Mr. President, You Can’t Save the Economy and Save the Planet
There is a biting paradox at the heart of two of President Obama’s urgent problems: the economic crisis and the state of the climate, which, as many people believe, is about to erase human existence on the planet.
The United States has a consumer-driven economy. In other words, the present unemployment of 10% (but in reality about 17%) can only be decreased by increased consumption of consumer goods. A “green economy” is beyond our present technological capabilities, so the unavoidable consequence of increased consumption is a rise in the “carbon footprint” of the American citizen.
At present, nobody knows how to drastically reduce our carbonfoot print while at the same time drastically increasing the consumption and production of goods and services. The transformation from a fossil fuel burning society to a green society will take many decades. There are still many states that produce electricity by burning coal. Other states like California burn a lot of natural gas in electricity production. This is cleaner, but still, natural gas is a fossil fuel which releases CO2, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and reactive hydrocarbons. Clean fossil fuels don’t exist.
What about “alternative” energy?
A report in Holland about the use of modern windmills, released last week, concludes that “building windmills adds to a higher use of fossil fuels and a higher release of the greenhouse gas CO2.” The construction and maintenance of windmills demand high volumes of energy, and when a lack of winds forces the mills to inactivity, ineffective gas turbines (other types of turbines cannot be fired up on short notice) have to fulfill the demand of electricity.
When one is convinced that climate change is a threat to life on earth, one solution remains. Under federal guidelines, we must maintain or increase unemployment and redistribute available labor. Part-time jobs will be the trend of the near future. Until real clean energy sources like cold fusion are available, accumulation of wealth by definition increases the release of CO2 — but cold fusion is still science fiction. So if climate change needs to be stopped, it is of the utmost importance to give up the essence of capitalism: the ambition to grow and make a profit. An economic crisis and high unemployment are nothing but a blessing in disguise.
Leon:
It is actually worse than you say. The US produces less CO2 per unit output than either China or India. Reducing our industrial base will increase world CO2 as production moves abroad.
But CO2 is about control of the US economy by the government and has nothing to do with global warming. If you really believe man made CO2 causes global warming you need to shut down China and India. Any treaty, action, reductions etc. are meaningless unless you tackle those two countries rapidly growing CO2 output.
Since no one is, in any effective way doing so one must conclude that the man made global warmists wish to punish America. Obama is just carrying out this mandate.
“In other words, the present unemployment of 10% (but in reality about 17%) can only be decreased by increased consumption of consumer goods.”
No. Present unemployment is mostly structural, and could be decreased only by invention of new breed of valuable consumer goods and services.
“unavoidable consequence of increased consumption is a rise in the “carbon footprint” of the American citizen”
No. Carbon footprint (aka energy intensity) per capita in US is stagnant from the time of oil crisis of 1975.
“At present, nobody knows how to drastically reduce our carbonfoot print “
No. France reliably generates 100%+ of its electricity consumption (78% of generation is nuclear, the rest is hydro, plus 20% export) with total country carbon footprint per capita of 1/3 of US.
“Clean fossil fuels don’t exist”
Didn’t exist 30 years ago. Modern “fossil” fuel electricity generation and transportation is virtually clean.
Word of advice: STFU, you illiterate humanitarian-educated moron is not mentally fit to air your opinion on any material matter.
“Cold fusion” isn’t just “science fiction”- it’s a nonexistent phenomena adduced to explain a thermal evolution that was caused by purely electrical and chemical means. Pons & Co. apparently weren’t familiar enough with electrolytic reactions to recognize one when they created it by accident.
The fact that money is still being spent on this speaks volumes for the effect of wishful thinking and New Age dogmas on science today. Sort of like the AGW cult, in fact.
(If you want to know how it might be possible to get a non-bomb-type fusion reaction to work, Google “Alvarez cycle” and/or “catalyzed fusion”. Dr. Luis Alvarez of UNM-Albuquerque did the math back in the early Fifties. So far, no one has disproved it to the best of my knowledge. And no, it has nothing to do with Pons’ work.)
As for what Obama wants, I think he made that pretty clear in the campaign. He objects to the existence of our economic system, both on “ecological” and purely philosophical grounds. And he wants it abolished in favor of one based on “egalitarian principles”, under the control of a “benign” government with absolute power.
