November 5, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

In October 2011, the Alberta Government launched a massive advertising campaign promoting the idea that billions of dollars of tax revenues and increased electricity rates (which climbed in October to about 12.5 cents per kWh for residential consumers) are needed to achieve “carbon” capture and sequestration (that is: “storage”), in an attempt to have Alberta do its part in regulating global climate trends.

First of all, the “carbon” in carbon capture and sequestration is a misnomer, because what is supposed to be captured is not carbon but carbon-dioxide, plain, old CO2, a benign, harmless trace gas that is essential to all life on Earth and without which life as we know it would not exist on Earth.

Atmospheric CO2 levels have been measured regularly and systematically since 1959.  Some people, some of whom are scientists, assert that global temperature trends are being affected and even controlled and driven by atmospheric CO2 levels. That assertion is not supported by hard evidence.  At best, nothing more can be said about it than that it is a theory for which the science is not settled.  It is supported only by computer models.

Computer models will say what they are designed to say, and the adage about computers, “GIGO” (Garbage In, Garbage Out), applies with a vengeance to computer models.  No scientific evidence exists that proves that atmospheric CO2 levels are a controlling factor in global temperature trends.

On the other hand, a good many scientific facts relating to CO2 have been established and are supported by real world measurements, such as,

1. There is no correlation between rising temperature trends and increasing CO2 levels.
2. In 1998, the global temperature trend levelled off and can even be said to have fallen a bit, while atmospheric CO2 increased since then to about 392 parts per million or about four hundredth of one percent of the atmosphere.
3. Man-made CO2 emissions comprise only about three percent of total atmospheric CO2.  The other 97 percent of atmospheric CO2 originate from natural sources.
4. Plants will stop growing when atmospheric CO2 reaches a level of 200 parts per million and will begin to die off when the CO2 level falls to 150 parts per million.
5. The rising CO2 levels during the last thirty years have helped along the greening of the planet and increased agricultural productivity (e.g.; by about 25 percent in China).  In reality, increased levels of atmospheric CO2 have helped substantially to alleviate world hunger.

The truth about CO2 emissions is not wanted by those who spend our money.  Indeed, some people try to oppress it!  Good luck with that.  The advent of the Internet has made it practically impossible to suppress the truth, but the Alberta Government’s CCS propaganda campaign makes it obvious that good, old propaganda tactics are alive and well.  There are just fewer people now who will be willing to swallow government-sponsored lies than there were, say, during the Hitler era.

John O’Sullivan: Popular Skeptic Writer Fired for Exposing Carbon Climate Fraud

Friends, I write to announce my employment with my publishers, Suite101, was  terminated today without prior notice or explanation and all my articles  published over a two-year period with them ar….(Full Story)

In  case you missed the link to it in John O’Sullivan’s article, the  observations offered here are fairly straight-forward and easy to  understand:

Japanese Satellites say 3rd World Owes CO2 Reparations to The West

Well, in a somewhat bizarre twist, it looks like I must reconsider my opposition to CO2 reparations. The notion that the evil sources of CO2 “pollution” must pay those who are lowering the planet’s CO2 levels….(Full Story)

So,  guess what! If we believe that man-made CO2 emissions are the cause of  catastrophic global warming, then let’s do the best thing possible to  ameliorate the problem.  Let’s make sure that the underdeveloped and  developing nations acquire the same living standard as achieved by the  developed nations, and the problem will go away all by itself.

However, if anyone wishes to put his money where his mouth is with his climate change superstitions and wants to spend billions of dollars implementing measures for amelioration of catastrophic global warming, let him do it with his own money, at the source and not here where it will do no good.  However, if he wants to spend that much money to do some good for humanity where he lives, let him spend it on fixing things that need fixing, such as our health-care system.

