to an blog which claims that the research article in question fails to demonstrate causality.
This is clearly a blog intended for the uninformed: studies NEVER EVER demonstrate causality. Ever. Causality cannot be proven.
Clearly this blogger either has no respect for his audience, or is too ill-informed to be commenting on studies.
Who is behind the wind initiative? None other than oilman T. Boone Pickens, always on the lookout for the next BOONEdoggle: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121556087828237463.html
Check out http://miscandmatch.com/serendipity/index.php?/archives/2009/05.html – nice pie charts illustrating how electric power is REALLY generated in the U.S. (mostly by burning stuff and generating CO2) and France (mostly clean nuclear energy) can be viewed at
So now we have the Goracle, Obama, Chu and Soros all coluding.
We should:
A) indict Gore
B) impeach Obama
C) throw Chu under a bus
D) run Soros through a wood chipper
This has gotten quite interesting. BC: BACK UNDER YOUR ROCK!
If this data pans out, after Congressional Bribery reported last week, and Conspiracy to Deceive (and much more) this week, we are indeed looking at Impeachable offenses.
But I could be bought – I just might want one of those $800k/yr jobs right now…
This is some very disgusting information, in all, and Obama, EPA, DoE and Soros need to join BC under it’s rock. Who knows, they might make some cute/unintelligent babies down there…
BTW Charlie;
Thanks for the start of what I hope to be a very exposing article series!
I personally felt it important enough to Facebook, Twitter, and email headline and links to a few in the media, along with friends and family.
Rocking stuff, though I know proper analysis of emails and such can take a good amount of time – I would expect CEI, and maybe even SPPI to jump right in on this.
#17 “Cousin” Pat: Keep your eyes on PJ: I just wrote this breaker to lead into a piece by Chris Horner that should be up soon. This is CEI’s baby.
To CJ: Well, a nuisance FOIA request by a nuisance right wing organization, who then tries to transform normal email chatter into a dark conspiracy via highlighting stuff out of context is not exactly going to change my mind that this is all just nutso nonsense. And that Spanish thing was indeed rubbish, whether you want to believe it or not.
One key aspect of this AGW Scheme. http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/19702
“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was specifically designed by Maurice Strong as a political vehicle to further his objective of crippling the industrial nations.”
IMO, the entire leftist community is determined to aid in our economic suicide. The FOIA seems to be one of our strongest weapons. Maurice Strong, Al Gore and Obama have been linked since the start of the Chicago Climate Exchange. The more FOIA requests are submitted concerning their activities, the better off the industrial world will be.
So where’s the part where $800,000 per job is debunked?
If only you Lefties were this interested in applying the same scientific rigour to AGW…
Thank you, BC. I choose not to believe it. No offense, though.
19. BC:
To CJ: Well, a nuisance FOIA request by a nuisance right wing organization, who then tries to transform normal email chatter into a dark conspiracy via highlighting stuff out of context is not exactly going to change my mind that this is all just nutso nonsense. And that Spanish thing was indeed rubbish, whether you want to believe it or not.
——————————————————————–
So getting to the truth is a nuisance now? I can see how one would think that if they had something to hide or were a political hack.
The rubbish cited in post 19 comes from a government agency ( DOE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)) that will have no reason to exist if they can not keep conning people in to believing that global warming is a dangerous event that must be stopped no matter what the cost.
The part of the Article claiming the initial report was created by some big money which opposes the AGW con game is laughable when compared to the trillions of dollars
the government spends on propaganda to make AGW appear to be a credible threat to our existence.
That’s quite an article from the Canada Free Press.
I’m getting an impression of a very wide, deep, co-ordinated and politicized agenda in all this climate stuff. Or, rather, an impression I’ve had for a long time is expanding.
If any of the AGW “science” were true and conclusive on its merits, none of this worldwide network of organizations and individuals would have to be working so hard to control and pervert the information stream.
(I think access to decreasing fresh water supply will be a dominant factor in the 21st century, but nothing to do with the theories of this despicable network of crooks and liars operating under the rubric of “science”. The real issues of our future are being given short shrift while these self-interested agendists hold the day with their blathering emails, their financing and their politics.)
Zapatero, the socialist, has contributed to tanking the Spanish econmy. The condition of Spain’s economy, the extremely high unemployment rate etc., is beyond debate.
Apparently, Zapatero’s emphasis on so called “green jobs” replacing conventional jobs has contributed to the decline. Whereas most people on Earth want a clean & healthy environment, the speed and means through which economic changes are undertaken can be done intelligently or stupidly.
The decline and condition of Spain’s economy is not open to debate.
