Energy Independence - Some points to ponder

In the coming months, after the Messiah is in office, you will begin to see more and more nonsense under the heading of 'Energy Independence'. We need to think clearly about this topic. It is important from both an economic as well as a national security and sovereignty standpoint. The problem is, in a BHO administration, the problem will be framed as an environmental issue. If you have a short attention span, or weak analytical skills, - this post is probably not for you. A fun(ny) article from Mother Jones can be found here. Also, this article recounts some of the whacky predictions from years past regarding climate. Ok - on to our topic

First, man-made global warming is a crock. The sun is the primary driver in the temperature fluctuations that happen on the earth. If you are so inclined, you can find tons of info on the web to germinate your thinking on the issue. So, the whole issue of energy should NOT be looked at through the lens of 'carbon footprint'. The whole notion of carbon footprint is fallacious and will lead you, through wrong-headed thinking, to wrong-headed conclusions.

The environ-weenies LOVE 2 things: wind and solar. The problem is, from a macro-level, these are both fatally flawed. Why? Let's talk in simple terms to illustrate.

Both wind and solar suffer from the same problem: they are unpredictable and variable. Why is this a problem? Let's use an example. I have a town of 100,000 people. I have conventional (coal or natural gas) electrical generation plants to supply the needs of my town. These are primary steam turbines. As the manager of the turbines, I run them at a capacity that exceeds, by some amount, the demand that my customers have. I do this to make sure that they will not run short. Because I cannot store the power (no one has battery technology to do that), any power my customers do not use immediately, I either dump in the ground (or possibly sell to the national grid at a big discount).

Now, a bunch of people in town put up windmills. These generate power for the individual homeowners. They are happy. They use the power from the windmills, making them buy less from the city. If they run short, I am always here to fill in the gap. But, if they produce an excess, they can even sell it back to the city. This sounds excellent! But - it is not so excellent as it seems.

Because, you see, the city as a whole gains no benefit. The city must keep producing power at the same rate as before. They cannot adjust their output to correspond to the fluctuating nature of the wind. What is the net result? The homeowner is happy on a micro-level - but the city as a whole sees no net benefit. They cannot reduce their production, and hence their consumption of fuel. So, we built a bunch of windmills (an intensive industrial process) and see NO net benefit for 'the earth'.

As an example, the Dutch have 6,000+ windmills. They have not reduced their conventional production!

The same problem exists with solar. It is variable, clouds and all. But, I live in Ohio - so we don't really think much about solar!

So, wind and solar are not the paths to energy independence. What could be the paths? We already know the answers:

• We can conserve more. True - but driving consumption down is not a strategy for keeping this country great in the long-term
  
  
• We can produce more of our own coal, oil, and natural gas. The incoming administration has indicated that it is hostile to this idea. One struggles to see a rational reason why. Other countries will be setting up deep water drilling rigs practically within sight of our shorelines. But, for some reason, we refuse. It is almost like the refuse-niks of domestic production WANT us to fail. But that would be calling them anti-American, or anti-capitalist! Hmmm. That is a subject for another day.
  
  
• We can move towards nuclear power. This is the ultimate win-win. If you care about green-house gases (I do not), you have to love nuclear! ZERO emissions. Yes, you have to deal with the spent fuel - but if we focus on this, it is solvable. There are even mini reactors available. Don't look for any in the US - I am sure the enviroweenies will block their importation.
  
  
• We will continue to look at bio-fuels. But, barring some monumental break-through, this will only marginally help. Why? Well, using corn for ethanol backfired. It is less efficient than oil. And, as a bonus, it drove corn prices through the roof. Besides, the environmentalists would stroke out if we put even MORE land to use to produce crops (think fertilizer and pesticide runoff, deforestation, and destruction of habitat for the Fuzzy-Breasted Nut Scratcher)
  

So, in conclusion:

• Wind and solar won't solve our problems
  
• We have options for more domestic production - but the Messiah is against these options
  
• Nuclear is the ultimate solution - but the Messiah will fold to the environmentalists - so no more nuclear
  
• Bio-fuels, nice try - no solution.
  

Net result - we are getting ready to spend Billions on 'feel-good' programs and policies. We will launch a bunch of research programs. We will probably have 'cap and trade' policies that will punish industry, but do NOTHING towards our goal of energy independence.

So, at the end of the Messiah's term in office, we will be NO closer to energy independence than we are now. But,

• We will have given the left control over Billions of dollars to dole out as they see fit.
  
• We will have exerted more control over American business.
  
• We will have weakened America on the world stage - making it 'fairer' for the rest of the world.
  
• We can all 'feel-good' - because we 'did something'. (Nothing useful, but 'something')
  

All of these are goals of segments of the left. And, most sadly, the American people will not hold him accountable for the failure! They will be seduced into believing that all of the 'activity' generated equals progress. Because, for the left, it is not the result that matters, only that you had 'good intentions'.

Sorry, but that is how it is going to play out.