Posted in Propaganda debunked, Censorship, Shell CCS Project, Corruption & Fraud, Electric Energy Prices, Community & Industry, Climate Change, Emission Incidents & Issues | Print | No Comments »

September 28, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Good points, not all are true, at least not at the level of detail that is feared and castigated, but, ultimately, that is what metering will in the end evolve into:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JNFr_j6kdI&feature=youtu.be

Posted in Civil Rights, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

July 16, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

The king wears no clothing, but it is even worse that he can’t afford to pay for being made to look like a naked fool.

High Costs Bury AEP’s Carbon Burial Plan
Posted on July 15, 2011 by News Staff

American Electric Power has scuttled its pilot project to bury CO2 from its Mountaineer coal-burning plant in Red Haven WVa. The original projected cost, before unanticipated overruns, was $668 million. About 1/3 of the gross output from a plant would be required to capture, compress and inject the CO2 into the ground, generating an automatic 50% increase in the cost of net output, before conversion costs.

“The AEP plan, announced with much fanfare in 2009, marked the first time that carbon dioxide was to be captured and buried at a US power plant.”

The pilot system would only have captured 110,000 tons of CO2 per year, out of a total of 7.9 to 9.8 million tons per year from the plant. The company, headquartered in Columbus, “cited difficulties in getting state regulators to approve charging customers for the costs of carbon capture.”

From this morning’s Columbus (OH) Dispatch: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2011/07/15/high-costs-bury-aeps-carbon-plan.html?sid=101

______________
It is a good thing that the people that made the decision to scuttle the AEP CCS project came to their senses. A country that is at the verge of bankruptcy should not waste one-third of a power plant’s energy production to bury even a fraction of the beneficial natural fertilizer that plant exhausts into the air, fertilizer that is essentially free of cost.

The economics of the decision to scuttle the CCS project are sound and make sense. It boggles the mind why anyone in their right mind and not blinded by harmful environmental fanaticism ever made a move to spend even a single dollar on such a hare-brained scheme.

The situation with Shell’s CSS project in Alberta is no different with respect to it being a hare-brained scheme by environmental fanatics and government agencies catering to them holding Shell over a barrel. Don’t blame Shell for the idea that blowing CO2 down Mother Earth’s derriere at a billion-dollars a shot is a thing that Alberta consumers must fund. It is a political decision which Shell supports only because it cannot lose on it on account of taxpayers and consumers footing the bill.

I you think that those observations are not substantiated by facts, then you better have a look at the comments that were posted at wattsupwiththat.com in relation to the AEP CSS scheme.

Posted in Climate Craziness, The New World Order, Shell CCS Project, Corruption & Fraud, Community & Industry, Electric Energy Prices, Emission Incidents & Issues | Print | No Comments »

June 13, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Some recent energy articles of interest

By John Droz, Jr.

An interesting article appeared in a wind industry trade journal: “Is Wind Energy The New Wedge Issue For Conservatives?”
( http://www.nawindpower.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.7757 ).

Some of the comments are: “The acrimony is being powered by a combination of small-government conservatives who see wind and other renewables as a waste of money and by others who consider wind a technology that will never be as effective as oil, coal or natural gas.” In other words people are objecting to wind energy as it is expensive and ineffective. Imagine that!

And there is this from the comptroller of Texas (a very pro-wind state): “wind is an expensive boondoggle that does not produce jobs”.

Note that the industry does not respond with proof that these positions are wrong, but rather tries to dismiss them as being political…
—————————–

A wonderful assessment of wind energy by an energy expert http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2011/05/26/fitting-wind-onto-the-electricity-grid-part-2/ .

A VERY promising development where New Jersey is dropping out of the RGGI program http://www.atinstitute.org/ati-statement-on-gov-chris-christies-plans-to-remove-new-jersey-from-rggi/ . Hopefully this will be a wake-up call to the other member states.

Renewables Laws Changing is a positive development compared to the prior RPS mandates
http://www.renewablesbiz.com/article/11/05/renewables-laws-changing .

Some good comments by the governor of Maine about a more sensible position on renewables
http://waldo.villagesoup.com/column/columnpost/weekly-radio-address/400386 .

