Tag Archives: nuclear energy

Stopping Green Energy 

Posted on by

Author:  R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D.  

The re-election of Donald Trump provides an opportunity to correct the devastating agenda of the green new deal extremists.  Inexpensive and ample supplies of energy are essential to the progress of our economy.  Solar and wind will never produce sufficient reliable energy to fuel a modern society.  Impossible, as the Europeans have found out.

It is very discouraging to realize that many of our elected Republicans believe the man-made climate change hoax and are therefore willing to support things like carbon neutrality.  There is no reliable scientific evidence that man’s consumption of fossil fuels has altered the environment!  The environmental extremists base their scare tactics about manmade global warming on computer models generated by their fellow believers.  The truth is that the earth’s temperature has varied substantially long before there were enough human beings to impact the CO2 levels.  There have been at least eight ice age/warming periods over the earth’s history going back several million years.  We are now in a global warming cycle from the last ice age that occurred over 10,000 years ago.  So the first thing we need to do is to ensure that our lawmakers are not taken in by the climate change extremists.  We also need to stop indoctrinating our children with the man-made climate hoax.

As President Trump has advocated, we need to “drill baby drill” for oil and natural gas, both of which we are fortunate to have an abundant supply.  We also need to return to coal burning plants since we have the technology to ensure that coal is burned efficiently and cleanly;  instead of shipping our coal to China, which is greatly expanding their coal fired plants and doing so with little concern for the environment.  President Trump’s recent announcement of our withdrawal from the globalist so-called Paris Accords which are detrimental to America is a step in the right direction.  Remember, that cheap and abundant energy will enhance our ability to compete with other countries in manufacturing.

All government subsidies and tax incentives for solar, wind and electrical vehicles need to be stopped immediately.  Wind farms off our coast are an environmental hazard that only enriches China.  A recent study conducted by the conservative John Locke Foundation estimates that continued movement towards wind and solar will produce an enormous increase in energy prices in our country.  Not only are wind and solar expensive and produce unreliable energy, but due to their intermittent energy production, extensive battery storage capacity (or more likely backup fossil fuel plants) will still be needed.  Experts have recently predicted that a full implementation of Artificial Intelligence will require a threefold electrical capacity increase nationwide.

The final solution to energy production is nuclear power.  Due to the environmental extremists scare tactics and excessive regulation, there has not been a nuclear power plant built in North Carolina since the Shearon Harris plant near Raleigh was completed in 1987.  This despite the improved safety and ability to produce nuclear power plants of smaller size, which could be located closer to customer demand.  The European Union is planning on increasing their nuclear plants due in large measure to the ineffectiveness of wind and solar.  Currently, France generates over 70% of their electricity from nuclear reactors.

The bottom line is that we need to do away with the move towards wind and solar and go back to the common sense approach of relying on fossil fuels and nuclear power.  If we do not, we will be unable to maintain our economy and grow for the future.  Our conservative lawmakers need to make this happen.

Green Energy Policies Have Consequences

Posted on by

On Friday, PJ Media posted an article about the Swiss government’s winter plans for the Swiss people.

The article reports:

The alpine country — one of the wealthiest in the world — will severely restrict electric vehicles from its roads, according to a Daily Mail report. If the country runs out of power, EVs won’t be allowed out for anything but “essential” travel.

But the restrictions don’t end there.

The contingency plan calls for three levels of energy rationing.

Under the least extreme, most buildings would be limited to 20C (68F) and “people will be asked to limit their washing machines to a maximum of 40C [104F].”

Under the mid-tier, retail stores could find their hours reduced by two each shopping day, many buildings would have their heat limited to 19C (66F), and nightclubs wouldn’t be allowed any heat at all — although given the other restrictions, that point might be moot.

Sports stadiums? Closed. Movie theaters, too.

But the Swiss might not find much relief at home, either. Should the worst come to pass, gaming consoles and streaming services like Netflix will go on the verboten list.

The Swiss generate nearly two-thirds of their energy from hydroelectric sources that produce very little electricity during the winter months when the water is locked up as snow and ice.

Most of the remaining third of their power is produced by nuclear.

