It Snowed Last Night And The Midwest Shut Down – How can 4-6 inches of snow do that

Global Warming has turned the midwest into a group of handicapped old ladies. I mean I can remember when we would get at least 2 or 3 inches before Thanksgiving, go through a warm period and then get 6-8 inches right before Christmas. It would be considered a light year if we got a couple of feet for the whole season. Now we get 4 inches and the WHOLE WORLD shuts down. But first I gotta say:

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

This is what I woke up to:

snowbarn.jpg

So I got out the old metal snow shovel and proceeded to clear the sidewalk, my car and the back porch. Snow shovels however have gotten a whole lot better over the years:

guidedogs.blogspot.com

From this to all of these:

http://www.amazon.com/Suncast-SF1850-22-Inch-Scoop-Shovel/dp/B000A1CENK

Suncast SF1850 22-Inch Big Scoop Snow Shovel with Wear Strip

See larger image

Share your own customer images

 
 
 

 

Suncast SF1850 22-Inch Big Scoop Snow Shovel with Wear Strip

Other products by Suncast

4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (60 customer reviews)

60 Reviews

5 star: (34)
4 star: (13)
3 star: (6)
2 star: (4)
1 star: (3)

 See all 60 customer reviews…


Price: $39.99 & this item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping. Details

In Stock.
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.

 
 

Want it delivered Friday, January 8?

Order it in the next 3 hours and 25 minutes, and choose One-Day Shipping at checkout.

Details

 
 

5 new from $31.21 2 used from $36.99

:}

http://www.nextag.com/snow-shovel/shop-html

3-Way Swivel Snow Shovel

 

3-Way Swivel Snow Shovel

 

This snow shovel’s extra-wide 26-1/2″ blade acts like a plow, allowing you to push snow out of the way without lifting.

No user ratings [rate this item]

+ Add to Shopping List  |  See More Like This

 

 

Find Other Outdoor Patio Furniture

Related Searches:

 

$44.99

Go to Store

Yo-ho Polartuff Snoblade Snow Blade Shovel W/ Wheels

 

Yo-ho Polartuff Snoblade Snow Blade Shovel W/ Wheels

 

No user ratings [rate this item]

+ Add to Shopping List  |  See More Like This

 

 

Find Other Sports & Outdoors

Related Searches:

 

$79.95

Go to Store

Telescoping Snow Shovel

 

Telescoping Snow Shovel

 

The Telescoping Snow Shovel is just the right size to dig out the snow that builds up around your tires during a heavy snowfall.

No user ratings [rate this item]

+ Add to Shopping List  |  See More Like This

 

 

Find Other Outdoor Patio Furniture

Related Searches:

 

$12.99

Go to Store

Dakota Snoblade Snow Blade Removal Shovel W/ Wheels

 

Dakota Snoblade Snow Blade Removal Shovel W/ Wheels

 

No user ratings [rate this item]

+ Add to Shopping List  |  See All Sports & Outdoors

:}

http://www.uline.com/BL_7052/Snow-Shovels?pricode=wm605&gclid=CKHPu_Tfkp8CFRQeDQodWF0vBg

:}

http://www.wovel.com/

Clears Away Snow 3 Times Faster Than Shoveling…
with Half the Effort and Less Risk of Injury

The new Folding Frame Sno Wovel™ and Sno Wolf™ are the only snow removal devices, performing equal to or better than a snow blower, that are recognized by Co-op America and National Green Pages™ for its positive, pollution-free environmental standards and zero carbon footprint in usage. Univ. of Mass. indpendent study confirms the wheeled snow shovel clears snow with a fraction of the effort and safer on the back: “comparable to simply walking.”

NEW: Time Magazines Best Invention for 2006

Click to view all sale items

No fuel, fumes and deafening noise to harm the environment or the operator.
THE NEW FOLDING FRAME SNO WOVEL™:}

http://www.rei.com/category/4500674

:}

See More About:

Picture of ergonomic snow shovel.

Picture of ergonomic snow shovel.

David Beaulieu

More Images (3)

 

Sponsored Links

Find a Snow RemoverFind Top Rated Snow Removers. Compare Up to 4 Quotes Now.www.ServiceMagic.com

Snow Shovels guideLooking to find Snow Shovels? See our Snow Shovels guide.HomeGardenDream.com

Ames Snow ShovelLooking for Ames Snow Shovel? Find more Information now.Garage.AmericanModernLiving.com

Landscaping Ads

Two Stage Snow Blowers Ergonomic Snow Shovels John Deere Snow Blower Snow Ice Snow Tools

When George Bailey first appears in the Christmas classic, It's a Wonderful Life, he and a bunch of other boys are sliding down a snowy hill on their snow shovels (I guess their parents couldn't afford sleds or toboggans). That's about the only fun use to which snow shovels have ever been put, as far as I know.

For with that one exception, snow shovels signify nothing but drudgery. Worse yet, to those who suffer from bad backs, snow shovels are nothing less than instruments of torture. The human frame simply isn't designed for extended periods of snow shoveling. It was with these thoughts in mind that I recently tested three different Ames True Temper snow shovels:

  1. An Avalanche Ergo Plus ergonomic snow shovel
  2. A Snow Blazer wide-grip snow shovel
  3. A Penguin VersaGrip snow pusher

:}

Make sure you take a break and drink a hot drink...

