Chris Horner is Captain America in my Book

I get a news mag Military, that includes essays by Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media (AIM).

An AIM interview of Chris Horner, an author and speaker I knew from his work on enviro and climate affairs caught my eye.

Now I am mad as hell.

The interview of Chris Horner is by AIM editor Roger Aronoff who just gets out of the way and lets Horner tell his explosive story of exposing the corruption in the US EPA and the administration of the Executive Branch.

I am still so outraged and alarmed it is hard to articulate.

Horner is a lawyer and investigator for Competitive Enterprise Institute who exposed the Richard Windsor scandal, Lisa Jackson, former Administrator of the US EPA was using the email internet alias Richard Windsor to run US EPA sensitive and probably illegal political projects and campaigns and only hard driving Freedom of Information Request efforts by Horner exposed the nature of the deceptions and misconduct.

The AIM interview discusses at length the Horner project to expose the political machinations of the current administration and the lead agency on regulatory and environmental affairs. Horner is smart enough to understand and explain the implications of his discoveries.

The interview is long so it requires a serious effort,but it is stunning. Horner knows the US EPA very well, in all its perfidy.

I knew Horner was doing important work because Milloy is working with him, but his interview will alarm the serious citizen to an extreme.

You care enough to find out how the government may be beyond redemption? The interview is very troubling.  

Hear the interview here:

Industrial Wind: The Great American "S-WIND-LE" 

Not Clean, Not Green, Not Free!
~ Industrial Wind turbines are being sold under the pretense that they will significantly reduce CO2 emissions, and thereby help avoid Global Warming. Yet, 30 years into subsidizing the building of wind factories off the backs of taxpayers and ratepayers has proven otherwise.

~ With approximately 250,000 industrial wind turbines installed worldwide today (45,100 turbines totaling over 60GW of installed wind projects in the USA, according to AWEA),
CO2 emissions have NOT been significantly reduced, nor has a single conventional generation plant - including coal, been decommissioned anywhere thanks to industrial wind. (See: Wind Turbines Are Climate-Change Scarecrows, by Robert Bryce)

~ The Brookings Institute reports that "Wind and Solar are the Worst" way to reduce CO2.

~ Due to the unreliable, erratic, and volatile nature of wind, industrial wind turbines need constant "shadow capacity" from our reliable, dispatchable generators - that is, if you want to be sure the lights will come on when you flick the switch.  Thus, as Big Wind CEO, Patrick Jenevein candidly admitted, 
"Consumers end up paying twice for the same product."

~ All things considered, including demand levels and import/exports - the more wind installations we add, the more we must add fossil-fueled generation. 

~ The TRUTH:
Wind generation locks us into dependence on fossil fuels.

~ Adding wind as a supplement to our conventional generating system requires so much supplementation that in many areas of the country, adding wind actually causes increased CO2 emissions in the production of electricity than would be the case with no wind at all.  Iowa exemplifies this -- As Iowa's installed wind capacity has increased over recent years, so has their
coal use and CO2 emissions.

~ ONE (1) 450 MW Combined Cycle Generating Unit located at New York City (where the power is needed in New York State), would provide more power than all of New York State's 16 installed wind factories combined, at 1/4 of the capital costs -- and would have significantly reduced CO2 emissions and created far more jobs than all those wind farms – without all the added costs (economic, environmental, and civil) of all the transmission lines that must be added across the state to New York City.  

~ Industrial wind supplies electricity, and therefore, has nothing to do with our "foreign oil dependence" created by gasoline and diesel fuel needs.

~ 4,000 - 6,000 pounds of rare earth elements are required per turbine, producing
disastrous ecological results in China, where the rare earth elements are being mined.

In many low-wind areas of the country (ie: New York State), Industrial Wind Turbines do NOT produce enough power to pay for themselves over their very short, 5 - 13 year lifespans.

~ The average output of many wind factories is
less than 25% - many days, providing nothing at all.

~ Studies from those long-invested in wind power in Spain and elsewhere have shown that
2 - 4 jobs are LOST in the rest of the economy, in large part due to the associated "necessarily skyrocketing” electricity rates President Obama forewarned would accompany his 'green' energy policy. 

~ Consider GE's Shepard's Flat Wind Factory, at which each 'job created' was shown to cost taxpayers
$16.3 MILLION - exorbitantly expensive jobs for a product which is neither "reliable," nor "efficient" - two professed requirements of the "sustainability" movement.

~ Wind technology has proven to be effective only as a tax shelter generator for large corporations in need of an increased bottom line - just as it was originally designed to do by ENRON, the trailblazer for industrial wind in the U.S. 

