PDA

View Full Version : Obama's Energy Bill



trane
06-25-2009, 07:08 PM
There is no doubt energy prices will be going up if this passes. With everything else thats going on now I would think there would be other things to worry about instead of spending this much time trying to fix something that may not need fixed or even couldn't be fixed. I am all for finding better ways but forcing the issue at this time seems stupid and expensive.

This is a good read on the bill.
http://www.heritage.org/research/energyandenvironment/wm2438.cfm

Here is a story that I thought was worth sharing.

Historic parallels in our time: the killing of cattle -vs- carbon

From our perspective as a modern society, the actions of the Xhosa would seem foolhardy, even insane. First let me say, I’m not at all against alternate energy, or improved or even different technology. Heck, I drive an electric car myself and have done two solar power projects. But Waxman-Markey, if enacted, will be the equivalent of killing all our cattle at once. It took us over 100 years to get where we are now, we can’t expect change overnight, it must be gradual.

If NASA’s James Hansen can be an advocate, then I may as well suggest that you send this story to your elected federal representatives and to your local letters to the editor, as is our right in the US Democracy constititional republic – Anthony

Death of a Civilization

by David Deming



Over the past several years we have learned that small groups of people can engage in mass suicide. In 1978, 918 members of the Peoples’ Temple led by Jim Jones perished after drinking poisoned koolaid. In 1997, 39 members of the Heaven’s Gate cult died after drugging themselves and tieing plastic bags around their heads. Unfortunately, history also demonstrates that it is possible for an entire civilization to commit suicide by intentionally destroying the means of its subsistence.

In the early nineteenth century, the British colonized Southeast Africa. The native Xhosa resisted, but suffered repeated and humiliating defeats at the hands of British military forces. The Xhosa lost their independence and their native land became an English colony. The British adopted a policy of westernizing the Xhosa. They were to be converted to Christianity, and their native culture and religion was to be wiped out. Under the stress of being confronted by a superior and irresistible technology, the Xhosa developed feelings of inadequacy and inferiority. In this climate, a prophet appeared.

In April of 1856, a fifteen-year-old girl named Nongqawuse heard a voice telling her that the Xhosa must kill all their cattle, stop cultivating their fields, and destroy their stores of grain and food. The voice insisted that the Xhosa must also get rid of their hoes, cooking pots, and every utensil necessary for the maintenance of life. Once these things were accomplished, a new day would magically dawn. Everything necessary for life would spring spontaneously from the earth. The dead would be resurrected. The blind would see and the old would have their youth restored. New food and livestock would appear in abundance, spontaneously sprouting from the earth. The British would be swept into the sea, and the Xhosa would be restored to their former glory. What was promised was nothing less than the establishment of paradise on earth.

Nongqawuse told this story to her guardian and uncle, Mhlakaza. At first, the uncle was skeptical. But he became a believer after accompanying his niece to the spot where she heard the voices. Although Mhlakaza heard nothing, he became convinced that Nongqawuse was hearing the voice of her dead father, and that the instructions must be obeyed. Mhlakaza became the chief prophet and leader of the cattle-killing movement.

News of the prophecy spread rapidly, and within a few weeks the Xhosa king, Sarhili, became a convert. He ordered the Xhosa to slaughter their cattle and, in a symbolic act, killed his favorite ox. As the hysteria widened, other Xhosa began to have visions. Some saw shadows of the resurrected dead arising from the sea, standing in rushes on the river bank, or even floating in the air. Everywhere that people looked, they found evidence to support what they desperately wanted to be true.

The believers began their work in earnest. Vast amounts of grain were taken out of storage and scattered on the ground to rot. Cattle were killed so quickly and on such an immense scale that vultures could not entirely devour the rotting flesh. The ultimate number of cattle that the Xhosa slaughtered was 400,000. After killing their livestock, the Xhosa built new, larger kraals to hold the marvelous new beasts that they anticipated would rise out of the earth. The impetus of the movement became irresistible.

The resurrection of the dead was predicted to occur on the full moon of June, 1856. Nothing happened. The chief prophet of the cattle-killing movement, Mhlakaza, moved the date to the full moon of August. But again the prophecy was not fulfilled.