:}

Top Energy Stories Of 2009 – The end of the Naughties

Ok we are 14 hours away from the year 2010 so I am going to have to post several top 10 lists. It seems that everyone has to have one. Since that is the case I will use theirs. But first I have to say:

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

Our First top 10 is from the Energy Tribune but actually originates with:

Posted on Dec. 28, 2009

http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=2768

The Top Ten Energy Stories of 2009 Ed. note: This item originally ran in Robert Rapier’s R-Squared Energy Blog.

Here are my choices for the Top 10 energy related stories of 2009. Previously I listed how I voted in Platt’s Top 10 poll, but my list is a bit different from theirs. I have a couple of stories here that they didn’t list, and I combined some topics. And don’t get too hung up on the relative rankings. You can make arguments that some stories should be higher than others, but I gave less consideration to whether 6 should be ahead of 7 (for example) than just making sure the important stories were listed.

  1. Volatility in the oil marketsMy top choice for this year is the same as my top choice from last year. While not as dramatic as last year’s action when oil prices ran from $100 to $147 and then collapsed back to $30, oil prices still more than doubled from where they began 2009. That happened without the benefit of an economic recovery, so I continue to wonder how long it will take to come out of recession when oil prices are at recession-inducing levels. Further, coming out of recession will spur demand, which will keep upward pressure on oil prices. That’s why I say we may be in The Long Recession.
  2. The year of natural gasThis could have easily been my top story, because there were so many natural gas-related stories this year. There were stories of shale gas in such abundance that it would make peak oil irrelevant, stories of shale gas skeptics, and stories of big companies making major investments into converting their fleets to natural gas.Whether the abundance ultimately pans out, the appearance of abundance is certainly helping to keep a lid on natural gas prices. By failing to keep up with rising oil prices, an unprecedented oil price/natural gas price ratio developed. If you look at prices on the NYMEX in the years ahead, the markets are anticipating that this ratio will continue to be high. And as I write this, you can pick up a natural gas contract in 2019 for under $5/MMBtu.
  3. U.S. demand for oil continues to declineAs crude oil prices skyrocketed in 2008, demand for crude oil and petroleum products fell from 20.7 million barrels per day in 2007 to 19.5 million bpd in 2008 (Source: EIA). Through September 2009, year-to-date demand is averaging 18.6 million bpd – the lowest level since 1997. Globally, demand was on a downward trend as well, but at a less dramatic pace partially due to demand growth in both China and India.

:}

Then there is Greentech Media:

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/top-ten-energy-storage-of-2009/

Top Ten Energy Storage of 2009

Electric vehicles boost lithium-ion batteries, DOE dollars for grid storage, ice-making air conditioners, and a smart grid to rule them all.

Energy storage – you can’t do electric vehicles without it, and it sure would make renewable solar and wind energy a lot more useful.

That’s the imperative behind 2009’s push into energy storage – from the fast-moving world of batteries for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles to the slower development of a variety of technologies for storing power on the electricity grid.

1. A123, Green Tech’s First IPO of 2009: A123 Systems broke the green tech IPO drought in September, when it debuted its shares to the public markets and was immediately rewarded with a doubling of their price. But the lithium-ion battery maker has since seen shares fall to close to their initial offering price of $13.50, perhaps linked to the scaling back of electric vehicle plans by customer Chrysler. A123 is also making batteries for grid energy storage, bridging two worlds that have until now been mostly separate.

2. The Government Boosts Vehicle Batteries” Next-generation batteries wouldn’t be where they are today without the billions of stimulus dollars the federal government has aimed at the sector. In August, the Department of Energy handed out $2.4 billion to such companies as EnerG2, A123 Systems, Johnson Controls, eTec, EnerDel, Saft and Chrysler and General Motors, most of it to build battery factories in the United States – a key goal of the grants, given Asia’s dominance in battery technology and manufacturing.

3. Fuel Cells’ Waning Fortunes? What the federal government has given to batteries, it has taken away from a once-favored alternative – fuel cells. Technologies to convert hydrogen into electricity and water are clean, but they also require a massive infrastructure to deliver hydrogen – which is mostly made today by cracking natural gas – to millions of vehicles. Energy Secretary Steven Chu has said he will cut back drastically on DOE funding for vehicular fuel cell research, which he described as decades away from commercial viability. In the meantime, fuel cells soldier on in the stationary power generation market, and are finding niches in forklifts and other short-range heavy vehicles, as well as in military applications.

But wait? Panasonic has started to deliver fuel cells that burn natural gas to produce heat and electricity in Japan and Bloom Energy is expected to come out of its hidey hole soon to talk about devices that pretty much do the same thing for industrial customers. By exploiting heat and power, these fuel cells can be 80 plus percent efficient.

:}

What better way to end the new year but with the Department of Defense:

http://dodenergy.blogspot.com/2009/12/year-in-review-top-10-dod-energy-events.html

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Year in Review: Top 10 DOD Energy Events of 2009

Not sure if you’ll agree, but from my vantage point, this was the first year that merits a DOD Energy top ten. Folks who’ve been at this enterprise a long time, like Tom Morehouse and Chris DiPetto at OSD (and a small handful of others in the Services), have been doing energy grunt work without a heck of a lot of support or credit (that’s my take, not theirs). Over the past decade there have been isolated wins and signs of improvement, but nothing sustained.