The operative question in these United States is whether or not the current President (& coterie) is attempting to tank America’s economy out of simple ignorance and incompetence or intent.
http://www.worldtribune.com
Organized CRIME: The ‘looting’ of $11 TRILLION from the U.S. economy
March 5, 2010
The following is based on a report by Cliff Kincaid for Accuracy in Media.
Zubi Diamond, author of the powerful new book, Wizards of Wall Street, says the agenda of Soros and other short sellers is clear. Their purpose, he says, is “to loot America and any foreign country which invested in America. Greece was one of them. Iceland was ravaged and annihilated.”
The economic crisis was deliberately engineered for profit and political gain and has already resulted in the “looting” of $11 trillion from the U.S. economy…The Managed Funds Association, the lobbying arm of the hedge fund short sellers, is crafty and deceitful.
“The most influential members of Managed Funds Association, the hedge fund short sellers, have an anti-capitalism agenda, an anti-industrialized nation agenda, and a far left liberal, Marxist radical agenda,” Diamond says.” Hedge Fund short sellers are not capitalist. They are anti-capitalist and they are not investors; they are anti-investors.” He says they “loot” companies and countries.
…“George Soros put the support of the organization [the MFA] behind Obama,” his book says. “Soros wanted somebody that hates the traditional America and its constitution, a left-wing radical like himself, so he chose Obama.”
“Nothing will happen until the American people know what caused the economic crisis and the solution for fixing it,” he tells AIM. “Nothing will happen until the American people know about the Managed Funds Association and their role in engineering the economic collapse.” He calls the MFA “the cancer in our society that needs to be cut out, exterminated and abolished. America and capitalism will not survive unless the Managed Funds Association is eradicated, uprooted and destroyed.”
Diamond notes that Soros is a member of the Managed Funds Association, and they are “making negative comments about the Euro. They are targeting and preying on capitalist countries and currencies.”
He goes on, “They feel invincible. They have a license to destroy any company or country or hold the company or country hostage while preying on the investors. They are having dinner meetings, openly discussing collusion to attack a particular asset class, equity, or a country’s currency. If this is not organized crime, I do not know what is.”
He warns that any asset class that is traded in the NYSE, CME, or EUREX exchanges is susceptible to manipulation by the members of Managed Funds Association and their strategic partners. “They have primed the market for manipulation,” he says.
In the case of Greece, Diamond says that the country “gathered all her nest eggs and brought it to the wolves’ den at Goldman Sachs,” a member of Managed Funds Association, “but Goldman Sachs then shorted the market while their clients were on the other side of the trade.”
Diamond says there would not have been a Greece debt crisis if all the safeguard regulations had not been removed. He blames Christopher Cox, who served as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), for laying the groundwork for this financial upheaval.
…“The Managed Fund Association is the government,” Diamond charges. “They bought the policy makers and regulators, and then took over our government.”
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_economy0172_03_05.asp
Reading through the e-mail traffic, there does appear to be a definate evolution from it being a case of partisan insiders in cahoots with outside special interests (a couple of them) getting the ball rolling to fire off some sort of obfuscation – basically a derogatory hip shot, that they wanted to get out the door as quickly as possible, even if it lacked enough analysis and research to support their position. Thus leading to an agonizing squabble about what to call their product. And there is the inclusion, very early on, of the accounting code to use for charging the time used to the taxpayer. . .
What flows from all that is a pretty eye-glazing bureaucratic sludge pit of squabbling on “getting their story straight” when people started asking pointed questions, mostly to fabricate a cover story – yes, fabricate/refine a cover story – on the origins of the hit job on the Spanish report. There’s also a lot of holes in the material provided – indicating that additional germane material was withheld, probably on the basis of quibbling technicalities due to the wording of the FOIA request.
It ain’t the act, it’s the coverup. And it’s pretty clear these folks panicked (figuratively) and just made stuff up. . .which apparently was then testified to in Congress.
Whoopsies. That’ll likely leave a mark!
The rubbish report mentions “Exxon funded” like that is some kind of a bad thing.
Here is a comparison Exxon funded versus government funded.
“Meanwhile in a distracting sideshow, Exxon‐Mobil Corp is repeatedly attacked for paying a grand total of $23 million to skeptics—less than a thousandth of what the US government has put in, and less than one five‐thousandth of the value of carbon trading in just the single year of 2008.”
There is a rumor going around that Exxon has money to pay their bills. Meanwhile the US government is broke, and yet they spent
“The US Government has spent more than $79 billion of taxpayers’ money since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, administration, propaganda campaigns, foreign aid, and tax breaks.”
