Comments for Climate Etc.

Reblogged this on <a href="http://junkscience.com/2015/08/11/will-the-presidents-clean-power-plan-save-consumers-money/" rel="nofollow">JunkScience.com</a>.

David Springer:

It’s protected political speech personalizing a famous politician. Get over it.

Protected from government action unless there is a threat or call for violence.

…and the most practical and directly applicable solution would seem to involve visiting the local Home Depot for a sufficiency of rope.

There are streetlights in Mordor-on-the-Potomac in need of proper decoration.

In any event, there is no right to post garbage on Judith Curry’s site and the moderator should delete these posts. I believe she has a duty to do so. These racist rants are as idiotic as the defense of the use of Nazi name-calling on WUWT and Bishop Hill.

With “friends” like these….

I agree with the sentiment. I think that is inevitable that to an extent that some people will line up on an issue not because of the substantive issues, but because of their mindsets. The real problem (and the problem here) is when such thinking clouds or dominates the dialogue such that the real substantive issues get lost in all the noise.

Timg56, they dropped it from the target calculations but my understanding is that it remains as a compliance option and much has been written saying this in the efficiency community. The regs do not mandate any specific actions, just the target. But EPA has always been clear that the savings occur from efficiency despite the fact the electricity prices go up. They do not claim that renewables lower the price.

His comment reflects what he is, and what the people who like him and what he says are… nothing but chit sausages… human excrement in a skin with enough bones to hold the pile crap upright. .

David,

“But EPA has always been clear that the savings occur from efficiency despite the fact the electricity prices go up.”

I would have said “because” rather than “despite,” and “conservation” rather than “efficiency.”

Is there any place on the EPA web site that says what they expect the residential electricity prices to be in 2030? Or even where it is acknowledged that the residential prices would go up?

Dave

In case anyone here’s interested in facts about the spill (more than cynically exploiting the spill to advance an agenda).

https://www.hcn.org/articles/when-our-river-turned-orange-animas-river-spill

Very relevant article in the WSJ (full text available here):
http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/press/the-price-tag-for-uprooting-americas-electric-grid/

josh*a

Thanks for the informative article. The comments were good as well.

I have no idea what the stigma of ‘superfund’ is, but it seems like there were too many people with good intentions getting involved, but no consistent body to draw everything together and resolve it over the long term. The EPA seems as if it should have taken overall control and banged a few heads together but its involvement was too long delayed and not effective because of local rivalry.

In the UK the Environment Agency (a govt agency) would have taken control of such a large and complex operation and instructed private firms to do the work under its supervision.

tonyb

Why are you so worried about what some book author says? There are plenty of ultra conservatives that I basically ignore because I know they are on the fringe.

genghiscunn | August 11, 2015 at 12:57 am |
“Seeing this is clearly a political sub-thread, I’ll post a little of Greg Sheridan’s view. Sheridan is The Australian’s Foreign Editor, highly respected and well-regarded in both Oz and the US, very pro-American and with many high-level US friends and contacts:”

AKA – a lightweight with nary an original thought.

Just repeats what his “high level US friends” tell him.

An epic waste of time.

Peter

The late great (but dictatorial) premier of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew reckoned it was the invention of the air conditioner that enabled hot nations to compete on an equal footing for the first time with the cooler countries.

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/leekuanyew

tonyb

Hi Judy,

Indeed it is. The IER study is a levelized cost analysis that attempts to include the fossil fuel backup costs for wind.

My sense from the European experience, however, is that something is going amiss that is not captured by any levelized cost analysis. The apparent charge of a dollar per watt per year for wind and solar capacity represents an enormous potential burden on a society. Consider that replacing the nominal electricity generation (kWh) of the United States, leaving aside storage issues and new loads like electric cars, would require something of the order 10,000W of wind and solar capacity per person.

To be continued …

Dave

Well, lets see Joseph. We have public officials as well as prominent leaders in the climate movment who are unabashedly anti capitalist and essentially communist in everything but name.
If you (and the other young ens) dont see the danger in that then all freedom is truly lost.

Sign a petition to remove McCarthy from the EPA over her incompetence with the Animas River spill:
https://www.change.org/p/barack-obama-hillary-clinton-fred-upton-epa-administrator-destroys-river-mccarthy-must-resign?recruiter=359549164&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=fb_send_dialog

They are taking money from those who do not support their liberal and green schmes and giving it to those who do support their liberal and green schemes. This is about the transfer of power and money.

We have public officials as well as prominent leaders.. essentially communist..

Any examples? And you know I do hear the Communist tag flung around sometimes about some Democrats, but it is a bit of fringe idea (I don’t hear it that much).

all right, put that way, I will withdraw my comment and my objections.

Latest Images