But this year something changed, and I have to give credit to the increasing strength of the convoy connection. It’s finally shown everyone that being smart and proactive on energy issues isn’t the domain of Birkenstock wearing, granola eating, tree hugging peace-nicks. The clear (and easy to understand and communicate) link between fuel convoys and 1) causalities, 2) costs, and 3) mission degradation.

I’m sure I’m leaving a lot out (that’s a good thing). But without further adieu, here’s the list for the year, in no particular order:

  1. Gigantic Army solar installation off the ground at Fort Irwin in California’s Mojave Desert to advance conversation beyond Nellis. Score – Fort Irwin: 500+ Megawatts, Nellis AFB: 14 Megawatts
  2. Boeing’s high tech, super efficient 787 Dreamliner finally flew. Basis for future tanker/transport?
  3. Convoy lessons brought the concept of proactive energy planning fully out of its Birkenstock phase … for everyone.
  4. Energy audits in Afghanistan commence with Marines. It’s called MEAT, for Marine Energy Assessment Team, see here and here.
  5. Like DARPA to advance US space tech post Sputnik, ARPA-E‘s mission is to turbocharge US competitiveness in energy tech (ET).
  6. 3 of the 4 Services hold major confs exclsively on energy issues. The Navy version in particular generated a huge amount of great info

:}

HAPPY NEW YEAR

:}

2009 Was A Very Busy Year For Energy Conservation – And other Environmental Endeavors

http://ecopolitology.org/2009/12/29/the-top-9-stories-in-environmental-politics-of-2009/

The Top 9 Stories in Environmental Politics of 2009

From Copenhagen to Climategate, 2009 was a busy year for those of us at ecopolitology and anyone else interested in environmental politics. Here’s a rundown of what we saw as the year’s biggest environmental politics stories.

Van Jones’ Resignation

Van Jones, one of the people who was fighting hardest to create jobs in a green economy resigned his job at the White House as Special Adviser to President Obama for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the Council on Environmental Quality. Jones was the target of a coordinated attack spearheaded by conservative media pundit, Glen Beck, for what Beck claimed was Jones’ communist leanings.

:}

From that to Number 5:

Economic Downturn and its Impact on Environment

One of the biggest stories in 2009–environmental or otherwise– was the massive economic downturn that gripped the U.S. and many other parts of the world. A tanking housing market, collapsing banks, and folding financial institutions all but dried up the available credit. As a result, homes were foreclosed, people lost their jobs and a general reluctance to invest in clean energy and pass legislation for the betterment of the environment permeated nearly every environmental debate in the country. The renewables sector was hit particularly hard for most of the year as banks were not lending up-front capital required for many renewable energy projects. Despite the economic slump, the wind industry continued to grow through the 3rd quarter, but suffered much more in Q4 of 2009.:}

From that to number 1:

Inauguration of Barack Obama as President

On January 20, 2009, the world watched as Barrack Hussein Obama was sworn-in as the 44th President of the United States. Throughout his campaign, Obama promised renewed attention to energy efficiency and renewables and a return to science-based policymaking. Many argue that Obama’s unprecedented commitment to science stands in stark contrast to the previous administration’s tampering with and dismissal of scientific findings that were not in line with its political agenda.

:}

There is much much more in this article including, Cash for Clunkers; ClimateGate, Copenhagen, cccccChanges…oh sorry got carried away with the Cs.

:}

So How Do All The Climate Liars Get To Copenhegan – Is someone paying their way

No one bothers to ask themselves, “how does a parellel anti-global warming conference get set up in Copenhagen”? We know how the pro-climate people got there. The world’s environmental organizations sent them. Some of them live there or are close enough to drive. The Government people got there on their countries dime as did the UN people. But how did the aptly named Lord Mockton get there? The answer is easy – The Carbon Industry sent them:

http://motherjones.com/special-reports/2009/12/dirty-dozen-climate-change-denial

Assignment 2020, Climate Change, Copenhagen Climate Talks, Corporations, Environment, Top Stories

In 2006, according to the Pew Research Center, 77 percent of Americans saw “solid evidence” for global warming. By this fall, that figure had dropped to 57 percent—and just 36 percent said they believed that humans are to blame. That’s good news for climate change skeptics and deniers, who have spent years trying to perpetuate the illusion that the reality of climate change is up for debate. Never mind that the scientific consensus is firmly on the side of global warming—for anyone seeking an alternate view, there’s an entire parallel universe where junk science and bogus statistics ricochet through an echo chamber of kooky blogs, “nonpartisan” institutes, and fake “green” and “citizen” groups that are often acting on behalf of the oil and coal industry.

With Copenhagen kicking off and the overblown “Climategate” scandal making headlines, the deniers have even more fodder for their campaign to kill serious action to slow climate change.

Here’s a guide to the dozen loudest components of the climate disinformation machine.

:}

This is one of the most comprehensive articles I have seen and I urge everyone to read the whole thing. These pricks think they can BURN us off the planet. I hope they are wrong.

:}

Alice In Greenland – Guest poster Jed Morey has his say

I rarely have “guest posters”, mainly because nobody asks but also because I like to run my mouth. I forget how I found Jed’s Column but it makes so much sense in such a short space that I actually ASKED Jed if I could use it. How rare is that? So far that would be 2 people Jed and Dan Piraro soooo without further ado (I always wanted to say that…damn).

http://www.longislandpress.com/2009/12/09/alice-in-greenland/

Alice In Greenland

Written by Jed Morey on Dec 9th, 2009 and filed under Columns, Off The Reservation. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

Want to take a trip down the environmental rabbit hole? Spark a discussion about climate change and watch human warming reach extremes far greater than any place on the globe.