The cattle-killing movement now began to enter a final, deadly phase, which its own internal logic dictated as inevitable. The failure of the prophecies was blamed on the fact that the cattle-killing had not been completed. Most believers had retained a few cattle, chiefly consisting of milk cows that provided an immediate and continuous food supply. Worse yet, there was a minority community of skeptical non-believers who refused to kill their livestock.

The fall planting season came and went. Believers threw their spades into the rivers and did not sow a single seed in the ground. By December of 1856, the Xhosa began to feel the pangs of hunger. They scoured the fields and woods for berries and roots, and attempted to eat bark stripped from trees. Mhlakaza set a new date of December 11 for the fulfillment of the prophecy. When the anticipated event did not occur, unbelievers were blamed.

The resurrection was rescheduled yet again for February 16, 1857, but the believers were again disappointed. Even this late, the average believer still had three or four head of livestock alive. The repeated failure of the prophecies could only mean that the Xhosa had failed to fulfill the necessary requirement of killing every last head of cattle. Now, they finally began to complete the killing process. Not only cattle were slaughtered, but also chickens and goats. Any viable means of sustenance had to be destroyed. Any cattle that might have escaped earlier killing were now slaughtered for food.

Serious famine began in late spring of 1857. All the food was gone. The starving population broke into stables and ate horse food. They gathered bones that had lay bleaching in the sun for years and tried to make soup. They ate grass. Maddened by hunger, some resorted to cannibalism. Weakened by starvation, family members often had to lay and watch dogs devour the corpses of their spouses and children. Those who did not die directly from hunger fell prey to disease. To the end, true believers never renounced their faith. They simply starved to death, blaming the failure of the prophecy on the doubts of non-believers.

By the end of 1858, the Xhosa population had dropped from 105,000 to 26,000. Forty to fifty-thousand people starved to death, and the rest migrated. With Xhosa civilization destroyed, the land was cleared for white settlement. The British found that those Xhosa who survived proved to be docile and useful servants. What the British Empire had been unable to accomplish in more than fifty years of aggressive colonialism, the Xhosa did to themselves in less than two years.

Western civilization now stands on the brink of repeating the experience of the Xhosa. Since the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the late eighteenth century, Europe and North America have enjoyed the greatest prosperity ever known on earth. Life expectancy has doubled. In a little more than two hundred years, every objective measure of human welfare has increased more than in all of previous human history.

But Western Civilization is coasting on an impetus provided by our ancestors. There is scarcely anyone alive in Europe or America today who believes in the superiority of Western society. Guilt and shame hang around our necks like millstones, dragging our emasculated culture to the verge of self-immolation. Whatever faults the British Empire-builders may have had, they were certain of themselves.

Our forefathers built a technological civilization based on energy provided by carbon-based fossil fuels. Without the inexpensive and reliable energy provided by coal, oil, and gas, our civilization would quickly collapse. The prophets of global warming now want us to do precisely that.

Like the prophet Mhlakaza, Al Gore promises that if we stop using carbon-based energy, new energy technologies will magically appear. The laws of physics and chemistry will be repealed by political will power. We will achieve prosperity by destroying the very means by which prosperity is created.

While Western Civilization sits confused, crippled with self-doubt and guilt, the Chinese are rapidly building an energy-intensive technological civilization. They have 2,000 coal-fired power plants, and are currently constructing new ones at the rate of one a week. In China, more people believe in free-market economics than in the US. Our Asian friends are about to be nominated by history as the new torchbearers of human progress.

May 13, 2009

David Deming [send him mail] is associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma.

Copyright © 2009 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

lanceonthejob
06-26-2009, 02:01 PM
It's about time the price of energy went up.
Too cheap, for too long.

Need to cut-back consumption, while maintaining ...and YES, strive to improve the quality of life.

One reason - the energy consumption costs do not reflect the REAL cost, as it pertains to mitigating all impacts on the economy and the environment that are due to the use of the energy in the first place.
(just like potable water, personnal computers, etc.)

...Last time I checked, we are all a part of the economy AND the environment.
Time to stop messing around - and FIX BOTH.