A new MIT study has some unique perspectives on the economics of wind energy http://econ-www.mit.edu/files/6317 .

“Oil ‘subsidy’ and ‘tax breaks’ nonsense” gives a superior overview to this contentious issue:
http://familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.9598/pub_detail.asp

“The Politics of Alternative Energy 1: The Myth of Viable Industrial-scale Renewable Energy”:
“‘Success is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm.’ Winston Churchill’s dictum could have been coined for the green advocates of the renewable energy revolution; a revolution that demonstrates a thorough-going disconnect between the political rhetoric and a grasp of the physics and economics vital to energy realism.” http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm/7616/The-Politics-of-Alternative-Energy-1–The-Myth-of-Viable-Industrial-scale-Renewable-Energy

“Inconvenient Truths about Renewable Energy”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703421204576327410322365714.html?KEYWORDS=energy#printMode .

Another Real Estate professional speaks out saying that wind projects can bring down home values 25 to 40 percent — for as much as 2 miles away: http://www.bayshorebroadcasting.ca/news_item.php?NewsID=35521 .

In a fascinating development a Spanish judge orders a wind project to be dismantled
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/18/wind-farm-ordered-dismantled/ .

“NY Wind: Much Ado About So Little” http://www.windaction.org/faqs/31912 .

One of the key facts to focus on is that there is no such thing as wind energy by itself. This article makes that very point
http://canadianenergyissues.com/2010/12/11/wind-power-is-gas-power-and-comes-with-pollution/ .

The Australian government is revisiting the wind acoustic issue. The good news is that some of the presenters at their discussion are actually qualified scientists who contend that there are serious human consequences to wind development. See http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2011/june-6-2011-645-pm-ny-city-time/ .

Green Energy costs 1500 jobs http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/247946/EU-push-for-green-energy-costs-another-1-500-jobs .

Why do we need to choose between nuclear and renewables — we don’t:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/may/27/why-choose-nuclear-renewable-energy .

“Everything you’ve heard about fossil fuels may be wrong” talks extensively about wind energy
http://www.salon.com/news/env/energy/?story=/politics/war_room/2011/05/31/linbd_fossil_fuels .

A good letter about Yucca mountain and the US economic benefits of nuclear energy http://tinyurl.com/3pcmyrk .

Some recent global warming articles of interest —

“Former ‘alarmist’ scientist says Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) based in false science”
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/15/former-alarmist-scientist-says-anthropogenic-global-warming-agw-based-on-false-science/ .

“Germany’s green government advisors admit frankly that decarbonization can only be achieved by the limitation of democracy - both nationally and internationally.” http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article13396336/Wir-rutschen-Hals-ueber-Kopf-in-die-Oekodiktatur.html .

A fine discussion of Patrick Moore and the religion of environmentalism
http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2011/5/the-personal-costs-of-spurning-green-misanthropy .

“The Global Warming Doctrine is Not a Science” (Vaclav Klaus): http://www.klaus.cz/clanky/2830 .

Thank you for your support.

john droz jr.,
physicist & environmental advocate

Posted in Electric Energy Prices, The New World Order, Energy Newsletter, Energy Issues, Alternative Energy Sources, Fines & Penalties, Climate Change, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

April 27, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

The Stuart Young wind report, partly funded by the environmental organization  John Muir Trust, is another item you should add as an objective source of information that is critical of wind energy ( http://www.jmt.org/news.asp?s=2&nid=JMT-N10561 ). It shows, yet again, that wind energy is a high cost, low benefit option, and that industry claims are rarely met. Kudos to the John Muir Trust which has been a rare voice of reason in the cacophony of self-serving political noise coming from the environmental community.

_________________
Note by folc.ca: The cited report states: “At the end of the period studied, the connected capacity of wind power was over 2500MW so the expectation is that the wind network will produce, on average, 750MW of energy. In fact, it’s delivering far less than everyone’s expectations. The total wind capacity metered now is 3226MW but at 3a.m. on Monday 28th March, the total output was 9MW.”

