Month: May 2009

Trojan House: New poster-child of solar failure

From the Detroit News:

It was supposed to be a shining example of the green movement — a completely independent solar-powered house with no gas or electrical hookups.

Seven months ago, officials gathered for a ribbon-cutting ceremony to celebrate the $900,000 house owned by the city of Troy that was to be used as an educational tool and meeting spot.

But it never opened to the public. And it remains closed.

Frozen pipes during the winter caused $16,000 in damage to floors, and city officials aren’t sure when the house at the Troy Community Center will open…

“The system was designed to kick a heater on to keep water from freezing,” [the superintendent of parks for the city] said. “The heater drew all reserve power out of the battery causing the system to back down and the pipes froze.”

Yeah, but shouldn’t the first clue of failure have been the very idea of building an 800 square-foot house in Troy, MI that cost $900,000 — that is, $1,125 per square foot? The median price of homes in Troy is about $159,000 and that’s for an 1,800 sq. ft home — about $88 per square foot.

Even if the solar system hadn’t malfunctioned, who in their right mind would consider the house a success?

I suppose it’s fitting that this tragi-comedy occurred in a place called Troy — the greens are trying to deceive us in adopting their nutty policies and goofy technologies with a Trojan House.

Beware of greens bearing grifts.

Al Gore 1984

The latest from CEI:

Can Big Brother be green? Absolutely. If carbon dioxide were the planetary poison that global warming alarmists claim, then every aspect of our lives would be fair game for government control: the homes we build, the cars we drive, the light bulbs we use. Even the number of children we have—because lets face it; any reduction in CO2 that we achieve will be more than offset by the households our kids will create when they grow up.

There are already proposals in Congress and federal agencies to vastly increase taxes and regulations in order to address the so-called global warming crisis. But as a growing number of scientists are openly declaring, there is no crisis.

To take action, and to learn more, see http://cei.org/1984

South Park fans—this clip has a special treat for you.

Irony aficionados—In its original 1984 ad, Apple Computer warned of a totalitarian threat in computing. Today Al Gore sits on Apples Board of Directors. The company that warned of 1984 25 years ago now has, as one of its directors, the man most likely to lead us into a new 1984.

History students—Apple Computer ran its ad, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV…, only once, during the 1984 Super Bowl, to introduce its new Macintosh computer. In 2006, during the primary battles, a pro-Obama YouTube take-off of the Apple ad was created by an independent solo video artist,.casting Hillary Clinton in the role of Big Brother. The ad was titled Vote Different—apparently parodying Apples Think Different slogan. It can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-l…

John Norquist: ILUVCENTRALPLANNING

In an effort to play the “energy efficiency” card on opponents of oppression-via-CO2-regulation, former Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist concludes a piece entitled “Global Warming Skeptics Often Own Worst Enemy” with:

Is it a good idea to obsess on global warming as a threat to human life on earth? I don’t know, but as a supporter of free-market capitalism I do know that if we can produce the same or more wealth with less energy, we should do it. And if that also helps the environment, what’s the problem?

Norquist says he supports free-market capitalism yet he resorts to the collective — that is, “if we can produce the same or more wealth with less energy, we should do it.” Who is “we,” Mr. Norquist? The government? If so, count me out of we.

Has not the 20th century entirely debunked the concept of central planning? How many more people, Mr. Norquist, must suffer and/or die to prove the folly of central planning on a societal scale.

Certainly any capitalist can determine on his own and without the assistance of bureaucrats whether energy efficiency efforts make sense. As a sop to those with central planning inclinations, however, if we are going to do anything, why not act to make energy more available and more affordable, rather than act to make it less available and less affordable.

A few more points. The potential gains of energy efficiency on a societal basis have been way oversold and there is no reason to believe that will change any time soon.

Also, Mr. Norquist, perhaps you’ve heard about the problems with the compact fluorescent lightbulbs you seem to embrace? You know: they are expensive, provide inferior light, aren’t reliable, may be dangerous and are definitely a hassle if broken, come from China (as opposed to incandescent bulbs from Kentucky), pose quite a health risk to Chinese factory workers and, in all likelihood, provide no environmental benefits whatsoever.

As far as your penchant for smart growth, Mr. Norquist, you may want to live in a “compact” community, but count me and many Americans out. We like our spacious homes and yards, and the comfort, convenience and freedoms afforded by automobiles, cheap gas and roads. We don’t want our lives circumscribed and rationed by the pestilence that is meddlesome government.