NEOCONs tend to disagree - just like their entire economic 'platform' - no real out-of-box thinking going on there, folks.

duckman373
06-26-2009, 02:23 PM
I think we should test it out first in Illinois for a few years and see how it goes.

mrs reb77
06-26-2009, 02:27 PM
Illinois is on the brink of raising their personal income tax. Decision has to be made by Tuesday if I recall or else they're starting to cut services.

lanceonthejob
06-26-2009, 02:29 PM
Oh wait - yup, a 10% inc. tax cut will fix everything.
Then to be followed 1-year later by a hidden 15% tax increase.

a.k.a. - Reagan Political Mind Control Manual, et al.



I forgot.

jpsmith1cm
06-26-2009, 02:34 PM
Why should we pay more for energy when we don't have to?

We have plenty of oil on American soil that we can drill for. We don't need to buy Middle Eastern oil from terrorists.

trane
06-26-2009, 06:10 PM
Why should we pay more for energy when we don't have to?

We have plenty of oil on American soil that we can drill for. We don't need to buy Middle Eastern oil from terrorists.


If this passes having our own oil will not make any difference. This is a step toward eliminating oil before a cost effective replacement is found. This bill is not going to magically make an alternate energy source just appear but is going to cost everyone until it does. Minds are working hard on this and who ever comes up with the answer will be rich. This bill is not going to make the brains of engineer's any smarter and will not make a solution come any quicker.

The second prong is cap and trade. With cap and trade, absolute limits on total emissions of greenhouse gases are established. Before those in a covered sector can emit a greenhouse gas, they need to have the ration coupons (also known as pollution permits or allowances) for each ton emitted. Because the ration coupons will have a value, and therefore a cost, cap and trade becomes a tax on fossil fuels and the energy they generate.

jerryd_2008
06-26-2009, 06:25 PM
Why should we pay more for energy when we don't have to? ...

I am no way a vicious tree-huger, but coal plants do not pay for the damage they cause. Forget CO2. They spit out millions of pounds of ash, lead, radiation, etc. due to the million tons of coal or more each burns every year. Why can't we follow France (ugh, did I say that!) and Japan and get some next-generation nuclear plants in place?

trane
06-26-2009, 06:51 PM
I think there needs to be a little more time for the people of this country to understand what this is going to do. Many including Pelosi are pushing this hard but you have to wonder why. Do a search and see if she may profit from this if it passes. If your looking for an investment natural gas would be at the top of the list if this passes.

fixacr
06-26-2009, 07:07 PM
Rule of liberalism #5- The cure for every problem is government intervention and/or a tax increase, even when the problem was caused by government intervention and/or a tax increase.

It appears that the current administration is trying to use government intervention to create a crisis that you can bet they will then attempt to solve by more intervention.

I have heard that theoretically a fire can be put out by quickly putting a large enough amount of gasoline on it to deprive the fire of oxygen. Perhaps Obama fancies himself a fire fighter.

jerryd_2008
06-26-2009, 07:09 PM
... If your looking for an investment natural gas would be at the top of the list if this passes.

Recently saw T Boone Pickens talking at the University. He wasn't very convincing when I asked him with 50,000,000+ NG users in the US, are we going to be able to afford NG if transportation and other uses like electricity generation pile on using it. I followed with what happens to our large personal investment in HVAC/hot water/cooking NG plant in our homes when we can't afford NG any more. It's already being used since utilities can't get coal plants approved (not that I recommend them).

Nuclear, nuclear, nuclear! Oh, sorry. Got carried away again.

whec720
06-26-2009, 07:10 PM
I'm for increasing nuclear energy for boosting our grid. Bonehead Dems, (Republicans are a non factor now) won't let it happen. Like I said, America has lost its edge.

jerryd_2008
06-26-2009, 07:20 PM
I'm for increasing nuclear energy for boosting our grid. ...

Not a big solar and wind fan since you have to duplicate it with base generation to support normal needs. But, hey, what if we used them whenever the sun shines and the wind blows to convert water to hydrogen? Still have the distribution problem for cars, but maybe there are some large industrial uses, even electric generation, that could burn it cleanly. Maybe on the coasts it could be used to desalinate salt water.