~ Two of the largest wind holding corporations - GE and Florida Power & Light - have paid NO federal income taxes in the U.S. in years, in large measure because of their "investment" in wind.

~ Warren Buffett candidly admitted, “We get tax credits if we build ‘windfarms.’  That’s the only reason to build them.  They don’t make sense otherwise.” 

~ The sprawling footprints of industrial wind factories cover vast swaths of land, causing massive Habitat Fragmentation (habitat loss has been sited as major reason for species extinction).  See:

~ Mathematically, it would take more than 3000 wind turbines rated at 2 MW each, spread over 800 kilometers (approximately 500 miles), to equal the energy from one 1600 MW coal or nuclear plant.  But even after covering 500 sq miles with industrial wind turbines, it still would NOT replace the need for those conventional generating units since wind turbines can produce no effective (or firm) capacity.

~ Wind, paired with natural gas (the most flexible generating system), can offset a mere fraction more CO2 emissions than could be achieved with the gas unit alone - without any wind at all. Wind represents redundant generation, although it would generate capital costs more than triple the cost of the gas unit. With wind, the country gets one electricity production system for the cost of two.  

~ Wind can neither be a functional alternative, nor additive energy source. Wind energy is so diffuse that no machine can convert it to modern power.  (See: Understanding E = mc2)

~ Studies have shown that MILLIONS of birds and bats are being killed every year by these giant "Cuisinarts of the air," as a Sierra official dubbed industrial wind turbines in a moment of candor. 

~ President Obama recently gave industrial wind developers a 30 year free pass to slaughter eagles without penalty, while all other energy sources are fined tens of thousands of dollars and more per bird death.

~ Industrial wind installations significantly interfere with both military and weather radar, severely compromising both homeland security and weather advisory systems that would otherwise serve to protect American citizens.

~ Big Wind Corporations looking to cut corners have been caught using old Bethlehem Steel brown-field slag as fill in access roads which run amongst croplands in western NY.

~ Personal health and property value losses by those who end up stuck living within the massive footprints of industrial wind factories ARE significant and growing world-wide, yet are being ignored by most of the media, 'green' enthusiasts, and over 80% of the U.S. population who live within big city limits and are oblivious to the detrimental effects being wrought on rural America thanks to the 'green' "Emperor Who Wore No Clothes." 

~ Suggesting proper 'siting guidelines' for wind factories is akin to suggesting building larger closets for the "Emperor With No Clothes."

~ In Wisconsin, the negative health effects associated with living too close to industrial wind factories have caused many people to actually abandon their homes, leading the Wisconsin Board of Health to declare Duke Energy’s wind turbines a "Human Health Hazard."    

~ Let's be real - Would you buy and move YOUR family into a home surrounded by 450 - 500+ foot tall industrial wind turbines, with their 164 foot-long, 11-TON, bird-chopping blades spinning overhead - only hundreds of feet from YOUR home on all sides?  I have yet to meet anyone who would. 

~ Studies have shown, and any realtor worth his oats will tell you, there are significant property value losses (10% - 25% and more), depending on the proximity to the wind turbines. 
LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION!!!  Could you and your family afford to take that kind of loss on YOUR home?  

~ Why would anyone in their right mind support imposing this torture on their fellow Americans???  It is shameful, criminal, and un-American!  These peoples' most expensive life investments - their homes, have been rendered virtually worthless.

~ Would you take your family to vacation amongst the footprint of industrial wind factories?  Neither would most anyone else - which ruins the tourism trade many scenic rural areas across rural America depend on, especially in this flailing economy.  The only ones getting rich in this scenario are the multi-national wind developers.  The rich are getting richer at the rest of our expense for a useless product.

~ Besides rendering these folks' homes virtually worthless, the fact that American citizens are being assaulted with their own taxpayer and ratepayer dollars (which are subsidizing the building of these wind factories to the tune of 80% of the total costs), is blatant theft of both their money and their
Constitutional private property rights.  Again I say - It is shameful, criminal, and un-American! 

~ Corporate cronies push the "All of the Above" nonsense, while what U.S. taxpayers and ratepayers really need is an "All of the Sensible" energy policy. Industrial Wind does NOT make the cut!  
~ If you can't figure out why they would do this, you haven't asked enough questions:

Mary Kay Barton is a retired health educator, New York State small business owner, Cornell-certified Master Gardener, and is a tireless advocate for scientifically sound, affordable, and reliable electricity for all Americans. She has served over the past decade in local Water Quality organizations and enjoys gardening and birding in her National Wildlife Federation “Backyard Wildlife Habitat.”

