Here's the key slide from the presentation:
Posted on 07/07/2011 5:16:02 AM PDT by Kaslin
The environmental left has been relentless with their efforts to shape public policy and opinion in favor of renewable energy sources while waging all out war on the oil, natural gas, and coal industries. Over the last several decades, the radical left has convinced politicians as well as the voters to support vast amounts of taxpayer funded research, direct subsidies of green technology, and more recently mandated use of green energy sources.
But green projects, proposesd in the name of conserving resources, are really resources hogs.
It seems that whenever the smart guys in government implement policies to save us from ourselves and make the world a better place, we get stuck with the bill as well as a whole new set of problems that they created. As time passes, the body of evidence continues to mount that much of the radical left's claims were overstated, half-truths, and in some cases outright lies.
Just in the last few days, we came across the following four reports that show yet again that all the homage paid to the green gods has not resulted in the benefits promised, and often creates a whole new set of problems.
Outsourcing Carbon Emissions
The global warming alarmists have long promoted government policies designed to reduce a given nation's total greenhouse gas emissions. That was an objective of the Kyoto Accord, and indeed, considerable hoopla surrounded a claim that since 1990 developed nations had reduced emissions by 2 percent. But, as is often the case, there is more to the story.
H. Sterling Burnett of the Heartland Institute reports on the findings of a study conducted by the Centre for International Climate and environmental Research in Oslo, Norway that "emissions from increased production of internationally traded products have more than offset the emissions reductions achieved under Kyoto Protocol."
As developed nations began manufacturing less and importing more of the goods they consumed they were effectively outsourcing emissions to foreign countries; typically nations with environmental standards below the participants in Kyoto. China alone accounts for 75 percent of the world's outsourced emissions and 75 percent of the growth in global emissions during the past decade. With an export-based economy, China produces far more emissions that any other nation.
When the emissions from the manufacture and transport of imported goods are figured into the equation, the study found that total global emissions from the developed nations actually increased as much as 12 percent since 1990, rather than the 2 percent decline often cited. "This shows the difficulty in reducing emissions overall," according to Myron Ebell, director of energy and global warming policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. "It's like squeezing a balloon – squeeze on one end, and the other end blows up."
Economic Benefits Outweigh Environmental Impacts of Shale Drilling
The radical environmentalist's favorite new target is the technology called hydraulic fracturing (fracing) that has been around since the 1940s and used on millions of oil and gas wells to unlock trapped energy reserves. Radical leftists claim fracing could pose grave environmental risks, particularly to water. However, several exhaustive studies by the EPA determined that the fracing poses "little or no threat to (underground drinking water)." Further, the EPA could find "no confirmed cases" of water well contamination or underground movement of the fracing fluid. None of that has stopped the lefties who aren't about to let the facts get in their way. Their objective is to shut down the whole fossil fuel industry.
As with virtually any human activity, there is some degree of environmental surface impact and the occasional accident does happen when wells are drilled. Three researchers at the Manhattan Institute in New York decided to analyze the real amount of risk compared to the backend reward for increased domestic production.
The scientists studied the Marcellus shale region in Pennsylvania where fracing has been used extensively for over 60 years. They found that the "typical Marcellus shale well generates about $4 million in economic benefits while generating only $14,000 in economic damages from environmental impacts." That is a ratio of 1:285. Almost anybody would jump at the opportunity for that kind of return on investment. But, then, the anti-oil and gas crowd is also the anti-free market capitalism crowd. They pretty much just dislike everything that makes sense for America.
Renewable Energy Sources Require Vast Amounts of Natural Resources
What's wrong with this picture? Green energy was supposed to purify us of our decadent ways and make us more responsible stewards of our natural resources.
For sure, the two most obvious renewable energy resources available are wind and sunlight, and they are free and continuously replenished. But, the conversion of them into large amounts of energy requires vast amounts of natural resources, most notably land.
In an op-ed for the New York Times, Robert Bryce of the Manhattan Institute analyzed ramifications of California's highly ambitious mandate that will require one-third of all the state's electricity come from renewable sources by 2020. Bryce put a pencil to the challenge.