Hey, let's get some out-of-the box thinking going here.

jpsmith1cm
06-26-2009, 07:22 PM
I am no way a vicious tree-huger, but coal plants do not pay for the damage they cause. Forget CO2. They spit out millions of pounds of ash, lead, radiation, etc. due to the million tons of coal or more each burns every year. Why can't we follow France (ugh, did I say that!) and Japan and get some next-generation nuclear plants in place?

I'm all for nuclear energy. We still need oil to run our cars, no matter what type of hybrid is created, we will need gasoline for a long time.

hearthman
06-26-2009, 09:07 PM
Look up which legislators and senators have bought interest in 'green energy' since this crap came up. Then correlate to the vote today.

When will this hemorrhage end? We are being taxed to death so a select few will profit while we become enslaved into socialism.

I emailed my senators and congreeman telling them if they vote for this BS, I will do all I can to hound them to hell and fight their re-election with everything I have. Congressman Joe Sestak's flunky on the phone looked up my name and didn't see it on his records. That's because I am not registered as a DAMMITcrat in his District. See how they work? If you ain' registered in their party, you dont exist therefore you don't count. He'll know who I am after I'm done telling the District know how this scumbag has voted for every expenditure of my money he could.

Be a patriot and fight these evil doers at every turn. Be heard and do all you can to let them know you don't approve of their killing the country.
Bash the socialists!

trane
06-26-2009, 10:44 PM
It passed and we are screwed.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24232.html

Things we HAVE to use every day are soon going to cost us more. Wouldn't it have been smarter to pass this after we had thought of a way to actually do it?

k-fridge
06-26-2009, 10:47 PM
It passed and we are screwed.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24232.html

Things we HAVE to use every day are soon going to cost us more. Wouldn't it have been smarter to pass this after we had thought of a way to actually do it?

It still has to pass the senate and word is that the votes are not there.

Call your senator, quick!

trane
06-26-2009, 11:07 PM
300 pages they didn't want them to know much about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXXZYcaSCeI

This is whats going on in the video.
http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/06/26/house-filibuster/

Tool-Slinger
06-27-2009, 11:39 AM
It is a national energy tax. Obama needs the money. Of course, we also need our money, but he will take it if he can get it.

smittyii
06-27-2009, 08:06 PM
It is a national energy tax. Obama needs the money. Of course, we also need our money, but he will take it if he can get it.

make no mistake, this is not about energy or pollution. this is a tax! on every thing that requires energy to manufacture it. plain and simple. if no other industrial nation does this insane perversion then our industries and economy will bear the brunt of the tax. without an opposition party in place the socialists can do as they like, they already wrote themselves an unlimited check with the stimulus bill, now with this onerous tax they can pay for socialized medicine, rescue socialist security and any other social program they deem fit! they are not "liberals" in the traditional sense. these are progressive socialists that would make a "liberal" blush! these are the true believers you have elected, the true internationalists. there are two failed parties in this country, the democrats and the republicans. i know my congressman didn't vote for this because he has NEVER voted to increase the size of government. he did run for president last year though.RON PAUL!!! vote libertarian and return the power to the American people.

Hugh B
06-27-2009, 08:25 PM
make no mistake, this is not about energy or pollution. this is a tax! on every thing that requires energy to manufacture it. plain and simple. if no other industrial nation does this insane perversion then our industries and economy will bear the brunt of the tax. without an opposition party in place the socialists can do as they like, they already wrote themselves an unlimited check with the stimulus bill, now with this onerous tax they can pay for socialized medicine, rescue socialist security and any other social program they deem fit! they are not "liberals" in the traditional sense. these are progressive socialists that would make a "liberal" blush! these are the true believers you have elected, the true internationalists. there are two failed parties in this country, the democrats and the republicans. i know my congressman didn't vote for this because he has NEVER voted to increase the size of government. he did run for president last year though.RON PAUL!!! vote libertarian and return the power to the American people.