Meanwhile, “Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008. Banks, which profit most, are calling for more. Experts are predicting the carbon market will reach $2 – $10 trillion in the near future. Hot air will soon be the largest single commodity traded on global exchanges.”
BS “will soon be the largest single commodity traded in global exchanges”.
WindGate is about right. The criminals in our government and the faux-scientist criminals co-operating with the LIES about wind energy production deserve to go to prison.
Perhaps in 2010 and 2012 we can begin cleaning out this Augean Stable of Liberal, Socialist, Progressive, Marxist SH*T in the Democrat Congress and White House. It and they stink to high hell and the stink is seeping into the atmosphere creating a haze of disease and destruction of our economy.
Too bad we can’t just hang these corrupt bastards!
The problem is only going to get worse! More wind is going to aggravate the problem. We are literally throwing money at the wind.
Here is what BPA is getting from their 2780 Megawatts of wind now.
http://www.transmission.bpa.gov/Business/Operations/Wind/baltwg.aspx
And here is ERCOT’s (Sorry I could not find a fancy graph like BPA)
http://mospublic.ercot.com/ercot/jsp/frequency_control.jsp
This from almost 10,000 Megawatts. (@ about $1 Million per Megawatt)
If you do the math, you will see that we are getting about 5% of the name plate capacity. When the Wind proponents say that about 6% of the power in Texas is coming from wind, they divide the total power generated into the turbine “Name Plate” capacity, which they will never get. Sounds good though doesn’t it? The above graphs indicate that a better figure is more like 2% of the power in Texas comes from wind.
To get the state mandates of 20% would require about 10 times more than they now have installed. (You can rest assured that the Green lawyers will take the utilities to court to make that happens, not right away but it will happen.) That will require an amount of “wind power” almost equal to the presently installed coal and nuclear capacity. That is where all of these green jobs are going to come from. And then you will see brownouts, rolling blackouts and black blackouts.
When politicians and other scurrilous creatures say it’s not about the money – it’s about the money. When the Obama administration said they will get the politics out of science, what they meant to say was “they will get the science out of the politics”, which is precisely what has occurred. It is almost like they observed how corrupt other administrations had been and said “that’s nothing, watch this, we can show you Real corruption”
#19 BC — Well, a nuisance FOIA request by a nuisance right wing organization, who then tries to transform normal email chatter into a dark conspiracy via highlighting stuff out of context is not exactly going to change my mind that this is all just nutso nonsense.
And yet the government is utilising propaganda from known leftwing organsiations (as opposed to science) to create policy, which is OK?
This is no different than the revelations that much of the IPCC’s claim of peer reviewed science was little more than op-eds from climate alarmist eco-advocacy groups and student dissertations.
Your position appears to be that unscientific op-eds from advocates you agree with are right and proper; disagreement is a nuisance. Just like the CRU business, the fact that anyone needs an FOIA request at all proves that what’s being done is not transparent, not open, and reeks of a club atmosphere. In science paid by the public and politics, any need for FOIA ought to be automatic grounds for throwing out whatever is being done by definition.
Yes this is a black and white viewpoint. It’s not nuanced; it’s not sophisticated; it’s not subtle. It’s not meant to be.
meanwhile, the Obama Administration along with his banking overlords, are forcing the IMF to deny loans to developing 3rd world countries who are in need to cheap coal power plants.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/US-to-World-Bank-Dont-fund-coal-fired-plants/articleshow/5493089.cms
this assures that these nations will remain 3rd world or, be forced to take a out MASSIVE loans from the IMF/World Bank to buy into Wind Power.
“Progressives are nothing more than educated (well, they went to college but that is not a guarantee to being educated), elitist, authoritarian assholes who are willing to give up their liberties to the government in an attempt to force the rest of society behave, think and act like they do.” – samUwell
#29 pagar — The rubbish report mentions “Exxon funded” like that is some kind of a bad thing.
Indeed. Invoking oil companies is designed to appeal to those who are predisposed to assume corporations are evil. It’s one the fascinating underpinnings re why climate alarmism appeals to the left and is rejected by the right; the right isn’t disposed to assume that Exxon or business in general is inherently evil.
I imagine that if I were watching a movie derived from some of what I read, the mention of “oil companies” or “Exxon” would trigger the Darth Vader music so as to let you know what you’re supposed to be thinking (just in case you’re one of the benighted.)
A FOIA request, years on end might I add, is a ‘nuisance’? Such requests shouldn’t take one’s political leanings. How asinine..
‘Normal email chatter’ consists of elbowing, shoving away any disagreement with differing scientists? Wow, you’re obviously not of science pedigree, BC. That has to be one of the most ignorant posts in PJM.
