New
Gang of Flagellants Wants Us To Suffer for Our Energy 'Greed'
by
Vin Suprynowicz
by Vin Suprynowicz
DIGG THIS
Imagine you’re
the head of a big energy outfit – GEM, The Greedy Energy Monopoly.
Your financial guys bring you their analysis of a proposal to build
big new centralized solar panel arrays and strings of windmills
along every mountain ridge, in place of new coal-fired generating
plants:
"We were
kind of surprised, boss, but as we pencil it out, we can actually
generate enough power to meet all our customers’ anticipated needs
for the next 30 years if we go with this solar and wind package,
and at a savings of 25 percent," your accountants inform you.
"The customers have been whining about $200 electric bills;
this would allow us to reduce those bills by 25 percent. Or, in
you prefer, we could reduce their bills by 20 percent, and pocket
the other 5 percent."
You’d have
to be nuts not to go with that plan.
So why do our
energy companies continue to plan and build coal-fired plants?
Because the
above scenario is bogus. It’s a lie. Replacing the bulk of our power
generation with solar and wind and other "green" technologies
may well come to pass in another century (and we’ve got enough coal
to last three centuries while we get it right, so what’s the rush?)
But if they could do the job for less, right now, there’d be private
entrepreneurs racing to get rich by building such facilities behind
every mesquite tree. And there aren’t.
Why?
To understand
the kind of brinksmanship being proposed by this ululating chorus
of manufactured environmental urgency (our air and water are much
cleaner than they were 50 years ago – they can only claim there’s
a crisis by making stuff up), imagine you’re a military commander
in the field. Your force is being pursued by a larger, faster enemy
who’s going to catch up and bring you to battle in a day or two.
But your scouts tell you there’s a large river nearby.
There are two
ways for you to use that river. The more traditional course would
be to get your forces to the other side, lining up in a position
that invites the enemy to attack you by crossing the river, exposing
his men to your withering fire as they attempt to swim or paddle
across.
But there is
a second way to use that river. A desperate general, concerned that
his own men are likely to break and run at the sight of a superior
foe, could put his own men’s BACKS to that river, cutting off all
hope of retreat. "Win or die," he tells his men.
That’s a tactic
of desperation. It risks everything on one roll of the dice – no
chance to withdraw and regroup if things go wrong.
Yet that’s
what the green extremists who now gather to shriek their opposition
to the construction of three new cleaner, high-tech coal-fired generating
plants in Nevada are really asking us to do – abandon both nuclear
and coal (the latter a technology that’s proved "sustainable"
for millennia, whereas you can hardly speak of "sustaining"
something that’s never yet been done on a large scale), telling
the "greedy" energy companies: "We think you’ve been
lying to us. We think you can provide all our energy needs with
wind, solar and geothermal and we think you can do it in just a
couple of years. Do it or die."
All based on
the ginned-up notion that the harmless carbon dioxide generated
by burning fossil fuels – not toxic sulfur fumes, mind you, but
CARBON DIOXIDE – contributes enough to today’s minor, natural, cyclical
global warming that we could really cool the globe by making this
change – while India and China continue to burn all the coal they
want.
This is palpable
nonsense. Not only that, let me make a prediction: When the globe
starts to cool off in answer to natural solar rhythms, as it will,
these same characters will prove theirs was an agenda in search
of a crisis by proposing EXACTLY THE SAME SOLUTIONS to the new perceived
"crisis" of "global cooling"!
What evidence
do they offer – other than carefully crafted rhetoric, "assuming"
we can reduce electrical demand through "greater efficiency"
– that these technologies can do the job in a short time horizon
without massive unforeseen environmental costs, without tripling
our electric bills either directly or through tax subsidies? And
that’s before we allow for delays caused by the inevitable obstructive
lawsuits from these same technological Kervorkians or their "Green"
first cousins, complaining that windmill farms and their new transmission
lines will endanger birds and bugs, about the toxic dangers of vast
new battery farms ...
This comes
very close to choosing a course of action based on late-night radio
conspiracy theories: "The Detroit-Petroleum Combine has an
internal combustion engine that’ll run indefinitely on water, see.
They bought up the patent and they’ve been keeping it a secret because
if it ever got out it would blow the lid off their whole operation.
Nicola Tesla came up with a way to generate unlimited power and
transmit it via radio waves with no environmental costs. He proved
it when he caused that big blast at Tunguska in Siberia in 1908.
