Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study
Ben Webster From: The Times June 10, 2011 3:23PM
ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.
The EPA’s War on Jobs
Coal is from Earth, Lisa Jackson is from mercury
JUNE 13, 2011
Link to Editorial
President Obama’s jobs council will make its first recommendations today on lifting hiring and strengthening the economy. Too bad the message doesn’t seem to be reaching the Administration’s regulators, in particular the Environmental Protection Agency.
Certainly a case can be made for say, kinetic rechargers built into body armor to keep the myriad power hungry devices of the modern combat soldier charged and functioning but wind and solar? Not even useful in home barracks, let alone battlefield conditions. Container-sized mini nukes would certainly be a useful development and they would likely see a lot more disaster relief work than anything else but most of the suggestions look about as useful as feathers on a hippopotamus.
Renewable energy sources a priority for military, says report
Military establishments, notorious for wasteful energy practices, are being drawn to renewable energy development as part of efficiency-increasing strategies, Pike Research said in a report Monday.
“Green” jobs are notoriously the most expensive and least efficient way to encourage employment opportunity, costing more real jobs than they create along the way. As far as corporate welfare recipients and subsidy farmers go, the sooner they disappear from the landscape the better. No sympathy whatsoever.
Green jobs success eludes President Obama
By DARREN SAMUELSOHN | 6/12/11 11:09 PM EDT
President Barack Obama heads to an energy plant in North Carolina on Monday to talk once again about the job-creating power of a green economy.
The catch? Nearly three years into Obama’s presidency, the White House can’t point to much solid evidence that significant numbers of Americans are scoring the green jobs the president has been touting. (Politico)
Wind generators to fight Bonneville policy at US FERC
The Energy Debate: Coal vs. Nuclear
Rutgers researcher finds factors other than global warming and potential for plant accidents figure into Americans’ preferences
Irate Power Companies to Sue Berlin For Damages
Germany’s power companies are preparing to take legal action against the government’s decision to shut down their nuclear power plants. They say the new closure plan is too rigid and will prove more costly to them than the previous nuclear phaseout agreed by a center-left government in 2000. (Spiegel)
Germany turns back to fossil fuel plants
By Stephen Beard
Faced with the dilemma of how to fill the energy gap left by its recent decision to move away from nuclear power, Germany is increasing fossil fuel power generation. (American Public Media)
Italy renewable shares boosted by nuclear vote
Shares of Italian renewable energy companies rose on Monday as a vote against the reintroduction of nuclear power generation in Italy grew increasingly likely. (Reuters)
Killing people with “concern”? Biofuels lead to nearly 200,000 deaths (est) in 2010.
The precautionary principle is exposed again for the insidious mindless posturing that it is.
Biofuel policies push more people into poverty as food prices rise and the poor are forced to spend more of their income on food. In a study published in Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Indur Goklany calculated the additional mortality burden of biofuels policies and found that nearly 200,000 people died in 2010 alone, because of efforts to use biofuels to reduce CO2 emissions.
Bad Government is a killer. (Jo Nova)
Donna Laframboise: How Much Harm To Humans Is OK?
Beware of overzealous environmental regulators
In my latest Health News Digest article, I attack the fear-mongering regulators, who have used cancer as their favorite boogeyman for decades. For far too long, people are our side of the debate have attempted to use science to promote our argument.
However, there are several problems with this…
1. It has almost never worked. Indeed, it hasn’t worked since Silent Spring was published in 1962.
2. ”Science” is in the eye of the beholder, with far too many scientists—especially in academia—being chemophobes themselves.
3. Given the state of public awareness of scientific principles, an appeal to emotions will always win out. Or, as we say in marketing, if the choice is between cerebral or limbic, choose limbic every time! Despite more than 6,000 papers on BPA for example, and its being given a clean bill of health again and again, the fear entrepreneurs continue to use it successfully for fund raising.
Instead of lame calls to “Science,” we should invoke the very same Precautionary Principle always touted by the other side. That is, if a particular widely used chemical is to be effectively banned by the regulators, only to be replaced by some compound with not nearly the same amount of history, the burden of proof that there will be no harm caused by such action is theirs.