Enjoy the opinionated, delusional blogs you read as ‘fact’.
Folks, the full story is up now.
#35 GLA: Invoking oil companies is designed to appeal to those who are predisposed to assume corporations are evil.
It’s not even very consistent: oil companies world wide give hundreds of millions in grants to the global warming side.
What they really think is bad is disagreement.
This story isn’t really breaking. I remember reading and commenting upon it last week somewhere.
BC, you can’t put lipstick on a pig. Obama and his overlords wouldn’t need to go out and rubbish the reports from both Spain & Norway regarding so-called green jobs if this was in fact a successful eneterprice. If the so-called green economy were successful it would be manifestly evident. Nothing succeeds like success.
Wind & solar are not viable at this time nor possibly ever. The numbers don’t lie, and no amount of lefty spin can alter those facts.
Howdy Folks!
FOI – from The Danish Think Tank Cepos, Wind Energy, The Case of Denmark (direct link download 3.2Mb PDF)
http://www.cepos.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/Arkiv/PDF/Wind_energy_-_the_case_of_Denmark.pdf
Don’t listen to BC, he’s just a stooge for Big Wind. The name says it all.
Cause and affect, little man. You keep on slapping up windmills, and soon you will have less wind. It is somewhat similar to daming a river. We aren’t even 100% certain how wind is generated, and the greenies are out to tap it. Kinda like Algore’s great idea of tapping the “millions of degrees” of geothermal. Problem was the test wells caused earthquakes!!
http://scitizen.com/future-energies/swiss-geothermal-energy-project-causes-earthquakes-_a-14-1035.html
Cause and effect, little man. You can’t take energy from our natural planetary energy budget without it kicking you in the ass somewhere else.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/conservation-mass-d_182.html
Read up on it sometime. Stored energy in chemical form or orbital solar is all that will work. Since your type are taking fossil fuels off the table, that only leaves nuclear for stored energy. But you don’t really like that one very much either, do you? How about orbital solar? Got to get the energy planet side somehow…microwave transmitters is the best solution, but you are afraid it will fry a frog or something. So that’s off the table to.
Come on BC, just admit you had civilization. It’s the ugly truth about your kind. Frankly, we’d all respect you a little more (a little more than nothing is a lot) if you just grew up and admitted you’re a closet Neanderthal wannabe.
Minnesota Wind Turbines
“One fifth of the arable land would have to be taken up by wind turbines to meet the mandate,”
The wind power project involves utilities in eleven cities scattered across the state from the metro area to East Grand Forks in a consortium called the Minnesota Municipal Power Agency (MMPA). Each of the eleven member cities received one turbine, and the twelfth was given to the MMPA owned and operated Faribault Energy Park in Faribault. It was supposed to be a step toward meeting the state renewable energy mandate that requires 25 percent of Minnesota’s power be from renewable energy sources by 2025.
It turns out, however, the twelve wind derricks will produce power for perhaps several hundred homes, hardly making a dent in the MMPA’s 57,000 household and business customers.
“They’re basically for public relations, educational purposes. They’re just not feasible for any significant amount of electrical generation,” said Dan Voss, Municipal Utilities Director for the City of Anoka.
The idea of a green energy public relations campaign is acknowledged up front in what’s called the Hometown WindPower project’s criteria for the turbine site selection on member city North St. Paul’s website. The document states the turbine must have “prominent visibility from major roads” and serve to “show each community’s commitment to clean renewable energy.”
The turbines succeeded in attracting publicity from the start, drawing national attention for all the wrong reasons, when the frigid Minnesota temperatures shut down the turbines before they ever got going.
“The original purpose was to help meet our 25 per cent requirement,” said Wally Wysopal, City Manager of North St. Paul. “The other objective is to get people to understand this is going to be a tough objective to hit and these are symbols of that. And I think you can see they’re not easy to get going sometimes.”
At $417,000 per wind turbine, it’s an expensive campaign fueled by federally subsidized Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBS). The revenue or cost savings from the renewable energy are utilized to pay off the bonds over an average of 15 years.
In 2007, MMPA envisioned installing 300 foot tall turbines that would generate as much as 1.5 megawatts of electricity, providing a greater portion of the cities’ daily energy use. But last fall MMPA began installing turbines less than half that height at 115 feet and with about one-tenth of the capacity at 160 kilowatts.
The estimates of how much power will be produced varies: North St. Paul’s website estimates that 110 homes will receive power when the turbines operate at full power; Anoka’s estimate is at 35-40 homes. At least one city utilities director hopes the controversy focuses attention on the danger of over-relying on wind power to meet the state’s renewable energy mandate.