To the right you have the laughable stance adopted by the conservative movement that humans are having no effect on climate and the atmosphere. At the other extreme are non-scientist policy makers and pundits holding “The End Is Near” signs on every street corner claiming that Iowa and Chad will be beachfront property by the end of next year.

Personally, I’m not qualified to discern which side is closer to representing the truth.

What I do know is that the debate should remain in scientific circles because I have yet to meet anyone qualified to entirely explain the variances in global temperatures. While world leaders are dithering in Copenhagen and arguing over hacked e-mails about tree rings versus thermometers, the public needs to close its ears to the noise produced on both sides of the global warming debate and focus on the tangible aspects of industrial pollution.

You don’t need to be an expert on carbon emissions or reference “parts per billion” to understand that we are seriously screwing up the planet. Public health has been compromised by the rise of industry. While there are several factors that contribute to the decline in public health, much of the discussion centers on energy production and sources because it’s the baseline driver of industry. So let’s look at it.

First of all, there is no such thing as clean coal. True, you can clean coal emissions, but the process of scrubbing coal to burn cleaner is just as much of an environmental disaster. There is no such thing as clean nuclear energy either, for that matter. True, the emissions are carbon neutral, but at some point every nuclear facility must dispose of the spent fuel used in production. The spent fuel must be stored somewhere and wherever that place is, it’s no place you want to be near.

Large wind farms in lakes and oceans are unrealistically expensive and remarkably inefficient. The Danes will tell you differently and espouse the virtues of wind power—just look at the marvel that is Copenhagen—but the fact remains that they are the largest manufacturers of wind turbines and have a vested economic interest in, shall we say, massaging the numbers. However, wind, solar and geothermal energy present viable options on a micro level and should be encouraged in every corner and backyard of the world. Individuals and small businesses need affordable access to clean energy solutions, not just municipalities.

Economically, there is no such thing as cheap oil anymore. Whether or not the Saudis or Venezuelans care to admit it, we have hit peak oil in the largest, most accessible oil fields around the world. Period. Are there places on Earth with large reserves of oil and natural gas? Yup. Is it easy to get to? Nope. Expensive to retrieve? Yup. Environmentally secure to extract? Nope.

As far as Cap and Trade is concerned—please. Giving large corporations and polluters the ability to buy their way out of cleaning their emissions is a lousy practice. Lisa Jackson from the EPA is on the right track by simply drawing a line in the sand and taking it out of the hands of Congress. The message from the Obama administration is clear: Clean it up. If Cap and Trade is allowed to continue one can only imagine Goldman Sachs creating a derivatives market that bundles pollution credits in with mortgages on homes with inefficient boilers and selling them to school boards in Greenland. No more government-backed securities bought by large corporations and sold on opaque markets, especially if they contain something as ethereal as carbon credits.

This is it folks. We have reached the tipping point. The only option heretofore is conservation.

If you wish to comment on “Off the Reservation,” send your message to jmorey@longislandpress.com.

:}

Can’t say it any better than that. By the way those who know me know I disagree with Jed about renewables, broadly stated, to replace fossil fuels but as he says “Cheap nope, time consuming Yup”. Thanks Jed.

:}

Iceburgs Attack New Zealand – well maybe they kinda drift by but

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

While the people who don’t want to admit that people are pooping on the planet so much that we are destabilizing the planet by citing bogus statistics or hacking emails that appear to challenge the L shaped curve for global warming over the last hundred years…the real destabilization continues. Which is the real point

.http://www.livescience.com/environment/etc/091123-icebergs-surprise-new-zealand.html

Environment

Etc! More Science News Out There...

Icebergs Surprise New Zealand

Submitted by Robert Roy Britt

posted: 23 November 2009 11:50 am ET

iceberg

An iceberg at Bauer Bay on the west coast of Macquarie Island has drifted from Antarctica. Credit: Brett Quinton / Australian Antarctic Division

At least a hundred icebergs have trekked from Antarctica toward New Zealand, arriving at islands off New Zealand in recent weeks after being set adrift perhaps 9 years ago.”The larger icebergs seen from Macquarie Island are tabular in shape, which indicates they have calved relatively recently, probably from one of the massive icebergs which originally calved from the Ross Ice Shelf nearly 9 years ago,” said Australian Antarctic Division glaciologist Neal Young in a statement released earlier this month.

More than 100 icebergs were seen in just one cluster, AFP reports today. Young says the smaller icebergs likely resulted from the breakup of a larger one.

“Everyone on station has their eyes glued to the horizon trying to spot new icebergs,” said Cyril Munro, acting station leader on Macquarie Island. “The scientists working on the southern tip of the island were astounded to see an iceberg of about 2 kilometers [1.2 miles] in length,” he said.

:}

Here are several maps if you would like to see the icebergs:

http://www.acecrc.org.au/uploaded/117/797697_63nz_iceberg_20091124_200.pdf

http://www.acecrc.org.au/uploaded/117/797697_61nz_iceberg_20091124.pdf

When they get to Tasmania we will be in big trouble.