That is born out by similar observations in Alberta.  For instance, during much of the cold spell during the week of Feb. 27 - Mar. 5, 2011, a week during which record cold temperature occurred in Alberta, of the nominal wind-power generating capacity of 777MW in Alberta, 0MW to 2MW were being produced.

You can observe current wind power generation in Alberta.

“A Reality Check for Wind Energy Investors” is a good article written by an energy experienced attorney and CPA. Read through the comments and his good responses to those: http://seekingalpha.com/article/262050-a-reality-check-for-wind-power-investors.

“Major wind farm canceled over FWS bird strike concerns”

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/04/06/xcel-windpower-dispute/

A good (very short) New Scientist video about how turbines kill bats http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRqu4WiLQfk&hd=1. Combine that with this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/8419796/Wind-turbines-hit-bat-populations.html.

What happens when fantasies like wind energy collide with reality? http://tinyurl.com/3ua72xe.

Two more states’ RPS mandates have been studied and found seriously wanting:

1 - Ohio http://www.atinstitute.org/study-ohio’s-alternative-energy-mandates-will-keep-its-economy-in-a-slump/, and

2 - Minnesota http://www.atinstitute.org/study-minnesota’s-renewable-energy-mandate-will-damage-state-economy-with-little-to-no-benefit-to-environment/.

A very worthwhile radio interview with activists in Minnesota http://tinyurl.com/3u494h7.

An interesting article about how wind turbines are no longer all the rage in [the Netherlands] http://www.dutchnews.nl/features/2011/04/trouw_wind_turbines_unpopular.php.

This is very good news, from a credible source: “The US Will Build Five Nuclear Reactors by 2020”  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-04/u-s-may-build-five-new-nuclear-reactors-by-2020-new-energy-finance-says.html.

Some recent global warming articles of interest —

900+ Peer Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism about AGW http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html.

An organization’s commendable efforts to have constructive, non-partisan solutions to global warming and energy issues http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=380&Itemid=108.

“Research on Forecasting for the Manmade Global Warming Alarm” http://www.forecastingprinciples.com/images/stories/pdf/ags2011congress.pdf

Bill O’Reilly talks about proposed US government cuts, especially the money for “Climate Control” http://tinyurl.com/3rowyg3.

Supreme Court Hears the extremely important CO2 Emission Case http://tinyurl.com/3rwcdjw.

A recent article of general interest —

A short video talking about the debt situation with the US government http://www.youtube.com/embed/VtVbUmcQSuk

Thank you for your support.

john droz jr.,

physicist & environmental advocate

Posted in Energy Newsletter, Wildlife, Energy Issues, Alternative Energy Sources, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

April 11, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Thanks to wattsupwiththat.com

New gasoline engine design has 4x efficiency of pistons

Posted on April 11, 2011 by Anthony Watts

This looks promising. It is basically a continuous combustion wave turbine. While not super powerful in this early design and not intended to replace a V-8 it can be brought to market for a hybrid vehicle application soon, according to the researcher. See the video below. While they’ve got a focus on CO2 for the usual reasons, I’ll take increased efficiency any day.

Schematic model of a wave disk engine, showing combustion and shockwaves within the channels. Source: Michigan State University.

Researchers from Michigan State University have been awarded $2.5 million from the Department of Energy’s ARPA-E program to complete its prototype development of a new gasoline-fueled wave disc engine and electricity generator that promises to be five times more efficient than traditional auto engines in electricity production, 20% lighter, and 30% cheaper to manufacture.
Continue reading →

Posted in Innovations, Energy Issues, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

March 15, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

From facebook:

Lorne Gunter

The Alberta government is passing bills to make it harder for landowners to resist powerlines being built across their property or to go to court to get compensation. It’s a shameful attack on property rights that threatens the freedom of all Albertans.