“One fifth of the arable land would have to be taken up by wind turbines to meet the mandate,” Dan Voss said. “It’s just not a good policy and it’s not sustainable and unfortunately, there’s no interest in it until the lights go out.”
Check here for coverage of another controversial wind power project in Minnesota.
Who is the blonde in the thumbnail?
elections have consequences…….
The wind turbines aren’t working out in Scotland or Texas either. In Scotland they’re effectively delivering zero percent of the load. When they’re needed most is when they’re least able to provide power.
The post above is the 1st time that I’ve seen wind turbines called what they really are in print, which is symbols. The eco-freaks say symbols to a committment to “clean energy” (although it required more fossil fuels to make them deliver them and assempble them than they’ll likely ever produce). To me they’re akin to pagan monuments to Gaia, or tributes to the follie of liberalism.
I’m stunned that I’m not reading it first on the NYT or Wapo.
You mean they are lying when they say they’ll only follow the science like good honest folks?
Wow, that’s a shock…
These people are communists, Read Mao
#39 Joe: Believe it or not, I think that was another story about a different set of emails. These came out just on Friday, I believe.
#43 Kochevnick, I believe that’s Cathy Zoi.
I love the crunchy irony of BC decrying how people try to twist innocent emails into dark conspiracies.
How many times has the Green Jobs lobby leveled charges of conflicts of interest and “science for sale” against skeptics without even so much as an email to show as evidence ?
When it’s an attack on “settled science” no proof is necessary, but when the shoe’s on the other foot…
Sorry guys, but wind energy involves science & progress, and we all know what the modern conservative thinks of that stuff.
BC, that’s a red herring. We’re talking about undue lobbyist influence and political manipulation of what was supposed to be a scientific response by the Obama Administration. I presume you were against that when it was supposed to be Big Oil influencing policy; why is it okay when it’s Big Wind?
BC @ #50: If you’ve been cued in on Climategate and all the attendant fallout from it, you would know what so-called liberal (or progressives) think of science – how can we use and abuse speculative hypotheses to get control of everybody so everyone bows down to the great goddes Gaia. The equation is CO2 = DDT; just as Rachel Carson provided a speculative hypothesis that got DDT banned, thereby leading to untold death and misery in Africa and Asia from malaria, so too, do the so-called liberals want to use a speculative hypothesis to get CO2 usage, if not banned, severely curtailed, and that too will lead to untold death and misery, this time, worldwide.
BTW Wind energy does not involve science or progress, and would take us back hundreds of years.
Is anyone really that surprised. Oh look some energy sector is in bed with the government. If anyone recalls Bush’s people in the interior department were literally sleeping with the oil execs. Energy is money, and money is power. So if it is not wind it is the oil people. Which is the lesser of two evils?
BC and Brian: Both of you post with no references, examples or citations. So we are left to think that you are just a couple of left wing loons attempting to debate using fifth-grade tactics.
I could not believe that anyone would vote for that empty suit in the first place and now I am even more bewildered that there are still so many who have not caught on yet.
The decline and condition of Spain’s economy is not open to debate.
#53 — Which is the lesser of two evils?
Despite your asinine attempt at comparison, the answer would be simple: “the one that works.”
We could loft solar power sats that beam power to the ground, but the funding would be enormous at first. Too bad; between the wind power subsidy (money for stuff that doesn’t work) and Obama’s apparent wish to have NASA build eco-sats for a living rather than develop the heavy lift capability needed for SPS, these aren’t going to happen any time soon. The important thing to take away here is that we have stuff that works. We’re just not doing it.
Meanwhile, wind doesn’t work. It never has. It’s been subsidised since the 70′s, and it didn’t work then. It doesn’t now. And it’s not going to work in the future without a magical technical leap rivaling the alchemist fantasy of turning lead into gold.
Thus if the white house had to be in bed with an industry, I’d hope that they would be at least clever enough to pick one that actually worked. Mere corruption trumps utter stupidity.
OBAMA and Bernanke are featured in a movie– about short selling and hedge funds called “Stock Shock.” Even though the movie mostly focuses on Sirius XM stock being naked short sold nearly into bankruptcy (5 cents/share), I liked it because it exposes the dark side of Wall Street and revealed some of their secrets. DVD is everywhere but cheaper at http://www.stockshockmovie.com
BTW Wind energy does not involve science or progress, and would take us back hundreds of years.
It’s not even very consistent: oil companies world wide give hundreds of millions in grants to the global warming side.
Helpful advises above. I have noticed that many people are using twitter for marketing. I would love to try this too for my business.