:}

And then there is this

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gsr62jU7bnmBi2Z-iKs_Mbgy-9rQD9C5TPD80

Icebergs head from Antarctica for New Zealand

The alert comes three years after cold weather and favorable ocean currents saw dozens of icebergs float close to New Zealand’s southern shores for the first time in 75 years.

New Zealand maritime officials have issued navigation warnings for the area south of the country.

“It’s an alert to shipping to be aware these potential hazards are around and to be on the lookout for them,” Maritime New Zealand spokeswoman Sophie Hazelhurst said.

dot dot dot

Large numbers of icebergs last floated close to New Zealand in 2006, when some were visible from the coastline in the first such sighting since 1931.

It is rare for whole icebergs to drift so far north before melting, but a cold snap around southern New Zealand and favorable ocean currents have again combined to push the towering visitors to the region intact.

dot dot dot

Young said that having the icebergs end up near New Zealand is not necessarily linked to global warming, but said that the rate of icebergs breaking off the Antarctic ice shelf in recent years may have increased due to dramatically rising temperatures on the continent over the past 60 years.

:}

hmmm…things are different in the REAL world

:}

Cap And Trade – An industry insider opposes it when industry proposes it

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

This is an example of what we have to put up with in this community. Springfield has been raped by corporate media purchases. First a right wing conglomerate, the Sinclair Broadcast Group, bought channel 20 and gave us an ex-CIA agent as a far right social commenter. Then Gatehouse buys our local paper, the State Journal Register, and in one week they give us an editorial in which Union Pacific says that they can ram as many freight trains down our throats as they want and the opinion below that Cap and Trade will kill the USA’s economy. This by the guy who lead the deregulation train before it derailed our economy. Thanks a lot man.

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x801093616/Dan-Miller-CO2-curbs-would-be-devastating

In My View: CO2 curbs would be devastating

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Nov 07, 2009 @ 12:03 AM

 Regulations and mandates that force nationwide cuts in carbon dioxide emissions offer only speculative environmental benefits, if any, as a switch to wind and solar power will certainly cause more harm than good to the environment.

But command-and-control forces in Congress are headed in that direction, with the House narrowly passing a bill to cap CO2 emissions, and the Senate taking up a companion bill this month.
Engineers calculate that a stunning 600 square miles of wind turbines would be needed to produce the same 1,000 megawatts of electricity as a single medium-to-large coal power plant. That’s enough to provide electricity to about 10,000 homes.

Even in favorable locations, wind turbines can supply electrical power only about 20 percent of the time, meaning utilities still must have an alternative baseload source to compensate for wind fluctuations, and those alternatives are three: coal, natural gas or nuclear power plants. But by taking coal and natural gas out of production due to carbon dioxide restrictions, a massive and enormously expensive program will be needed to build more nuclear power plants to supply this baseload.

Further, wind turbine developments despoil nature’s beauty, and indiscriminately kill birds and bats, including many endangered species.

Writing last summer in the Boston Globe, Eleanor Tillinghast, director of the environmental advocacy group Green Berkshires, warned, “Cutting wide swaths of unspoiled forest for access roads, clear-cutting miles of ridgelines, erecting industrial structures with spinning blades that threaten migrating birds and the last remaining bats — these are irreversible actions with permanent consequences.”

Solar power likewise requires substantially more environmental destruction than coal. The Nevada Solar One array, the most efficient in the nation, requires 350 acres of land to produce less than 1/10th the power of a conventional coal-fueled power plant, and that’s at peak efficiency at noon on a cloudless day.

Both wind and solar power projects inevitably would require the construction of new transmission lines, often across otherwise-pristine lands, to reach energy-hungry consumers. The nation’s key wind corridor, from the Texas panhandle to the Dakotas, contains no major population center.

Further, wind and solar generators consume much more water than coal power plants, a serious problem in desert areas with the most sunlight.

All of that explains why so many environmentalists oppose further development of wind and solar power. By forcing construction of more of these projects, carbon dioxide restrictions will have a devastating impact on many of America’s most valuable natural treasures.

Dan Miller is publisher at The Heartland Institute and former chairman of the Illinois Commerce Commission, the public utility regulatory body in Illinois. He can be reached at
dmiller@heartland.org.

:}

More on this guy Miller later.

:}

Nobel Prizes This Year Reflect A Turn Toward A Steady State Economy – Elinor Ostrom is a perfect example

While there was huge howling on both the right and the left about Barack Obama winning the Nobel Prize, I think it was mainly because they don’t understand that we are shifting from a “growth” paradigm to a “sustainable” paradigm and the Nobel people were publicly recognizing that fact. I think if they all knew what that meant, they would be howling even louder. What Barack and company have understood is that standard politics is about to become irrelevant. That is that the Growth method of economics is about to become obsolete and with it a whole way of life.

http://www.mysinchew.com/node/30218?tid=14

The sustainable economics of Elinor Ostrom

2009-10-14 17:56


It was not by chance that Elinor Ostrom was awarded this year’s Nobel prize in economics.

Global warming, along with the preservation of the quality of our environment, has become the most pressing issue facing the human race.

The presentation of this year’s Nobel prize in economics to Elinor Ostrom and Oliver E. Williamson–in particular Ostrom’s dedicated researches in the inter-relationship between mankind and our ecological system, thus ensuring the sustainability of our water, forest, fishery and other shared resources–should serve as a loud and clear alarm to mankind, who have now come face to face with ecological disasters of unprecedented proportions.