His model is apparently a combination of Alinsky’s theories and Plato’s “Republic”, essentially a “Dictatorship of the Chosen”. (This would tend to explain his infatuation with “Tsars” for every subject under the sun.) The fact that Plato’s plan was one of the nastiest “absolute states” ever conceived either has gone right over his head, or is something he sees as desirable. (Not an uncommon malady in his wing of the Democratic party, as witness my home state of Ohio’s notable contribution to the march of craziness in pursuit of imagined perfection, Dennis “The Menace” Kucinich.)
When I see someone who tells everyone up front that virtually every energy source we have is personally offensive to him, and that he will use the power of his office to stamp them out, I see someone too wrapped up in his own fantasies to be reliable on any question about how we keep the lights on.
When I see this same person engaging in what amounts to blackmail to get his way (telling the Senate to pass cap-and-trade or he’ll use the EPA to punish us for not doing so- after he has admitted that CAT is itself a time bomb that will wreck our economy), I see someone who wants to be “right” more than he wants to deal with reality.
And when I see him setting a world record for simultaneously telling everyone that he is more wonderful than they can possibly imagine, I see someone too much in love with himself to be reliable on almost any subject.
The main problem I see with The One is that he wants to go down in history as The Man Who Changed The World. He seems totally unconcerned with what the world might look like after he’s done “changing” it, though. His visceral hatred of our present civilization (common coin on his end of the political spectrum) trumps any sort of concern about “first of all doing no harm”.
He not only may not care what sort of ruin he leaves behind- he may simply not bother to think about it at all.
As George Orwell once said, “There are some ideas that are so stupid that only a very intelligent person could believe in them”.
This definition fits Obama’s economic and “ecological” delusions precisely.
To say nothing of his geopolitical ones. But that, as Conan’s chronicler said, is another story.
clear ether
eon
Nonsense. Man made global change is as real a threat as Monty Python’s white bunny. And sacrificing western civilization to stop it is the intellectual equivalent of sacrificing a virgin to a volcano to ensure good crops.
One more time for the really sloooooow: CO2 is NOT a pollutant. Get used to it, get over it, and get a life.
What makes you think he wants to save the economy?
The real conundrum that faced the Copenhagen conference was just “how many angels can sit on the head of pin.” And our President will continue to tilt at windmills until our Congress realizes that indeed, AGW is just another tactic used by the unreconstructed Marxists to destroy our country.
“What makes you think he wants to save the economy?”
Bingo.
#6 Morry Rotenberg. Sadly, it’s worse than you think. Our congress will not realize that AGW is just another tactic. Our congress will realize what they are told and paid to realize. Nothing more and nothing less.
There is a lot heat being released in this discussion.
Let us consider a plausible alternative. What may be apparent to some is that we can have full employment and a green economy. What is needed is not government mandates, punitive taxation and top-down command & control but new forms of energy that are non polluting or at minimum alternatives to mideast oil. Since “necessity is the mother of invention” and there are plenty of inventers and entrepreneurs out there working on new energy paradigms let us take a look at a few of them.
Cold Fusion AKA Low Energy Nuclear Reactions is a legitimate science that is producing reliable evidence of excess heat generation. Having said that there are other alternative energy sources that are also making headlines.
One is called Brown’s Gas which is a form of electrolysis that produces a combustible gas that is stable. Stable meaning it is a new form of gas and not just oxygen and hydrogen separated by direct current. This excerpt from Peswiki…
(snip) Brown’s Gas, which is created from the electrolysis of water into hydrogen and oxygen, not separated.
This amazing gas creates a flame that can be passed over the skin without burning it, yet sublimates tungsten within a few seconds. It can cut through 4 inches of steel. The hydroxy gas has been used for catalyzing an increased fuel efficiency in vehicles.
AKA Common Ducted Oxyhydrogen, HHO, Green Gas, Rhode’s Gas, Hydroxy, Di-Hydroxy, and Watergas.
There are numerous companies that are producing kits today that may eventually enable a vehicle to run entirely on Brown’s gas.