One third of California's electricity is about 17,000 megawatts. Bryce supposed that California's mandate might be split evenly between solar and wind. That's a bunch. Already under construction in the Mojave Desert is the $2 billion Ivanpah solar plant. It will cover 3,600 acres of land; about 5 ½ square miles. When complete it will provide just 370 megawatts. To meet just half of the mandated requirement of the new legislation – 8500 megawatts – 23 Ivanpahs would have to be built covering 129 square miles, about five times the size of Manhattan.
The enormous land requirements for a renewable energy facility create additional environmental concerns. For example, in April, the Bureau of Land Management ordered a halt to construction at Ivanpah out of concern for the desert tortoise, which is protected by the Endangered Species Act.
If the other half of energy required by California's renewable mandate comes from wind generation, the land requirements are even greater. The Roscoe wind farm in Texas covers 154 square miles and has a capacity of 781.5 megawatts. At that rate, California would need 1,675 square miles covered with wind turbines. That's considerably bigger than the entire state of Rhode Island.
In addition to California, 28 other states (including my Colorado) have adopted mandated requirements for renewable energy sources. "In the rush to do something – anything - to deal with the intractable problem of greenhouse gas emissions, environmental groups and policy makers have determined that renewable energy is the answer," Bryce says. But, he adds, in doing so they have "thrown in the ditch" was the deeply held essence of environmental protection advanced by the economist E. F. Schumacher; "Small is beautiful."
To be true to the stated objective of reducing greenhouse gases and true environmental stewardship, Bryce says policy makers and activists "must exploit low-carbon energy sources" – natural gas and nuclear power. "They have small footprints," he concludes.
Biofuels Responsible for Surge in Food Prices
Food prices are escalating in the U.S. and that's a problem, particularly for the increasing number of families that are cash strapped. However, globally the price escalation of basic commodities has international agencies like the United Nations warning of a food crisis. Analysts are trying to figure out what is behind the rapid surge in prices.
According to Timothy Searchinger, a research scholar at Princeton University, supply isn't the problem. In the July 2011 issue of Scientific American, Searchinger says the spike in prices is almost totally due to demand created by government mandated use of biofuels.
Since 2004 biofuels from crops have almost doubled the rate of growth in global demand for grain and sugar and pushed up the yearly growth in demand for vegetable oil by around 40 percent. When crops like corn and soybeans utilize more acreage, it restricts acres normally dedicated to other crops driving up those prices, too. In the U.S. about 40% of all corn is used for ethanol production.
"Our primary obligation is to feed the hungry. Biofuels are undermining our ability to do so," Searchinger determined. "Governments can stop the recurring pattern of food crises by backing off their demands for ever more biofuels."
We've dedicated numerous columns to the problems and myths surrounding the false promises and unintended consequences of chasing the renewable energy gods and ethanol, in particular. Government mandates have artificially raised the price of food, farm land, and fuel. When the bubble finally bursts, it won't be the politicians and environmentalists who get burned, it will be the innocent families that got stuck with the bill and farmers left holding the bag when the inflated prices collapse.
Even after all countries have been ground into bankruptcy, the Green movement will be the first to start up with state blessing in a 'revamped' government.
It has absolutely nothing to do with the enviroment, it’s all about control. If you control the energy production, you control the population. That’s their end-game, and as of late, they seem to be ramping up for something, judging by their actions.
About Bob Beauprez (the author of the article)
Former Congressman Bob BeauprezBob Beauprez is a Colorado native. He was raised on a third generation dairy farm near Lafayette, and spent 20 years in partnership with his parents and brother in that operation marketing their animals across the globe. Following the dairy career, Bob purchased and managed a community bank growing assets from 4 to over 400 million in 12 years. Additionally, he managed the family’s real estate development creating a 1500 residential unit golf course community.
In 2002, Bob was elected as the first representative from Colorado’s seventh congressional district, and re-elected in 2004. While in Congress, he served on the Ways & Means, Transportation, and Veterans Committees. He was the Republican nominee for Governor in 2006.
