Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Cash for Caulkers
I read the President's speech about "Cash for caulkers" (I never watch him, I read his speeches online, it's less irritating). I thought that this was a speech that needed "squaring up".
He made a point that we lose 40% of our energy from our houses and we should be adding caulking and insulating everything better. That is all I agreed with from the speech. Quite frankly, I don't know who would disagree with the logic: if you seal your home you can save money.
What I disagree with is; the government should be passing out money to do these projects. A tube of caulking costs between 5 and 10 bucks but after the government adds it's overhead of "money redistribution" you know the same tube will cost us 5 or 10 thousand dollars. Here's a couple of examples: Cash for Clunkers ended up costing about $24,000 to give away 3 to 5 thousand dollars. The stimulus cost about $200,000 per job created.
The President says that this policy is a win-win situation. We win by saving the planet from global warming and keeping energy costs down. I've got a better win-win situation for you Mr. President: How about building nuclear power plants? The waste they create is minimal, pollution is non-existent, and they help the security of the United States, because we are not depending so much on middle eastern oil. This seems to be more in line with what the President should be addressing, not the caulking in my windows.
Here's a thought, maybe we can get a check from the government to put caulking and insulation on our cardboard boxes we live in, after this President is done destroying the economy with his reckless spending.
P.S. Mr. President, insulation is not sexy, but feel free to cuddle with it anytime you want.
He made a point that we lose 40% of our energy from our houses and we should be adding caulking and insulating everything better. That is all I agreed with from the speech. Quite frankly, I don't know who would disagree with the logic: if you seal your home you can save money.
What I disagree with is; the government should be passing out money to do these projects. A tube of caulking costs between 5 and 10 bucks but after the government adds it's overhead of "money redistribution" you know the same tube will cost us 5 or 10 thousand dollars. Here's a couple of examples: Cash for Clunkers ended up costing about $24,000 to give away 3 to 5 thousand dollars. The stimulus cost about $200,000 per job created.
The President says that this policy is a win-win situation. We win by saving the planet from global warming and keeping energy costs down. I've got a better win-win situation for you Mr. President: How about building nuclear power plants? The waste they create is minimal, pollution is non-existent, and they help the security of the United States, because we are not depending so much on middle eastern oil. This seems to be more in line with what the President should be addressing, not the caulking in my windows.
Here's a thought, maybe we can get a check from the government to put caulking and insulation on our cardboard boxes we live in, after this President is done destroying the economy with his reckless spending.
P.S. Mr. President, insulation is not sexy, but feel free to cuddle with it anytime you want.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Climate change questionable?
The summary of the story:
There is a 98 page EPA report, that questioned the science behind global warming. This EPA analyst Alan Carlin stated there is no reason to do all this Cap and Trade legislation, because there is no global warming problem. It appears that they are "reassigning" Mr. Carlin.
Maybe they had to start rushing their trillion dollar, Cap and Tax, through Congress so no one could actually tell them they are wrong, and all this global warming is just garbage.
I just don't understand why Obama hates America so much that he wants to send our American jobs to Communist China, because of a problem that doesn't even exist, according to his own EPA staff.
I'm getting real frustrated with all these politicians at the federal level. All the cons, lies, games, are getting real old. To the elected officials in Washington ---Do what we sent you there to do, in case you don't know what that is here's a clue ---REPRESENT US!
This is the article I found on Foxnews.com
Sen. Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into 'Suppressed' Climate Change Report - Political News - FOXNews.com
There is a 98 page EPA report, that questioned the science behind global warming. This EPA analyst Alan Carlin stated there is no reason to do all this Cap and Trade legislation, because there is no global warming problem. It appears that they are "reassigning" Mr. Carlin.
Maybe they had to start rushing their trillion dollar, Cap and Tax, through Congress so no one could actually tell them they are wrong, and all this global warming is just garbage.
I just don't understand why Obama hates America so much that he wants to send our American jobs to Communist China, because of a problem that doesn't even exist, according to his own EPA staff.
I'm getting real frustrated with all these politicians at the federal level. All the cons, lies, games, are getting real old. To the elected officials in Washington ---Do what we sent you there to do, in case you don't know what that is here's a clue ---REPRESENT US!
This is the article I found on Foxnews.com
Sen. Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into 'Suppressed' Climate Change Report - Political News - FOXNews.com
Monday, June 8, 2009
White roof and roads
Energy Secretary Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize winning physicist stated that to protect us from global warming we need to paint the roofs or our houses and our roads white. What? Really?