Finally, how is anything that the green movement wants to do, particularly with respect to greenhouse gases, going to help the environment? I’ve worked on environmental issues for 20 years and have yet to be so enlightened. As far as I can tell, societal wealth is what makes for a clean environment. As the greens want to make us poorer, be assured that the quality of our environment will suffer if they succeed.

No stop signs. No speed limits. John Norquist would put us on the highway to:

Green Hell JACKET.indd

Western Climate Initiative: Costly and Ineffective

From the Western Business Roundtable:

A new study says that a climate action plan promoted by several Western governors could prolong the economic recession, weaken already overburdened Western power grids and will deliver a temperature “benefit” of only one ten-thousandth of a degree Celsius even after a century of operation.

Most popular: Green Hell on GlennBeck.com

Glenn Beck’s radio interview with Green Hell author Steve Milloy is at the top of GlennBeck.com’s “Most Popular” item list.

Click here to check out the interview about Chinese workers being poisoned with mercury while making compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs).

Subsidymagination: GE CEO advises Obama to just ‘give me the money’?

It has paid General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt very well to snuggle up to President Obama and his plan to socialize America and to do away with free markets and free enterprise.

General Electric will receive $40 million in federal stimulus money and another $15 million in New York State grant money to build a $100 million locomotive-battery plant near Albany, NY, according to the Wall Street Journal. The plant will eventually employ 350 people and could generate as much as $500 million per year in revenue by 2015, according to GE.

A few points to ponder:

  • The feds and NY state will be spending a total of $55 million to create 350 factory jobs. That works out to government spending of about $157,000 per factory job created. The median household income in Albany County for 2007 was about $70,000 per year. The factory jobs would not commence until mid-2011.
  • If it only takes a $100 million capital investment to build a plant that will be generating $500 million in revenue in six years and $1 billion within ten years, shouldn’t GE — a company with almost $180 billion in annual revenue, $19 billion in cash flow and $18 billion in operating profits — be able to afford the plant without nursing off taxpayers?
  • Since taxpayers will front 55 percent of the plant’s construction costs, what exactly will taxpayers receive in return? Will GE repay taxpayers with profits from the factory?
  • Hybrid locomotives are not some slam-dunk technology. A recent effort to market a hybrid locomotive designed for limited railyard use just failed.
  • Keeping in mind that GE’s hybrid locomotive has yet to be commercialized, it’s featured benefit is only a 10 percent fuel savings at best, plus the attendant reduction in air emissions — hardly something to get excited about.
  • Is GE getting this sweetheart stimulus deal because CEO Jeff Immelt sits on President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board? Exactly what advice does Immelt provide to Obama — ‘give me the money’? Isn’t this a conflict-of-interest?
  • Immelt is also a big supporter of Obama’s plans for greenhouse gas regulation (called “Ecomagination”) and nationalizing health care (called “Healthymagination”) since GE would benefit immensely from such legislation.
  • GE has already received a $140 billion bailout from taxpayers.

Ask Gary Sheffer, GE’s Director of Communications and Public Affairs, whether GE should just collapse its rent-seeking efforts under the single rubric of Subsidymagination. E-mail him at gary.sheffer@ge.com or phone him at 203-373-3476. Feel free to share his response with the rest of us.

White House looks to re-brand ‘cap-and-trade’; JunkScience.com announces naming contest

What’s in a name? Apparently, nothing conducive to green oppression if it’s “cap-and-trade.”

The White House is looking to replace the term “cap-and-trade” with something more exciting to the public, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times. According to the Times,

Today, aides in Obama’s Council on Environmental Quality will meet with a research and marketing group that is promoting an alternative to the phrase “global warming,” which some pollsters say fails to capture the idea of greenhouse gases threatening the environment.

“There is value in trying to get the messaging right,” said a senior White House environmental aide, who was not authorized to speak on the record. “Because at the end of the day this is tricky policy. . . . We want to make sure we’re talking in a way that people understand.”

Let’s save the taxpayers some money.

E-mail your suggested alternative to “cap-and-trade” to junkman@junkscience.com

The best entry received by Monday, May 18, 2009 wins an autographed copy of Steve Milloy’s new book, Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them.

So put your thinking caps on — no recycling “cap-and-tax” or “cap-and-charade” — it won’t be easy to buff the cap-and-trade turd into a popsicle!