Bill an attack on everyone’s freedom

www2.canada.com

The online source for Edmonton news, business, sports, entertainment, classified ads, horoscopes, weather, local news and more.

Posted in Civil Rights, Energy Issues, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

March 1, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

It is cold today.  In central Alberta, at Elk Island National Park, the source of the “local” official temperature values that are being shown for the communities of Andrew, Lamont, Chipman, Mundare and Bruderheim, the temperature reading at 9 a.m. was -39°C.  At the same time, 14km away from Elk Island Park, our thermometer in our backyard in Bruderheim showed -28.5°C.

The winds were slight, about 1-2 kmh.

It will stay cold for some time. It will also most likely snow a bit within the next few days.

There will not be much wind, which is a bad thing for those who have the illusion that wind power is a good thing and that it will be available when they need it most.

(Click on image to see source.  That web page is being updated every two minutes.)

That means that, although of the total Alberta generating capacity a full 5.8% is supposed to be derived from wind turbines, at 11:20 am only 0.022%  or 2.2 hundredth of one percent were being generated from wind power.

The reality of wind power is that a lot of power stations right now are working all-out to produce the increased power required due to the extremely cold weather and are being fueled by natural gas at peak prices, probably at a cost of about $0.07kWh, which means that the cost to consumers will be in the order of about $0.20 to $0.70kWh right now.  Yes, regardless of what rate you pay for what you use right now, the cost of a kWh is around $0.20 to $0.70 right at this moment, and that cost needs to be paid.

So how cold is it in all honesty where you live?  You still have to look up the thermometer in your back yard to get the correct answer for that.  Our thermometer says it is -28.5°C right now (at 9 a.m.) in Bruderheim, not -38°C, and that is a reading that is taken at some distance from the walls of our house, as those readings would be a bit “warmer” yet. as they would reflect more heat radiated by the house.

Many people watch the news to catch up on the weather forecast, or they check the Weather Channel on TV.  Few people take advantage of another feature that is available on the Internet, which feature will tell you everything you wish to know about the weather, without having to have it read to you by someone whose job it is to read it to you so that they can use that as a means to show you a bunch of commercials.

If you are happy with knowing the forecast trend (and historical weather trends many years into the past) at a level of accuracy that the pilots using the Edmonton Municipal Airport rely on, then here is a link to weather information at a glance, without commercials, a link you want to bookmark:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=weather+forecast+Edmonton

The source of the information upon which the information at that link is based is the Edmonton Municipal Airport.

And by the way, is it getting warmer, as Al Gore and David Suzuki are threatening?  Not on your life:

In the mean-time, the makers of wind turbines, such as General Electric, Siemens and anyone else who is reaping copious profits from the climate craze are laughing all the way to the bank — and we pay.

Posted in Climate Craziness, Propaganda debunked, Corruption & Fraud, Alternative Energy Sources, Community & Industry | Print | 1 Comment »

February 5, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

The Globe and Mail

A little town on the oil sands

GORDON PITTS

Chipman, Alta.— From Saturday’s Globe and Mail

Published Friday, Feb. 04, 2011 6:30PM EST

Last updated Friday, Feb. 04, 2011 7:35PM EST

Time moves slowly in Chipman, Alta., where the ancient hotel jukebox plays Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar as old guys talk over beers about what it’s like working in Fort Mac at 40-below. You can order a hefty helping of burger and fries with a Coke and still get a fistful of change from a $10 bill….

As Alberta braces for the next wave of growth, it is hoping for a sustainable future, and nowhere more than in little towns on the periphery that tried to catch the tail of the last boom, before the global economy suffered a stroke. Now in Chipman, and nearby places like Lamont, Bruderheim and Redwater, they’re hoping for a second chance at the last chance – and they hope this time it’s for real….(Full Story)

Posted in Town of Bruderheim, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

January 14, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

There have been warnings before this, but as the article identified farther down shows, Saskatchewan now, too, finds that CO2 injected underground leaks to the surface, but why should anyone be surprised?  Blowing CO2 down Mother Earth’s derriere is not a good idea.