Then there is BlackLight Power. Again quoting from Peswiki…
“BlackLight Power, Inc. is the inventor of a paradigm-shifting new primary energy source and a new field of hydrogen chemistry with broad commercial applications. BlackLight has invented a new primary energy source with applications to Heating, Central Power, Motive Power, and Micro-Distributed power generation. This relies on a new chemical process of releasing the latent energy of the hydrogen atom, the BlackLight Process. In this process, the electron in an ordinary hydrogen atom is induced to move closer to the proton, below the prior-known ground state. Hydrogen gas derived from water serves as the fuel.” –
So the future may not be a glum as the powers-that-be would have us believe.
Keep the faith.
@ eon: Cold Fusion fantasy
That turns out not to be the case;
The US Navy has demonstrated that
_something_ is happening, the question
which divides them is whether it is
energy production, or energy storage.
Either way, there is going to have to be
a change in the relevant physical laws
to account for the phenomenon, which
in turn may point the way to useful
new technology.
One would think that after the revelations of the last several months regarding climate “science”, the failure of Obama at Copenhagen and indeed the comic failure of that entire circus that no intelligent being would claim in print that we are destroying the climate through AGW. Yet Mr. de Winter, like so many self important Europeans, continues to insist. Great! De Winter, a novelist (no offense Roger) follows in the footsteps of a true ignoramus (Al Gore) to exhibit his profound lack of knowledge to all assembled. The internet, I am convinced, serves the primary purpose to being the vehicle where too many of the educated “elite” expound on subjects about which they know or understand very little. Unfortunately, for these people, their audience is frequently far more informed and far less gullible than they realize.
How can any sensible decision be made about “climate change” if the entire premise is false? No one can “save the planet” because it can take care of itself: if this were true, then how did the earth exist before the dawn of mankind?
I’m sorry, but I’m not going to allow someone to make me feel guilty for breathing. I don’t care how big my “carbon footprint” is because it doesn’t matter. I refuse to waste any time or energy worrying about a notion that is a fantasy, created for political purposes to control my life.
I think I’m getting what Leon’s on about. If Obama and the warmists really believe we’re on the eve of global destruction that would warrant throwing the health of the economy at it. But that’s never on the cards. We are thrown this warmist narrative so as to better control us. It’s more about expanding the power of the State (or global governance) and the redistribution of wealth than anything else. Also the time for voluntary efforts is over. The gloves are coming off. We’re headed straight for ecofascism now.
You linked “cold fusion” to the Wikipedia page. Here is a more authoritative source of information:
http://lenr-canr.org
This site includes a bibliography of 3,500 papers on cold fusion, including 1,200 from the peer-reviewed literature, and about 1,000 full text papers.
Cold fusion is much closer to being a practical source of energy than most people realize. See the recent Defense Intelligence Agency paper on cold fusion featured on this page.
Ah, the horns of a dilemma when you’re one of the redundant middle class. If cap and trade passes, you get that well paid white color job on the government dole; if it doesn’t pass, you get that poorly paid job picking fruit or washing SUVs at the car wash with a BS in climate science journalism.
And that.s the shame about so many … new conservatives… now, specially those that really believe in capitalism.
There is some big money to be made in saving the planet. A real growth industry…and they fail to see the forest through the trees. Hopefully, the trees will still be there for them to see when they opent their eyes eh? We that believe…hope so.
White color jobs? What – like making crayons?
eon wrote that cold fusion “. . . was caused by purely electrical and chemical means. Pons & Co. apparently weren’t familiar enough with electrolytic reactions to recognize one when they created it by accident.”
Fleischmann and Pons are among the world’s leading experts in electrochemistry, so this is unlikely. They were subsequently replicated by hundreds of other electrochemists and experts in nuclear physics, so it is impossible. And since many cold fusion experiments do not employ electrochemistry, it is irrelevant.
Eon and others who wish to comment on this would be well advised to first review the scientific literature on the subject, especially mainstream, peer-reviewed literature.
Cold Fusion, Schmold Fusion.
The Author of this piece would do himself a favor to familiarize himself with Polywell AKA Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusion research currently taking place.
Here is the nub of the AGW theory. Man emits CO2 by burning fossil fuels. This CO2 is trapped in the atmosphere and it is causing the planet to get warmer. Because man’s emissions are at an all time high the atmosphere is at a record high. And if we keep it up we will drive it higher.