I agree! This is another grab for power. And, they will keep it coming. Look for more of the same to come right along soon.

trane
06-27-2009, 09:56 PM
All the jobs created by this bill won't come close to the number we will loose when manufacturing goes elsewhere. Environmental legislation forced on us without other countries doing the same will make it more costly to manufacture products in the US, and American companies will go elsewhere.

China is now building one new coal burning power plant a month and have found a better way to go about it instead of hoping something better is going to come along any day and taxing the **** out of existing ones.

“No matter how much renewable or nuclear is in the mix, coal will remain the dominant power source,” said Ashok Bhargava, a China energy expert at the Asian Development Bank in Manila.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/world/asia/11coal.html

Here in Missouri we have already been forced to shut down our coal mines and are now getting coal from Wyoming because of its low sulfur content.
Missouri has 21 coal-fired power plants that emit more than 75 million tons of carbon dioxide annually and generate 80 percent of Missouri’s electricity. The dollar more on your bill to help those in need will have to be changed to $10.

jerryd_2008
06-28-2009, 01:38 AM
...

“No matter how much renewable or nuclear is in the mix, coal will remain the dominant power source,” said Ashok Bhargava, a China energy expert at the Asian Development Bank in Manila.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/world/asia/11coal.html

Here in Missouri we have already been forced to shut down our coal mines and are now getting coal from Wyoming because of its low sulfur content.
Missouri has 21 coal-fired power plants that emit more than 75 million tons of carbon dioxide annually and generate 80 percent of Missouri’s electricity. The dollar more on your bill to help those in need will have to be changed to $10.

China's position is a really convenient rationalization of why they won't participate in any solutions.

Arkansas gets 70%+ of its power from coal. Beware counting on low-sulfur coal! For a couple of years we haven't been able to get enough coal from Wyoming due to bottlenecks and damage to the monopolistic rail lines going there. Our power companies have to import much more expensive foreign coal up the Mississippi.

Seems like there are too many people, many of them political and not well-trained and experienced experts, looking for a slam dunk solution to a very complex and ingrained energy infrastructure. It's "We need a solution now!". Complex problems are rarely solved now. Trying to do so can be very expensive because they are frequently ill-planned and poorly thought through.

We need to get the low hanging solutions (i.e. efficiency, eliminating waste, insulation, caulking, etc.), plan out and put in intermediate solutions (i.e. nuclear, shutting down really bad stuff and replacing with the best available technology) and fill in our knowledge via research on long-term solutions (And I don't mean fusion power using water! That could be a very, very long-term solution!).

jr9701
06-28-2009, 05:13 PM
The administration is totally clueless on economics so why should it be any different on the premise of energy and pollution? It looks like its becoming easier and easier to continue with this ultra liberal ajenda.

The effects of cap and trade will be felt for years to come. I'm hoping a lot of it will be easily reversable. The concept of forcing so many forms of alternative energy that really isnt practical yet in these economic times is just crazy.

trane
06-30-2009, 09:33 AM
This is like the fox guarding the hen house.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/26/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5117890.shtml

bb
06-30-2009, 10:01 PM
All the jobs created by this bill won't come close to the number we will loose when manufacturing goes elsewhere. Environmental legislation forced on us without other countries doing the same will make it more costly to manufacture products in the US, and American companies will go elsewhere.

China is now building one new coal burning power plant a month and have found a better way to go about it instead of hoping something better is going to come along any day and taxing the **** out of existing ones.

“No matter how much renewable or nuclear is in the mix, coal will remain the dominant power source,” said Ashok Bhargava, a China energy expert at the Asian Development Bank in Manila.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/world/asia/11coal.html

Here in Missouri we have already been forced to shut down our coal mines and are now getting coal from Wyoming because of its low sulfur content.
Missouri has 21 coal-fired power plants that emit more than 75 million tons of carbon dioxide annually and generate 80 percent of Missouri’s electricity. The dollar more on your bill to help those in need will have to be changed to $10.

I think your on to something. Let's not forget that when China gets our manufacturing (even more so) because companies won't be able or will be reluctant to pay the Obama envirotax, China WILL be using more energy. Who's to say that China won't use some funky sulfur enriched coal to do their generation, negating all of our efforts on reducing the fictitious global warming.