Maybe, given that their country is in the friggin’ Alps, they should have switched that ratio around, but no. Instead, the government has decided to eliminate nuclear power altogether.

The question I have after read this is, “Will the people who made these rules be subject to them?” There seems to be a pattern in many countries (including America) that the rules for the average citizen are very different that the rules for the ruling class. As the ruling class tells Americans to reduce their carbon footprint, they travel the globe in private jets. If climate change were truly an emergency (which I believe it is not), shouldn’t we all be required to make equal sacrifices? The fact that we are not all making equal sacrifices should be a clue that there may be something other than climate change at work.

Was This Really The Most Qualified Person?

Posted on by

On Thursday, American Greatness posted an article about the Biden administration’s pick for deputy assistant secretary of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition in the Energy Department’s Office of Nuclear Energy. The choice is Sam Brinton, who according to his profile on an LGBTQ website, has “a dual Master’s degree in engineering systems and nuclear science and engineering from MIT.” That’s nice. He is intellectually qualified. However, there are some things that make me question the choice.

The article reports:

In his spare time, Brinton also enjoys roleplaying as a “pup handler,” and talking about having sex with animals.

As of December 2016, having sex with animals is illegal in 42 states.

The article continues:

His drag queen alter ego is “Sister Ray Dee O’Active,” The National Pulse reported. Brinton is reportedly the son of Southern Baptist missionaries, and claims to be a “survivor of a traumatic and torturous conversion therapy experience.”

Brinton provided a biographical statement to the LGBTQ Religious Archives network that included a story about how he had helped a little boy embrace his inner “princess” at Disneyland when the child saw him sashaying around in stiletto heels with his boyfriend.

This man obviously has some serious psychological issues. There is no way he should be holding an important position in our government.

Bowing To Reality

Posted on by

On Sunday, The Epoch Times posted an article that might indicate that Europe is waking up the pitfalls of ‘green energy.’

The article reports:

The European Union has drafted a proposal that allows consideration for natural gas and nuclear energy to be included within the scope of “green” investments as countries and environmentalists battle over the complicated classification system.

Later this month, the European Commission is expected to suggest recommendations on the environmental criteria needed in order to classify an energy source as “green” and whether projects can be included within the EU’s “sustainable finance taxonomy.” According to draft conclusions viewed by multiple media outlets, the commission has suggested adding gas and nuclear energy to the green mix, resulting in immediate criticism from some governing political parties and environmental activists.

Gas projects would be temporarily labeled green if they were utilized in place of coal and emitted less than 270 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per kilowatt-hour (e/kWh), receive a construction permit before the end of 2030, and plan to switch to a renewable energy source by 2035.

There are a lot of problems with ‘green energy.’ Although solar energy and wind energy seem like a wonderful idea, the chemicals that go into making solar panels and the problem of disposing of wind turbine blades after they are no longer useful need to be considered. Natural gas is extremely clean burning and abundant. Nuclear energy with good safety measures is also reliable and safe. At some point we are going to have to admit that green energy alone will not provide the power needed to run our civilization.

The article concludes:

“Taking account of scientific advice and current technological progress as well as varying transition challenges across member states, the Commission considers there is a role for natural gas and nuclear as a means to facilitate the transition toward a predominantly renewable-based future,” the European Commission said in a Jan. 1 statement.

EU advisers have contended that gas projects shouldn’t be given green labels unless the amount of emitted carbon dioxide is less than 100 grams per e/kWh, failing which there could be disastrous consequences for the climate. Nuclear power, likewise, can have adverse effects on the environment, especially when it comes to the disposal of radioactive waste.

“By including them … the commission risks jeopardizing the credibility of the EU’s role as a leading marketplace for sustainable finance,” European Greens President Philippe Lamberts said, Reuters reported.

Several European countries that operate nuclear plants, such as France, want the bloc to consider the nuclear option to be included in the so-called taxonomy to make it eligible for green financing.

In September 2014, I posted an article detailing what happened when Spain decided to  convert to green energy. What happened in Spain should have been enough to encourage the EU to include natural gas and nuclear energy in their future energy plans.