Read the complete article. (Shaw’s Eco-Logic)
Fewer French Fried: The Paradox Of Urban (And Global) Warming
Ah, summer in our cities, where the climate is woebegone and the temperature is almost always above normal.
How to Create Carbon Credits – Kill a Camel
The people who brought us pink bats and cash-for-clunkers have a new scheme – we can earn carbon credits by shooting wild camels, humanely of course.
Surely it would be far easier to shoot tame cattle? There are big mobs near all of our northern ports going nowhere.
And if greens have their way and stop all live exports, we can earn heaps more by shooting millions of sheep and goats, humanely of course.
What about those mobs of kangaroos? They burn carbon fuel and emit dreaded carbon dioxide. Why should they be spared when the future of the planet is at stake?
One small problem – what do we do with all those carcasses? Left alone they will release all the carbon sequestered within their bodies within a couple of weeks, thus incurring massive carbon debits.
And who counts the dead camels? To prevent carbon cull fraud the economy will boom with jobs for regulators, inspectors, auditors and prosecutors.
And of course, we must not burn diesel, av-gas or gun powder to do the slaughter, so the hunting must be done from horses using bows and arrows.
And if killing camels earns carbon credits, why can’t cattle, sheep and goat abattoirs also earn them?
More: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/camel-cull-credits.pdf [PDF: 414 KB] (Carbon Sense Coalition)
Climate change should be excluded from curriculum, says adviser
Head of government review says school syllabus needs to ‘get back to the science in science’
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 12 June 2011 22.00 BST
Climate change should not be included in the national curriculum, the government adviser in charge of overhauling the school syllabus in England has said.
Tim Oates, whose wide-ranging review of the curriculum for five- to 16-year-olds will be published later this year, said it should be up to schools to decide whether – and how – to teach climate change, and other topics about the effect scientific processes have on our lives.
In an interview with the Guardian, Oates called for the national curriculum “to get back to the science in science”. “We have believed that we need to keep the national curriculum up to date with topical issues, but oxidation and gravity don’t date,” he said. “We are not taking it back 100 years; we are taking it back to the core stuff. The curriculum has become narrowly instrumentalist.”
His stance marks a turning point in the development of the national curriculum. Oates’ intention is to substantially reduce the national curriculum. Under the previous government, the curriculum expanded to nearly 500 pages. His remarks also show he wants to reverse a shift in emphasis, made under the Labour government, under which teachers were encouraged to place great importance on scientific “issues” and not just scientific knowledge.
Oxfam’s Approach To Food Security Is Broken
Friday, 10 June 2011 07:39 Dean Kleckner, AgWeb blog
If something’s broken, it’s not “the global food system” but rather Oxfam’s approach to food security.
Farmers around the world are feeding more people than ever before in human history. So what does Oxfam, the celebrated advocacy group, have to say about this remarkable achievement?
Six astonishing words: “The global food system is broken.”
Industry begins to count the true cost of ‘climate change’
Heavy industry in Europe faces a crippling bill for global warming, says Christopher Booker.
Utility threat to shutter coal plants fuels EPA battle
By Ben Geman – 06/10/11 09:36 AM ET
Utility powerhouse American Electric Power’s (AEP) claim that looming Environmental Protection Agency rules will force it to shutter five coal-fired power plants is quickly feeding political battles over EPA as House lawmakers ready their return to Capitol Hill next week.
“This announcement is further proof of the devastating economic impacts of Obama’s anti-energy agenda,” said Charlotte Baker, a spokeswoman for House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.), in a statement. (E2 Wire)
The Downside of Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout
Triple price of gas to save planet, climate expert argues
BY MARGARET MUNRO, POSTMEDIA NEWS JUNE 8, 2011
VANCOUVER — Canadians may abhor the rising price of gasoline, but Thomas Stocker suggests the planet might be better off if it soared to “three to four” times its current level.