In the case of the Shell CCS Project in Alberta, it is not even done to increase oil production.  Shell will do it for no other reason than to use up money (a billion dollars of taxpayer money) to alleviate superstitious hype and hysteria.  Shell intends to do it in Alberta so as to appease bureaucratic pressure fueled by political expediency.  Not only that, but Shell’s “solution” is a condition for receiving the operating permit for their Scottford Upgrader Project.  Shell would surely not bother with their CCS Project if they would not be pressured into it.  Still, why not?  It is the taxpayers who will be paying the lion’s share of the cost.  That is “free” money, isn’t it?

The Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITION

Land fizzing like soda pop: farmer says CO2 injected underground is leaking

By: Bob Weber and Jennifer Graham, The Canadian Press

Posted: 01/11/2011 10:22 AM

A Saskatchewan farm couple whose land lies over the world’s largest carbon capture and storage project says greenhouse gases seeping from the soil are killing animals and sending groundwater foaming to the surface like shaken soda pop.

The gases were supposed to have been injected permanently underground.

Cameron and Jane Kerr own nine quarter-sections of land above the Weyburn oilfield in eastern Saskatchewan. They released a consultant’s report Tuesday that links high concentrations of carbon dioxide in their soil to 6,000 tonnes of the gas injected underground every day by energy giant Cenovus (TSX:CVE) in an attempt to enhance oil recovery and fight climate change….(Full Story)

A couple of the comments provided by readers of the article identify that CO2 is an essential plant food and that the Earth is currently in a CO2 dearth, which is correct, as plant growth will shut down when the atmospheric CO2 level drops to 150 ppm or less.  However, the vast majority of the comments are not confidence-inspiring and indicate an astounding lack knowledge about the role of CO2 in the environment.

Lack of knowledge is of course the reason why the proponents of environmental alarmism can get away with pulling the wool over people’s eyes.

Thanks to wattsupwiththat.com for the tip on this article.  If you wish to gain a realistic understanding of what is involved, don’t bother reading the reader comments at the Winnipeg Free Press, but read instead the comments at wattsupwiththat.com.  See for instance this exchange at wattsupwiththat.com:

R. Gates says:

January 11, 2011 at 11:08 am

I’m skeptical that CO2 could kill any animals as the effect would be logarithmic and would amount to very little effect even at high concentrations. I would look toward solar or ocean influences…it’s natural variation.

REPLY: You also aren’t very good at looking beyond your nose:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/27/quote-of-the-week-36-carbon-sequestrations-fatal-flaw/

CO2 is of course heavier than air, the gravel pit [in Weyburn] makes a perfect trap for small animals and unsuspecting humans.

Read up on Lake Nyos and Lake Kivu. Note the pictures of the dead animals here.

Then tell us again how CO2 in high concentrations leaking out of the ground aren’t a problem. CO2 bubbling out of the ground from any source, be it natural or sequestered, will find any low spots on the surface, and any living things in that low spot have the potential to be killed by asphyxiation. Even something as simple as making wine can kill you if you allow the CO2 to collect around you. It only takes 8% air concentration to kill you in about 10 minutes. See this hazmat source.

However, I predict you’ll try to save face and come up with some lame excuse as to why your version of “no worries” is right and we are wrong to be concerned.

-Anthony

It will without a doubt be interesting to watch for what will happen next, but it seems to me that Richard Courtney, a frequent commenter at wattsupwiththat.com, has a good idea on what to do about cheap and practical CO2 disposal if that should ever be necessary.  In the meantime, until the necessity for that arises, if it ever does, why not just release CO2 into the air? After all, it does wonders for increasing agricultural productivity, the greening of the Earth and solving world hunger. We would save a lot of money that way, and no one would have to worry about anyone getting killed by it.

Posted in Shell CCS Project, Taxes, Propaganda debunked, Community & Industry, Pollution: Health Issues | Print | No Comments »