Environmental initiatives continue to thrive in all corners of the Earth. Although many people are well equipped with the knowledge of protecting our environment, few will actually turn that knowledge into practical actions, resulting in the piling up of trash, severe river contamination, illegal logging as well as ill-planned and uncurbed developments. The quality of our environment has deteriorated further, culminating in a broad array of hygiene issues and illnesses.

Elinor Ostrom spent her teenage years in the depth of the Great Depression and the subsequent second world war, when resources were scarce and potable water a rarity. She grew vegetables in her own yard, and made her harvest into canned food. This opened up her eyes to the realisation of the necessity to work with other people for the common interests of all when resources were in short supply. Such a realisation had laid a solid foundation for her future scientific research works.

Judging from this perspective, it therefore came as no coincidence that she was given the Nobel.

It is an undeniable fact that environmental degradation has resulted in global warming. Even in Malaysia, the average atmospheric temperatures have risen over the past three decades.

:}

Summarizing her findings about the “tragedy of the commons”:

1. We must value the strategy of a more balanced overall development: In the past, due to the lack of overall development concept and plans, our developments have been concentrated in large cities while the well-being of rural residents was overlooked.

For instance, we moved polluting factories from cities to outlying areas and adjacent rural communities. We should have instead formulated a set of preventive guidelines to curb environmental degradation. The success of environment protection depends very much on the monetary expenses as well as manpower, financial and equipment inputs; and priorities and timetables should therefore be set.

2. An environment evaluation system must be put in place. Works on all new major construction projects, manufacturing plants and public gathering places, should begin only after environmental impact assessments have been carried out.

3. Promote a sense of responsibility in nurturing the necessary expertise. Future entrepreneurs must come to the full realisation that the prevention of environmental degradation is a responsibility which they are obliged to, and the money invested in the equipment for the prevention of environmental degradation should be seen as part of the essential operating cost in their production and service delivery. At the same time, they should also establish research bodies aimed at grooming expertise to fight pollution.

Not believing in the “tragedy of the commons,” Ostrom has put her entire lifetime’s effort in the researches on outlying and underdeveloped communities, living over a very long period of time with their impoverished residents.

:}

The 2 types of economies are on a crash course:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_41/b4150055757494.htm

The Clash Over Clean Power

Utility chiefs are juggling the conflicting goals of green energy and low rates—and self-interest reigns

BUCKING POWERFUL INTERESTS

What makes the task even more difficult is a fundamental clash between the two goals that Rowe, Rogers, and other CEOs say they are passionate about: keeping power prices low to benefit customers and averting the potential catastrophe of climate change. The effort to curb emissions, after all, will significantly raise the price of coal-fired and other fossil-fuel-generated electricity and make alternatives more competitive.

:}

Some countries are already there:

The future of energy happening now in Germany

Friday, 16 October 2009 08:01

Germans are leading the way in the clean energy revolution.  From huge smart grid projects and massive wind and solar farms to smaller micro-generation projects at the home to new appliances Germany is taking energy efficiency very seriously.

Germany passed legislation more than 20 years ago that required utility companies to pay homeowners who generated renewable power.  Since 1990, carbon emissions there have been reduced by 23 percent as a result of forward-thinking policies and by embracing innovative technologies.

The country is now conducting tests that will determine if homes can produce all of their energy needs and sell excess back to the power grid.  Operating under the label E-Energy, the project will include tens of thousands of homes in six separate regions.  The €140 million project has attracted many of the world’s largest energy and technology firms who have agreed to help pay for the effort.  Germany believes that a similar nationwide program could conserve 10 terawatts of energy annually – an amount equal to the yearly consumption of 2.5 million homes.

The Germans are also working on offshore wind farms and massive solar power installations to be built in Africa.  Several energy companies are working on the solar project that will eventually feed clean energy into Europe’s power grid.  Schemes such as these can eventually provide up to a third of the country’s requirements, according to estimates.

:}

The point being, that the Nobel Committee picked people that reflect that…the “Growthers” just don’t get it and never will:

http://nobelprize.org/

Nobel Prize Winners For 2009

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2009

Elizabeth H. Blackburn

Carol W. Greider

Jack W. Szostak

The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2009

Venkatraman Ramakrishnan

Thomas A. Steitz

Ada E. Yonath

The Nobel Peace Prize 2009

Barack Obama

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2009

Charles K. Kao

Willard S. Boyle

George E. Smith

The Nobel Prize in Literature 2009

Herta Müller

The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2009

Elinor Ostrom

Oliver E. Williamson

:}

I did not say it up front but Elinor is the first woman to get the Nobel Prize for Economics -Yaaaaaa

:}

Peak Oil, Peak Food, Peak People, Peak Water Or Peak Sex – Every finite resource runs out

I don’t run much about Peak Oil. Don’t get me wrong. I read their best web postings and sometimes I even publish some of the stuff they report on.

http://www.peakoil.com/

I rarely ever post stuff directly from the “Peak Oil” perspective for the same reasons that I do not post “end of days” stuff. They are BOTH true. That is OIL will run out and the Earth will come to an end but the predictiveness is problematic to say the least. For sure Peak Oil will come true before Peak Days, till either happens though…well the less said the better. They are having a conference in Denver and I thought I would post a couple of pieces so it doesn’t seem like I don’t like them.

Is there such a thing as Peak Sex? Well think about it (:)) there IS only so much that you can have.

