For those of you who may not have caught the sticky post on the front page, I’ll be at CPAC 2024 in Maryland this year, from Feb. 21-24. If anyone who reads these virtual pages will be attending, let me know! I’ll be hanging around with the Townhall Media Group folks a lot of the time, but figure on doing some wandering and hopefully catching up with some of my indy blogger buddies. If you’re going to be there, let me know in the comments!
I can’t believe this is already the last Hump Day post of 2023! Watch, though, for Friday’s Rule Five post, as we will be announcing some changes and some fun new stuff for the sight. Rest assured our Blue Monday, Hump Day, Rule Five Friday and Saturday Gingermageddon displays of toothsome totty will continue, as well as me bringing you my take on the events of the day.
Issues & Insights, one of my favorite interwebz reads, asked the question on Monday, “How far will the Climate Cult go?” And I think I know the answer: All the way.
Here are the salient points:
Carbon passports are catching among the climate clergy. “Personal carbon allowances could help curb carbon emissions and lower travel’s overall footprint. These allowances will manifest as passports that force people to ration their carbon in line with the global carbon budget,” says a report from a small group adventure travel company. “By 2040, we can expect to see limitations imposed on the amount of travel that is permitted each year.” CNN reports that “several laws and restrictions have been put in place over the past year that suggest our travel habits may already be on the verge of change.”
In Great Britain, “property owners who fail to comply with new energy rules could face jail time as the government pushes ahead with net zero measures,” according to media reports.
Ann Carlson, the White House’s acting National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator, “has long stressed the need to force Americans to live climate-friendly lives,” according to the Washington Free Beacon. While an academic at UCLA, she insisted the federal government is duty-bound to “induce behavioral change” by enacting policies that “make the bad behavior more expensive.” She has also said we “could benefit from a simpler life” but doesn’t believe “most people will engage in dramatic behavioral change” unless they are “forced” to.
United Nations researchers recently told the Guardian “that scientists should be given the right to make policy prescriptions and, potentially, to oversee their implementation by the 195 states signed up to the U.N. framework convention on climate change.” Journalist Alex Newman – correctly – says doing so “would undermine self-governance while ushering in an ‘insane’ totalitarian technocratic form of government.”
If this season’s line-up on the Fascist Fantasy Network wasn’t enough, I&I continues:
“How we live, heat, get around, travel and what we eat could soon no longer be an individual decision, but increasingly be dictated by the state,” says Kristina Schröder, who served under German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Germany’s Federal Family Minister from 2009 to 2013 regards the pandemic restrictions as “a blueprint for the climate movement on how to enforce fundamental restrictions on basic rights” and is “convinced that large sections of the climate protection movement are also fighting our way of living and our economy at least as much as they are fighting climate change.”
We didn’t have as much of this bullshit when the schools still taught things like history, economics, civics, and actual critical thinking; nowadays, of course, “critical thinking” is interpreted by the left as “you’ll think what we tell you and damn well like it.”
None of these things will apply to the elites, of course. They will retain their private jets, their yachts, and their filet Mignon with spotted owl appetizers. And it’s not the climate they are pushing for – it’s power, the power to control what the hoi polloi say and do, and that’s for sure and for certain. The foot soldiers of the climate movement are loud, loutish, and annoying. But the leaders – many of them – wield power, and it is their agenda on which we must stay appraised.
And, as I’ve always said and will continue to say, I’ll believe there is a climate crisis when the people who keep telling me there’s a climate crisis start behaving like there’s a climate crisis.
Programming notes: As this is the last Wednesday before Christmas, I’ll just note that there won’t be any regular posts on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day proper (Christmas Eve is on a Sunday, anyway, when I normally don’t post) but I will bring you some toothsome holiday totty on those days.
In between the holidays, regular posts will be going up as usual, including next week’s Hump Day links compendium and Rule Five Friday. New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day will repeat the Christmas totty schedule, then on Jan 2nd, 2024, regular posts resume. In other words, I plan on battering away at my keyboard over the holidays pretty much as usual, here and at RedState.
2024. Can you believe it? What the hell happened to 2023? Oh, and with the New Year, we’ll do our annual traditional celebration of diversity on our Saturday posts, so you all have that to look forward to. And in the new year, we’ll have some changes on the site, and some new stuff for you all to look forward to.
Note: Since I have two weeks worth of my RedState posts here, this will be lengthy, but you can see it all beneath the cut. And I will also say this: It’s great to be home. I still love the Colorado mountains and had a great time, but we also spent a few days in the Denver area visiting friends and family, and boy have three years in the Great Land changed my perspectives on Denver. Big cities are noisy, and they stink.
A new report by the International Energy Agency (IEA) projects a slowdown in the growth of natural gas consumed in the world, forecasting it will peak in North America in 2023 before declining next year.
Yet, it also highlights the opportunity ahead for countries that are willing and able to export liquefied natural gas (LNG), particularly the United States.
It’s just one more reason Canada needs to ensure it has a firm spot in the global LNG sector — something industry leaders and energy experts continue to highlight, even with last month’s projections by the IEA that oil, coal and natural gas demand will peak this decade.