So the big power companies had him killed and stole his notes and
hid the whole thing away, see, because if it ever got out ..."
If enemy bombers
were coming closer and closer to knocking out all America’s nuclear
and coal-fired generating plants, threatening to leave us and our
industrial economy paralyzed, the country would go on an emergency
war footing tomorrow and pursue those SOBs till we’d beat the pulp
out of them, even if it took atomic bombs – wouldn’t we?
If al-Qaida
artillery barrages were raining down on American construction sites,
delaying the completion of needed hospitals and highways by years
and driving up the costs of getting those facilities completed,
we’d be in an all-our war to find the forces manning those artillery
batteries, neutralizing them by any means necessary – wouldn’t we?
But let the
"greens" undertake to have the same crippling impact on
our economy by lobbying our Fifth Column lawmakers to pass bizarre
"environmental" mandates based on little more than "Let’s
pretend cars can get 50 miles per gallon without building them of
Reynolds Wrap," or filing lawsuits that delay needed projects
by decades, all because they pretend to be concerned with the fate
of some "threatened" weed or bug they’ve never seen, and
we all just shrug and say "Oh well, nothing to be done"?
Do we really
believe we’re alone on this planet? Has no one else noticed the
so-called "Kyoto Treaty" calls for the Americans and Europeans
to cripple our economies in pursuit of chimerical goals of absolute
environmental "cleanliness" while leaving China and India
and Indonesia free to pollute the world’s atmosphere and oceans
at will till they’ve surpassed us economically?
And we’re supposed
to embrace this agenda out of guilt that it’s so "unfair"
that the United States has 5 percent of the world’s population but
consumes 25 percent of the world’s oil?
(They sell
it to us willingly, you know. What would they do with the stuff
if they didn’t sell it to us – feed it to their camels? We buy it
because we INVENTED ways to refine it and use it that the camel
jockeys never dreamed of. Heck, American and English and Dutch geologists
had to go over and FIND the stuff for them, under agreements to
share the proceeds with us if anything turned up – agreements which
the thieving rascals unilaterally violated as soon as it suited
their fancy.)
Does anyone
think there wouldn’t be some collective chortling at our reversal
of stature if the Indian and Chinese economies grow to dwarf ours,
until Americans have to take ship to those foreign lands and sell
our services as waiters, laundry boys, and common laborers?
Yet we’re to
continue frittering away our lead in accrued wealth and technological
development, pursuing the chimera of perfect environmental purity
while these other smoke-gushing economies race to overtake us –
lulled into docile compliance by the siren song that "Global
warming is proven; our greedy use of carbon fuels is dooming us
to fry on an environmental griddle! We’re so guilty! We must be
punished, punished, punished! We must suffer and sacrifice. NO more
debate can be tolerated! It’s all been proven; the scientists are
unanimous! Something must be done! Surrender your common sense to
the wisdom of the great collective; here’s your hair shirt and your
flail; the Goddess Gaia demands unquestioning obedience and self-flagellation
or we shall all be doomed, doomed, doomed!"
If you found
one of these characters chanting this stuff under his stolen shopping
cart, you’d recommend a change of medication – wouldn’t you?
Yes, direct
solar conversion and other newer forms of power generation (including
micro-nuclear) will take care of our needs, eventually. As with
any investment, the trick is getting the timing right.
Those who lobby
the government to force private industries to ignore their own cost-benefit
analyses are really just trying to inoculate themselves from the
personal consequences of getting the timing wrong.
Instead, we’ll
pay. Their not-so-secret plan to get us to use less energy? Triple
our power bills.
The
correct course for those who believe the horizon of large-scale
wind and solar feasibility now lies within the next 10 to 15 years
is to find some inventors and scientists who are working on such
technologies, invest your life savings and – if you’re proven right
– get rich. Instead, these Gaian religious zealots want to use the
sledgehammer of government to "mandate" that these inventions
should happen faster – like King Canute ordering the tide not to
rise and wet his feet.
And they hope
that if they shriek loudly enough, they can drag us into the surf
along with them.
August
3, 2007
Vin
Suprynowicz [send
him mail] is assistant editorial page editor of the daily Las
Vegas Review-Journal and author of The
Black Arrow.
Copyright
© 2007 Vin Suprynowicz
Vin
Suprynowicz Archives
|