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/50359

http://transitionculture.org/2009/10/09/whither-resilience-and-transition-why-peak-oil-has-yet-to-outlive-its-usefulness/

9 Oct 2009

Whither Resilience and Transition? Why ‘Peak Oil’ Has Yet to Outlive its Usefulness

stress_city

It’s been a fascinating few days.  Early in the week, Nate Hagens and Sharon Astyk were suggesting the perhaps the term ‘peak oil’ has outlived its usefulness, given that we have almost certainly peaked, and that the peak oil movement needs to shift its focus.  It echoed something I wrote a while ago, likening ASPO and the wider peak oil movement to a Loch Ness Monster Society, dedicated to establishing the existence of this fabled creature.  They organise conferences, scientific searches of the loch, write papers and journals, and then one day, an entire, intact Loch Ness Monster washes up on the shore.  Then what?  They have no reason to exist any longer, their whole raison d’etre vanishes overnight.

However, I don’t think it is that straightforward.  For me, what we are seeing, taking a step back and looking in the longer time context, is a series of pulses.  Peak oil won’t go away as an issue, it pulses in and out of the collective consciousness and hopefully will increasingly come to underpin Government policy-making.  In July 2008, peak oil was pulsing as the oil price hit record highs, and issues around economics were in the background.  Now, economics has been the key pulse for the last year or so, and peak oil has been pushed off the side of the stage until the last few days.  If Colin Campbell’s original analysis, elaborated by David Strahan in his talk at the 2009 Transition Network conference, is correct, what looks likely is that the two will pulse alternately, as any kind of economic recovery increases demand, which raises the oil prices, which dampens economic recovery, which reduces demand and lowers prices, which increases demand, and so on and so on.  Until the connection between the two becomes clear, they will continue to pulse alternately.

Over the last couple of days, the peak oil pulse has become most prominent, with two excellent reports which will hopefully give Ed Miliband a lot to think about, and dampen the complacency brought about by Malcolm Wicks’ dreadful and fairly pointless report on UK energy security.  The first report, by the UKERC, the UK’s premiere research establishment, sets out to answer the question “what evidence is there to support the proposition that the global supply of ‘conventional oil’ will be constrained by physical depletion before 2030?”, via. a review of 500 published papers on the subject. Its findings are striking (you can read David Strahan’s excellent analysis of it here).  It argues that there is a ’significant risk’ of conventional oil production peaking before 2020, and brands those who argue that it will come some time beyond 2030 as being ‘at best optimistic and at worst implausible’.

ellipse ellipse ellipse as they say in the citation business:

Then today, Ofgem, which regulates electricity and gas markets in the UK, publishes its Project Discovery: energy market scenarios report.  It generates 4 scenarios about where energy prices might go between now and 2020, concluding that its worst case scenario means a 60% increase in energy bills.  In order to be prepared for the decline in UK gas supplies, the shift to low carbon energy generation and the phasing out of nuclear plants, the UK needs to be prepared to invest £200 billion.  Under all of its scenarios, fuel bills will rise, and interestingly, they note that the slower the economic recovery, the less steep the rise in prices.  It is a shot across the bows of what it sees as Government’s keeping of the issue on the long finger, and failure to invest (although it does put nuclear centre stage as part of the solution).

This morning on Radio 4’s Today Programme, shadow energy secretary Greg Clark and energy analyst David Hunter discussed the implications of the Ofgem report with presenter John Humphries.  It was a fascinating piece, mostly along the lines of “how has the Government let this slide for so long”, with Clark trying to make out that the Conservatives have been onto this for years, in spite of the lack of any evidence for this.  When asked what the Tories’ response would be, he replied ‘clean coal’, a technology which Humphries had to point out, doesn’t actually exist yet, a phenomena Clark had tried to sidestep by describing it as ‘pre-commercial’.  No talk, of course, of reducing demand, conservation, rethinking supply chains, of resilience.

:}

Righto, the Brits are so fascinating to read and watch. Kinda like watching Gold Finches feeding upside down.

While the Americans just call each other names…

http://www.thedenverdailynews.com/article.php?aID=6010

Will oil demand soon outgrow supply?

Peak oil believers think so, but oil, gas companies say that theory is bogus

Gene Davis, DDN Staff Writer

Tuesday, October 13, 2009


A “peak oil” conference wrapping up today in Denver is sounding the alarm that oil demand will soon outgrow supply, posing a potential economic threat to the country’s economic well being.

However, most oil and gas companies say the peak oil theory is bogus and that there are plenty of the natural resource to go around.

Mayor John Hickenlooper is among the peak oil believers. The former geologist told conference attendees yesterday that it’s not a question of if the world will reach peak oil ” meaning the time of maximum oil production ” but when it will happen.

“We cannot afford to ignore the issue,” he said in a statement. “By anticipating the expected rapid changes in both supply and demand, we can begin to frame the issue not only as a challenge but also as an economic opportunity.”

But The Colorado Oil and Gas Association, for one, doesn’t think Hickenlooper’s school of thought has much credibility. 

“For more than five decades, various individuals have claimed that the world had reached, or was nearing, peak oil,” said a statement from the group. “With more than 200 new oil discoveries in the last year alone, it’s safe to say that peak oil enthusiasts are every bit as wrong today as they have been for the past 50 years.”

The Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas has been hosting the International Peak Oil Conference at Denver’s Sheraton Hotel since Sunday. The event has featured more than 70 speakers who have talked about “energy, oil, and our future.”