And at least one person involved is showing some sanity on this issue:
“There are a lot of forecasts. You know, I’ve been in this business long enough to see peak oil many times and it’s never actually hit peak oil. This year, the world will use more oil than it’s ever used before,” Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel said in an interview Friday.
“Natural gas is a critical component in so many different regions of the world and will continue to do so as part of our sustainability goals, as part of backup for renewables . . . More and more people want to have a better lifestyle and that means cheap, affordable, secure energy.
“And, inevitably, for decades and decades to come, that is going to involve natural gas and oil.”
Of course it will. Everyone who understands energy density and economics knows this. It’s even become apparent in Germany, who are having to move back to coal for power generation after their green energy plans haven’t worked out and their supply of Russian natural gas was cut off. Oh, and after they shut all of their nuclear power plants down.
Maybe some sanity is returning to the world of energy. Then again, maybe not. But Canada’s development of their LNG resources would help the United States, too; we are, after all, not only neighbors but trading partners, and the U.S. is a huge energy market that I’m sure Canada would love to have a bigger piece of. And better we get it from Canada than from the Middle East.
On September 22, I published my calculations on solar subsidies. I found that federal incentives for solar energy were 200 times greater than those given to nuclear when calculated on an energy-produced basis. I arrived at that number by combining data from the Joint Committee on Taxation with domestic energy production numbers from the Statistical Review of World Energy.
Last year, “total energy subsidies and support” — the phrase used by the EIA in its report — for solar totaled $7.4 billion, and solar production totaled 1.8 quads. That works out to $4.1 billion per quad. Meanwhile, subsidies for nuclear totaled $110 million, and production totaled about 8.1 quads, which means nuclear got $13.6 million per quad. A bit of simple division ($4.1 billion by $13.7 million) shows that solar got 302 times more federal subsidies last year than nuclear.
Subsidies for the landscape-destroying wind energy business totaled nearly $3.6 billion in 2022, while production was 3.8 quads. That means wind energy got subsidies of $947 million per quad, or 69 times more than nuclear.
The enormous subsidies for wind and solar show, once again, that America’s energy policy has been hijacked by climate corporatism, which, as I explained in April, is “the use of government power to increase the profits of big corporations at the expense of consumers — and in particular, at the expense of small (and mostly rural) landowners — in the name of climate change.”
Here’s the constitutional authorization for the Imperial government to fund these subsidies:
Did you get that? As in, none. The Imperial City is levying taxes (theft) on us to spend our money on these things illegally.
All of these “green” energy sources only survive because of these massive subsidies. They are less efficient, have less energy density, are more expensive and produce more waste products than any other method of generating electricity; and they are sucking up far, far more taxpayer money per kilowatt than the most efficient, most energy-dense and cleanest form of generation available in the world today: Nuclear power.
But wait! There’s more!
Unfortunately, the $7.4 billion in federal subsidies given to solar last year may be only a foretaste of the climate corporatism to come. As I reported last Friday, under the Inflation Reduction Act, annual federal giveaways to solar could triple to $22 billion by 2036 and total as much as $50 billion by the late 2040s. Those massive subsidies for solar energy, which we are continually told is “green,” “clean,” and “renewable,” will create a staggering volume of solid waste that will largely go into landfills because it costs too much to recycle them.
What’s interesting is how all this isn’t playing into the Presidential election debates – at least, not yet. I’ve been in on RedState’s live-blogging of both GOP primary debates so far, and there has been little talk of energy at all, and absolutely zero discussion of nuclear power.
So, no matter who ends up in the Imperial Mansion, are we to look forward in perpetuity to more expensive, less reliable electrical power? To unreliable, short-range, possibly dangerous electric vehicles? To be herded into “15 minute cities”?
Actually, I think not. Stein’s Law applies here as with everything: “What can’t continue, won’t continue.” This whole scam, with its massive subsidies to almost-certainly well-connected private companies, has a shelf life.
Look, people should be free to use whatever power source suits them. If someone wants to pay to have a dozen solar panels on their roof, they are free to do so. If someone wants to put a water-wheel on a stream running through their property and use that, they can knock themselves out. But they should – nay, must not – receive even one penny of taxpayer money to help pay for it.
And the manufacturers of these alternatives should likewise not receive even one penny of taxpayer money to build them.
This mess in the Middle East has now officially gotten out of hand. More on that in the links.
When you’re a nation the size of Delaware, surrounded by people who want to kill you, it’s in your best interest to keep your military and your intelligence services dialed in, but in this case Israel obviously missed something.
Researchers from Spain and Germany have discovered characteristics of specialized secretory cells in simple animals called placozoans which could identify them as a prelude to neurons in other organisms.
Roughly the size of a grain of sand, these basic creatures have no organs, consisting of little more than a colony of different cell types. Much as they still do today, placozoans once hunted microbes and browsed algae in the warm shallows of seas 800 million years ago.
So 800 million years ago we have evidence of emerging brains. Any guesses as to when we might see evidence of brains in Congress?