However, the fact is the planet’s atmospheric temperature is NOT at an ALL TIME HIGH.
In fact the planet’s atmospheric temperature has been much, much higher in the past, before the use of fossil fuels. In fact the planet’s atmospheric temperature was much, much higher before man. There is something besides man that causes atmospheric temperature fluctuations. And they are greater than man’s impact.
Consequently, over the long term and short term, there is no evidence of correlation, or causation, that confirms CO2 levels in the current ranges +/- are mostly responsible for the planet’s atmospheric temperature.
The conclusion HAS to be that man is NOT the sole or even primary driver of the planet’s atmospheric temperature. That is common sense. Now maybe, maybe man is a factor but so far the evidence is not good. I think the thing to study is what actually drives the temperature of the atmosphere – sans man. Maybe then we can find out what causes that and engineer a solution, maybe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mxmo9DskYE
A clue for the dense: O, Pelosi and Reid WANT to destroy the country.
>>> And that.s the shame about so many … new conservatives… now, specially those that really believe in capitalism.
>>> There is some big money to be made in saving the planet. A real growth industry…and they fail to see the forest through the trees.
It takes some serious, serious ignorance about economics to let that fall from one’s lips.
Yes, there’s some big money to be made… from where? It isn’t to be made competing with more efficient (economically speaking) fossil fuel companies.
The ONLY place all this money from heaven is coming from is government… either directly through subsidy, or indirectly by taxing/regulating your competitors out of business.
So there is no free money… only money taken through taxes, or customers made available by killing off the company they used to be paying. If you think that’s economic progress, then you need to google “broken window fallacy”, and you need to do so immediately.
I reckon I like that there luke warm fusion best.
Obama’s cunning time-tested, three-step approach to the above stated problem:
1. Display a trademark “soulfully peering into the distance” gaze.
2. Look deeply and intently into the teleprompter.
3. And then blame GWB about why his hands are tied.
#11 Mike D . . .
The most wonderful feature of the internet is that it shows how many self-appointed pundits are so amazingly ignorant and stupid.
This is truly the Age of the Common Man and Woman.
Um, guys, tried-tested-and-in-use nuclear fission over here, saying hello with no carbon emissions? The third-generation reactors are all designed, they just need to be built.
And the only “waste” problem is storing it long enough to finalize and build fourth-generation reactors, which can use third-generation reactor waste as fuel.
#3 eon
I don’t know anything about “cold fusion” so I have nothing to say about it.
But the balance of your essay was such an excellent evaluation of Obama that it ought to be on the front page of PJM and circulated.
Bravo!
Big O and the dems are hell bent on destroying America in ANY way they can as long as they have their insatiable lust for power fed.
I think anyone who types “STFU” into a comment is pathetic.
The real denialists are those who don’t see that Congress has spent us into bankruptcy.
This weekend, via corruption, outright bribery and self-serving backroom deals, our enlightened Congress added the largest government entitlement in history to a growing list of bankrupt government entitlements.
Next up: Cap and Trade and its stifling regulation.
At some point this government bubble will burst. It will make the dot com and housing bubbles look insignificant.
“You can’t save the world by injecting hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy. On the contrary, these billions will destroy the world.”
With this kind of hyperbolic logic it causes me to wonder if the author is suffering from some cranial form of Dutch Elm disease or an excess of Gouda in the cerebellum. I would seek an arborist or a cheese monger as soon as possible.
You are so right Promethean. Your post makes the case.
Lefty, don’t even try to be an economist. Did you really make up that prosaic drivel, or did you lift it from another post?
Jim Baker – The prosaic drivel you refer to was conveniently located in the article’s text above. I simply took the liberty of reiterating one of the more erm, creative leaps of logic illustrated. I wouldn’t try to plagiarize Mssr De Winter’s prose for all the 5-year aged Gouda in Amsterdam.
Anyway Jimbo, as for my qualifications as an economist, I’ll simply allude to the fact that Economics, is the science, or lack thereof of rational choice. To pretend that Obama must pursue one activity – curtailing emissions and eschew another – rebuilding the economy is to engage in argumentum ad nepotismus or rather to argue on the level of my five year old nephew.
This writer has a fairly poor understanding of economics.