David Bowden, ASPOG executive director, said that after maximum oil production is reached, the United States economy might have difficulties growing without the constant input of steady and inexpensive oil.

As a result, Bowden is urging for people to “conserve, conserve, conserve” and shy away from “our monolithic oil consumption habits.” Although the United States has around 5 percent of the world’s population, the country uses approximately 25 percent of the world’s oil supplies, largely because of automobile usage.

Bowden supports light rail projects like FasTracks instead of building more roads or expanding highways. FasTracks is a multi-billion dollar transit expansion plan to build 122 miles of new commuter rail and light rail.

“Even though FasTracks has its challenges and the system is a bit limited right now, as oil supplies tightens and the prices go up, it will be necessary,” he said.

Critics have continually slammed FasTracks for running behind schedule and over budget.  

“(FasTracks) was such a faulty fiscal plan, it’s inexcusable,” said Jon Caldera of the libertarian Independence Institute earlier this year.

The recession and falling prices at the pump have taken the oil and gas issue out of the headlines. “But when the country pulls out of the recession and starts consuming more oil and growing populations in countries like China and India do the same the issue will become intensified, especially if oil production drops”, Bowden said.

“Anyone who tries to predict the timing and price of oil is engaged in a fools errand,” he said. “But we see the long-term writing on the wall.”

:}

Oh that is so BIBLICAL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_writing_on_the_wall

:}

Geoengineering – Love it or hate it, here are 2 views

Hate it:

http://www.alternet.org/environment/142784/james_lovelock%3A_schemes_to_%27reverse%27_global_warming_could_lead_to_disaster

James Lovelock: Schemes to ‘Reverse’ Global Warming Could Lead to Disaster

By James Lovelock, The Guardian. Posted September 21, 2009.

Better, perhaps, to let the earth look after itself than try to regulate its system through mirrors, clouds and artificial trees.

The idea of serious scientists and engineers gathering to discuss schemes for controlling the world’s climate would a mere 10 years ago have seemed bizarre, or something from science fiction. But now, well into the 21st century, we are slowly and reluctantly starting to realise that global heating is real. We may have cool, wet summers in the UK, but we are fortunate compared with the Inuit, who see their habitat melting, and Australians and Africans who suffer intensifying heat and drought. We should not be surprised that public policy is edging ever nearer to geoengineering, the therapy our scientists are considering for a fevered planet.

Our senior scientific society, the Royal Society, met at the start of the month to launch the report “Geoengineering the Climate” and to hear from its representative scientists. The meeting was hosted by the president, Lord Rees, and the chairman was Professor John Shepherd, who chaired the study group. The goal, as Prof Shepherd explained in the Guardian in April, was to investigate theories of “intervening directly to engineer the climate system, so as to moderate the rise of temperature” and to “separate the real science from the science fiction”.

Geoengineering is about deliberately changing the air, oceans or land surface of the world to offset global heating with the hope of restoring the cooler world we enjoyed in the last century. We are now fairly sure that the Earth has grown hotter by about one degree Celsius as a consequence of our own action in taking away as farmland the forests and other ecosystems that previously acted to keep the Earth cool. We also have increased by 6% the flow of CO2 into the air by burning coal, oil and natural gas. If we started global heating, can we reverse it by engineering?

:}

Or Love it:

http://www.alternet.org/environment/142687/geo-engineering_could_save_the_planet_%C3%A2€%C2%A6_and_in_the_process_sacrifice_the_world_/

Geo-Engineering Could Save the Planet … and in the Process Sacrifice the World

By Jason Mark, Earth Island Journal. Posted September 24, 2009.

Having unintentionally warmed the planet, we may have little choice but to intentionally cool it back down. But at what cost?

Earth is busted. Like a supercomputer whose elaborate code has developed a few bugs, the core operating systems of the planet are frayed: Ocean populations are collapsing, forests are disappearing, soils have become thin. Perhaps most worrisome, the globe’s atmosphere, the ecosystem on which all other ecosystems depend, is overheating. The machinery of life appears to have malfunctioned.

Since the scale of the climate crisis became clear, the strategy for fixing this glitch has focused on remediation. To maintain the atmosphere’s equilibrium, we need to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases. Our chief goal should be to return the climate to something approximating the pre-industrial status quo.

But what if such a return isn’t possible? What if the planet has gone permanently haywire? As the effects of climate change become obvious and global leaders remain unable to halt emissions, a growing number of scientists say we need to begin researching what’s called “geo-engineering” — ways to artificially reduce global temperatures and/or manipulate plants or the oceans to absorb huge amounts of CO2. Having unintentionally warmed the planet, we may have little choice but to intentionally cool it back down.

Even those most interested in geo-engineering say that the idea of deliberately deforming the planet in order to save it from ourselves is, as Stanford University‘s Ken Caldeira told NPR this summer, “scary.” Yet if we shy away from manipulating the whole globe and continue on our present course, we could be left with a burnt Earth unlike anything ever seen. The scientists who are encouraging government-funded research into geo-engineering are driven by a powerful motive: fear. All too aware of the implications of unchecked CO2 emissions — and worried that political systems aren’t moving quickly enough to respond to changes in the planet’s physical systems — these scientists say we may have no other option than to tinker with the sky.

:}

As the atmospheric pressure mounts so will the clamor to DO SOMETHING.

:}