Most recently, Bob has published his first book, A Return to Values ( http://areturntovalues.com/ ), and is editor-in-chief of an e-magazine, A Line of Sight ( http://alineofsight.com/ ). But, his greatest enjoyment comes from his buffalo breeding ranch in the northern Colorado Mountains where he and his wife of 40 years love to spend time with their four children and three grandchildren.
To use the game metaphor, it’s time to let loose the Angry Birds.
socialism, socialism, glorious godless socialism!
i found it hard to swallow that this was truly the overarching principle of Obama, but what else could move his administration to diss several religions and a delicately strategic ally with the recent State Department gay fete in Pakistan? He can’t brook ANY rival that hails from beyond this mortal coil.
The “Green” movement stopped being about the environment a long time ago. I do believe that it once was populated by people who genuinely do care about the environment, but that it was hijacked by socialists who are frustrated that people won’t just accept socialism on its merits.
If they really cared about the environment, you would see them writing articles about cost/benefit/risk analyses of all the various energies. But they don’t. Their only “solution” for everything is to stop allowing it.
Look at ethanol. Even 90/10 has about 54 cents a gallon in federal subsidies. The more ethanol per gallon the more the fed subsidy. This drives up the cost of corn and corn products.
IHMO, obama is way beyond socialism. His actions to date seem to be right out of the playbook of a former German “community organizer” from back in the day. He’s more fascist than socialist.
Here's the key slide from the presentation:
You should also read this:
http://alineofsight.com/policy/greatest-generation
“The Greatest Generation”
June 20, 2011 | By Bob Beauprez
What puzzles me is, to what ultimate end does Obama aspire. If he can be said to aspire. Maybe as you suggested it’s just his private ideas of what society all over the world should be like and he wants to be the nanny in chief of that? Like Bloomberg writ larger and with a (D) by his name? Even Joe Biden, the willing village idiot, could come up with better ideas than that. If this is fascism, he weaves a pretty weak fasces. It seems to follow a recipe for coming apart at the seams, not cohering.
Great article. Thanks for the link
Absolutely correct. They don't want business impact on the environment to be reduced; they want it eliminated. They want a significantly smaller population on this planet; they want us living in caves, like animals...forever foraging and grubbing for scraps of food from wherever we might find it. The green movement is not progressive; it's the exact opposite. It's anti-Progress.
Here in Iowa, we subsidize ethanol to the point that it is cheaper (about $0.10 per gallon) than everything else. I quit using it years ago. My ‘sensitive’ car could tell when I put ethanol in the tank - the ‘check engine’ light came on about 10 minutes into a fill with ethanol. Then it took about 4 tanks of ‘good’ gas for the light to go off.
I have tried telling folks that it is cheaper not to save the 10 cents at the pump - you pay for it in taxes...but no one listens.
Maybe he aspires to be a dictator, or a president for life, or whatever his third-world upbringing has instilled in his head. Maybe he interpreted the signals from the leftists in this country wrong, and they prefer some european socialism vs. hard core fascism. Or he could just be a total idiot. Judging by his end run around the Constitution by means of all of the alphabet soup agencies, he does have a plan and he’s trying like hell to implement it. Either way, this guy has to go.
With that “Dreams Of My Father” schtick, maybe he’s thinking his dad’s game in Kenya will somehow import well into the USA. Of course it won’t, but it is a recipe for weakness and chaos.
Yeah, tribal-feudalism doesn’t sit well with most Americans.
Unintended Consequences.
Biofuels. = High food prices.
Windmills.= Killing Birds and eagles, noise
High maintenance expensive,
Solar. = Doesn’t put out enough current to mak
it worth while, who is going to clean
all of those panels, What harm is done
to the environment by reflecting all
that sun? Do we know?
Battery powered cars. = Cost to build and get rid of the battery’s, where does the electricity to charge them come from if we close coal plants. Small , big family’s cannot use them. Etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.