I am no Nobel Prize (now doubting the validity of the award) winning physicist but lets just apply some common sense to the statement.
First off, we have roughly 300 million people living in the United States. In China and India they have roughly 2 trillion people. So why are we to blame for all the global warming? Are the people in China and India going to change the color of their roofs?
Next little question, What difference does it make when only 30% of the planet is even covered by land? I don't know how much of the land is covered by buildings and roads, but in the whole scope of the size of the planet, I bet not to many.
Where does all this reflective light go, once it reflects? My bet is it goes right into my eyes while I'm driving. Really though it has to reflect and then absorb into something. Last I checked the earth isn't a perfectly flat surface, so light will bounce in another direction and there is a good chance that it will hit something and absorb in the new object. Won't the heat generated warm the ambient air in the atmosphere as it goes to space?
OK, it is to help with air conditioning in warmer climates. Because of the heat generated by the sun it does keep your home cooler to have a lighter colored roof. I understand that. But what about all the people who don't live in a warm climate. I bet it might be a bit more economical for them to have a black roof so they do not have to heat their home as much.
Don't you think the people that live in warmer climates have already figured this out? Americans are not stupid, they are going to do things to help them save money when they built their house originally.
If I paint my roof white, when we get a good spring dust storm that turns my roof brown, do I have to go up and repaint it? What about all this paint that will eventually be added to all the landfills eventually, isn't it harmful to our environment?
I think this is just a strange statement from a scientist turned politician. My last question is for Secretary Chu; why the hell would you want to be working a political government job when you are a award winning scientist?
I am no Nobel Prize (now doubting the validity of the award) winning physicist but lets just apply some common sense to the statement.
First off, we have roughly 300 million people living in the United States. In China and India they have roughly 2 trillion people. So why are we to blame for all the global warming? Are the people in China and India going to change the color of their roofs?
Next little question, What difference does it make when only 30% of the planet is even covered by land? I don't know how much of the land is covered by buildings and roads, but in the whole scope of the size of the planet, I bet not to many.
Where does all this reflective light go, once it reflects? My bet is it goes right into my eyes while I'm driving. Really though it has to reflect and then absorb into something. Last I checked the earth isn't a perfectly flat surface, so light will bounce in another direction and there is a good chance that it will hit something and absorb in the new object. Won't the heat generated warm the ambient air in the atmosphere as it goes to space?
OK, it is to help with air conditioning in warmer climates. Because of the heat generated by the sun it does keep your home cooler to have a lighter colored roof. I understand that. But what about all the people who don't live in a warm climate. I bet it might be a bit more economical for them to have a black roof so they do not have to heat their home as much.
Don't you think the people that live in warmer climates have already figured this out? Americans are not stupid, they are going to do things to help them save money when they built their house originally.
If I paint my roof white, when we get a good spring dust storm that turns my roof brown, do I have to go up and repaint it? What about all this paint that will eventually be added to all the landfills eventually, isn't it harmful to our environment?
I think this is just a strange statement from a scientist turned politician. My last question is for Secretary Chu; why the hell would you want to be working a political government job when you are a award winning scientist?
Thursday, May 7, 2009
E-Crazy
I am a liberty loving, environment trashing, warmonger and all so maybe this piece will sound a bit crass but here it goes...
This save the environment thing is getting a bit out of hand, I think. Mesa County started charging $0.42 a pound for electronics to be "sent away" so we quit filling our landfill. My first question is: Who is going to go out in the desert and pick up all the TVs and computer monitors that the public will dump out there to avoid the fee? I'm sure they will become great target practice, targets. My second question is: Who is making the money off this deal? Does the company that Mesa County sends the electronics make money on both sides of the deal, meaning do we pay the company and then the company re-sell the waste to someone who recycles it into a product? I tried to find this information out yesterday, but couldn't find it anywhere. If this recyclable material is valuable, like copper, why don't we get paid for it, instead of us paying them to take it?
Another E-problem I have is all this hype about battery operated and hybrid cars. It is a hazard to dispose of a regular auto batteries. What kind of pollution is it going to be with these giant batteries in these cars? What about the people in auto accidents with these big cells full of acid in there car, is that really safe? I'm sure we can fix the problem by charging the public a couple of thousand bucks to dispose of their car, so they can "recycle it". If people die in an accident involving a battery, we can just call it our contribution to eliminating global warming, reducing their "carbon foot print" to nothing.... Oh wait I forgot, people are carbon so I'm sure we can't bury them because of the hazardous waste thing, and we can't cremate them for fear global warming, what do we do? Soylent green comes to mind.