Energy Tax Reform: Scrap the Baucus Proposal  

(Part I: Summary & Conclusions)   by Glenn Schleede  January 16, 2014

“Clearly, the wind industry would be a huge beneficiary of [this] proposed tax break scheme…. Almost certainly, lobbyists for the wind industry were heavily involved in the drafting of the Committee’s proposal…. It’s time for the Congress to consider the national interest, including the interests of citizens, taxpayers, and electric customers, before again extending tax breaks for the wind industry.”
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman and Members the Senate Finance Committee

: Energy Tax Break Proposal announced on December 18, 2013

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the December 18, 2013, Staff Discussion Draft of the Senate Finance Committee’s
Energy Tax Reform proposal.

Your proposal to repeal all existing renewable energy tax breaks is a good one and it should proceed. Your proposal to adopt a new renewable energy tax break scheme should be scrapped.
This memorandum provides comments on the portion of the proposal dealing with energy used to generate electricity covered on pages 3 and 4 of the above cited document.
Executive Summary
The Committee’s proposal that would base the availability and size of the proposed tax break for energy used in producing electricity on “cleanliness” (specifically, “greenhouse gas emissions”) measured at a “generating facility” is faulty in three important respects; specifically:
· Considering emissions at a generating facility would not, in the case of wind turbines, produce an accurate measure of “cleanliness.”
· The proposed single criterion, “cleanliness,” ignores many factors that are critically important when attempting to develop an equitable energy tax break.
· Contrary to Committee assertions, the proposed tax would not be ”technology neutral.”
The large number of wind turbines and “wind farms” that have already been constructed as a result of nearly 20 years of wind production tax credits and other subsidies have caused significant adverse environmental, economic, energy system reliability, scenic, and property value impacts that cannot, realistically, be ignored when considering a new tax break for wind. These impacts include:
· Electricity from wind that is high in true cost and low in true value.
· Massive wealth transfers harming ordinary taxpayers and electric customers.
· Misdirecting billions in capital investments dollars.
· High electricity prices that are particularly hard on low income people.
· Adverse environmental, ecological, scenic, and property values impacts.
[Note: Part II will excerpt from the detailed analysis between the Summary and the Conclusions]

Without any doubt, massive federal and state tax breaks during the past 20 years have resulted in the construction of many wind turbines and “wind farms” in the United States. The tax breaks and subsidies have been provided because the wind industry and other wind energy advocates have greatly overstated the benefits and understated the true cost of electricity from wind. These parties have, to a great extent, misled the public, media and government officials.
Work done by analysts in the U.S. and around the world has, during the past five or six years, demonstrated conclusively that wind energy has many adverse environmental, ecological, economic, scenic, and property value impacts.
In fact, the many factors discussed above, and not just “cleanliness” as defined by the Senate Finance Committee should be taken into account when considering whether massive tax breaks and subsidies should be continued for the wind industry.
Despite 20 years of massive federal and state tax breaks and subsidies for the wind industry and the current availability of multiple suppliers of these uneconomic machines, the industry offers no sound evidence that wind turbines will ever be a commercially viable (i.e., without tax breaks and subsidies) source of electricity.
Clearly, the wind industry would be a huge beneficiary of the proposed tax break scheme announced by the Senate Finance Committee on December 18, 2013. Almost certainly, lobbyists for the wind industry were heavily involved in the drafting of the Committee’s proposal. Otherwise, it’s unlikely that the industry’s Washington-based lobbyists, the American Wind Energy Association, could have issued a statement commending Senator Baucus and the Senate Committee almost simultaneously with the Committee’s release of its tax break proposals.
It’s time for the Congress to consider the national interest, including the interests of citizens, taxpayers, and electric customers, before again extending tax breaks for the wind industry.

Read the entire series:

GLENN SCHLEEDE: Energy Tax Reform: Scrap the Baucus Proposal (Part I: Summary & Conclusions)

GLENN SCHLEEDE: Energy Tax Reform: Scrap the Baucus Proposal (Part II: High cost/low value of windpower)

GLENN SCHLEEDE: Energy Tax Reform: Scrap the Baucus Proposal (Part III: Environmental Issues)

GLENN SCHLEEDE: Energy Tax Reform: Scrap the Baucus Proposal (Part IV: Negative Wealth Effects)

New York State 'Green Jobs, Green NY' a bunch of BS!

Blogger Template by Blogcrowds

Copyright 2006| Blogger Templates by GeckoandFly modified and converted to Blogger Beta by Blogcrowds.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.