E-lighting....These lovely little twirly Chinese made bulbs called CFL's aren't they great? I bought a handful of these things an put them in my house because I am cheap, and I wanted to save money on power. The next month Xcel came to my house and changed the electric meter. Now my power bill is $60 more a month, hummmm is it the stupid little bulbs? By the way don't break one, cause you will have to call out the hazmat team to clean it up. I'm sure there is a way to get fee at the landfill for all the mercury we are dumping in there with these bulbs, such a win-win, right? One more thing, did you know that incandescent bulbs give off heat? I wonder how much heat is lost in one's home by the use of CFL as opposed to incandescent bulbs? I guess you better turn up the thermostat so we don't get cold.
So as I wait for the world to collapse from all the environmental problems, that only the Americans are creating, I will be a good boy read my computer screen under the dim glow of CFL lighting, pay my Cap and Trade taxes, drink from a water bottle and eat my soylent green, with no questions asked. Thank you Mr. Gore, oh wise Internet Inventor, Thank you.
This save the environment thing is getting a bit out of hand, I think. Mesa County started charging $0.42 a pound for electronics to be "sent away" so we quit filling our landfill. My first question is: Who is going to go out in the desert and pick up all the TVs and computer monitors that the public will dump out there to avoid the fee? I'm sure they will become great target practice, targets. My second question is: Who is making the money off this deal? Does the company that Mesa County sends the electronics make money on both sides of the deal, meaning do we pay the company and then the company re-sell the waste to someone who recycles it into a product? I tried to find this information out yesterday, but couldn't find it anywhere. If this recyclable material is valuable, like copper, why don't we get paid for it, instead of us paying them to take it?
Another E-problem I have is all this hype about battery operated and hybrid cars. It is a hazard to dispose of a regular auto batteries. What kind of pollution is it going to be with these giant batteries in these cars? What about the people in auto accidents with these big cells full of acid in there car, is that really safe? I'm sure we can fix the problem by charging the public a couple of thousand bucks to dispose of their car, so they can "recycle it". If people die in an accident involving a battery, we can just call it our contribution to eliminating global warming, reducing their "carbon foot print" to nothing.... Oh wait I forgot, people are carbon so I'm sure we can't bury them because of the hazardous waste thing, and we can't cremate them for fear global warming, what do we do? Soylent green comes to mind.
E-lighting....These lovely little twirly Chinese made bulbs called CFL's aren't they great? I bought a handful of these things an put them in my house because I am cheap, and I wanted to save money on power. The next month Xcel came to my house and changed the electric meter. Now my power bill is $60 more a month, hummmm is it the stupid little bulbs? By the way don't break one, cause you will have to call out the hazmat team to clean it up. I'm sure there is a way to get fee at the landfill for all the mercury we are dumping in there with these bulbs, such a win-win, right? One more thing, did you know that incandescent bulbs give off heat? I wonder how much heat is lost in one's home by the use of CFL as opposed to incandescent bulbs? I guess you better turn up the thermostat so we don't get cold.
So as I wait for the world to collapse from all the environmental problems, that only the Americans are creating, I will be a good boy read my computer screen under the dim glow of CFL lighting, pay my Cap and Trade taxes, drink from a water bottle and eat my soylent green, with no questions asked. Thank you Mr. Gore, oh wise Internet Inventor, Thank you.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Global Warming......oh really....
I was watching the news how Barrack traveled to Denver to sign the Porkulus Bill and I saw some thing that is kinda disturbing.
President Obama took a day trip out to Denver on his private jet (a 747) to sign the Stimulus Bill. He rides in an airplane that uses 5 gallons of fuel to go one mile, so the 1493 mile journey used 14,930 gallons of fuel for the round trip. I'm not exactly sure what other planes travel with the President, but I bet there is one that carries his car(s), and maybe some for his security.
What made this more interesting is that the guy who introduced him sells solar panels, to help switch us to "Green Energy". If the President wants me to actually believe that global warming is an issue, maybe he could maybe lead by example. I bet they have staff that could carry that bill to the White House for him to sign. I even bet that if the President wanted to, he could fly the solar panel guy in on a commercial flight at much less cost. If this global warming is a crisis (or even an issue) then don't you think maybe our elected leaders could lead, would that be too much trouble?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
