Petition to President Obama for September 2015 Delivery: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WW

On July 23, 2016, we discontinued our forums. We ask our members to please join us in our new community site, The Hartmann Report. Please note that you will have to register a new account on The Hartmann Report.

50 posts / 0 new

PETITION TO: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/420/529/456/demand-liberty-from-fossil-fuels-through-100-renewable-energy-wwii-style-effort/

NOTE: This picture is worth a LOT MORE than thousand words (i.e. several million dollars in "profits" and several miilion cancers, a degraded biosphere, and degraded democracy too!):

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280714152422.png


OVERVIEW:

This action is important because the health and very survival of future generations depends on it. We must strive tirelessly to provide a Viable Biosphere for our children. They deserve as beautiful a planet as the one we have lived in.

It's time to reverse all this environmental trashing and get real about the fact that sustainability is not optional for a caring, intelligent human population. We are the caretakers of the biosphere because we are self aware beings. It's high time we began living up to our responsibility to be good stewards of nature.

"Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors; we borrow it from our Children." Ancient American Indian Proverb

PETITION:

Federal agencies have a target of making their buildings carbon neutral by 2030. We can do better, much better than that. We need a WWII sized effort for the health of our country and that of future generations.

The Federal Reserve provides low interest loans for cars and houses. They can also, for the good of the economy and the future of our country, provide the same low interest loans for a nationwide massive effort to transition to 100% Renewable Energy. We did this before with the Liberty Ship building effort of WWII to help us win the war. We can win the Climate Victory with a "Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through Renewable Energy" massive manufacturing of Renewable energy machines. I have all the details and have prepared a poster campaign to get all Americans on board with the effort like we did during WWII.

Mr. President, as you know, during WWII and up to this day, a banner was (and is) flown by Blue Star Mothers (son in the service) signifying their sacrifice and patriotic commitment to the national effort in the war front and the home front. Posters were widely distributed that asked people to save fuel with a mature lady (with the Blue Star Banner in the background) asking, "Don't you want our boys to have a chance to come home?".

We can do the same thing now and get everyone on board to win the Climate Victory. The banner for all patriotic Americans to fly is the Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations" banner/flag.

My first poster in the series has a lady (with the Green Leaf Star Banner in the background) asking, "Won't you give our children a chance for a healthy future?".

The effort would provide an explosion of jobs and a real chance at an economy that bioremediates the environment, rather than trashing it. Everyone, rich and poor would benefit. It's a win, win, Mr. President, despite the fierce opposition you will encounter from the polluting nuclear and fossil fuels vested interests. We can no longer afford profit over planet business as usual.

We all need to work together in the Service of Future Generations to regain a viable biosphere. Ubi jus ibi remedium.

Let's get it done!

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/general-discussion/historical-documentaries/msg1268/#msg1268

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/general-discussion/historical-documentaries/msg1273/#msg1273

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/general-discussion/historical-documentaries/msg1275/#msg1275

http://thecreativeactionnetwork.com/10540

http://thecreativeactionnetwork.com/10532

Respectfully,

Anthony G. Gelbert
Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110614145742.jpeg

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php
Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/420/529/456/demand-liberty-from-fossil-fuels-through-100-renewable-energy-wwii-style-effort/

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Comments

OK people.......did you sign and if not why not?

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

almost 1% of the way to your goal!!!! come on you guys, sign the peptition.. stick it to the Koch bros, you guys! Liberty from Fossil fuels, you guys!!

click that mouse

click that mouse

Click that mouse

Oh yeah, we're saving the planet now, You guys!

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote stwo:

almost 1% of the way to your goal!!!! come on you guys, sign the peptition.. stick it to the Koch bros, you guys! Liberty from Fossil fuels, you guys!!

click that mouse

click that mouse

Click that mouse

Oh yeah, we're saving the planet now, You guys!

Even if man's effect on climate were insignificant, even if the rest of the entire world bought into it, and acted accordingly,why wouldn't it be preferrable to more urgently move towards more environmentally friendly alternatives, we know exist, and can reasonbaly be expected to significanly enhance the health and safety of the planet?

If your only answer is that it affects your livelyhood, which you alluded to before,then STFU already.

drbjmn
Joined:
Jul. 22, 2013 5:52 am

Some background on why I started the petition that might spur a few million people to sign... That is, unless they prefer to continue being world class suckers for the war profiteering dirty energy corporations.

The 1%'s Responsibility to Shoulder 80% of the COST of a 100% Renewable Energy World

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2013/10/one-percents-planetary-assets-equals-80-responsibility-for-funding-a-100-renewable-energy-world

A 100% Transition to Renewable energy is beginning for the sake of democracy as well as energy demand and the need for a viable biosphere.

I recently started a petition at Care2 for that very purpose. The staff at Care2 asked me why I felt so strongly about demanding a WWII style massive transition to 100% Renewable Energy. This is a summary of my answer:

Dear Care2 Staff,
I am writing to answer your question as to what motivated me to start my petition hoping that you too will sign the petition, as it concerns the health and welfare of all humans as well as the biosphere we depend on.

I have discovered that we-the-people have been lied to and used for over a century by the fossil fuel interests for their profit while the biosphere has become, because of dirty fuels like fossil and nuclear, increasingly degraded.

In my research I have discovered many unconscionable acts by the fossil fuel industry and associated chemical industries during he last century. These are not "conspiracy" theories. they are quite well documented but not generally mentioned in grade and high school history texts or the news media. This modus operandi of the war loving fossil fuel, and now nuclear power, dirty energy corporations continues to this day with slick propaganda campaigns to keep the public deluded about the 24/7 fleecing they receive at the hands of these energy corporations that have undue influence on government policies.

I have written much, but just to give you the greatest evidence I have uncovered of the totally unnecessary reliance we have on dirty energy, let me quote from this peer reviewed book by Dilworth titled "Too Smart For Our Own Good". Notice the time period the book quote refers to. Then think about all the unnecessary hysteria disguised as prudent preservation of our "energy resources" for "national security" which conveniently (for the fossil fuel industry) is used as a justification for endless wars for oil and the accompanying human misery. Our energy "dependence" on oil, as well as scaremongering price shocks, are contrived, not real!

Dilworth (2010-03-12). Too Smart for our Own Good (pp. 399-400). Cambridge University Press. Kindle Edition.

"As suggested earlier, war, for example, which represents a cost for society, is a source of profit to capitalists. In this way we can partly understand e.g. the American military expenditures in the Persian Gulf area. Already before the first Gulf War, i.e. in 1985, the United States spent $47 billion projecting power into the region. If seen as being spent to obtain Gulf oil, It AMOUNTED TO $468 PER BARREL, or 18 TIMES the $27 or so that at that time was paid for the oil itself.

In fact, if Americans had spent as much to make buildings heat-tight as they spent in ONE YEAR at the end of the 1980s on the military forces meant to protect the Middle Eastern oil fields, THEY COULD HAVE ELIMINATED THE NEED TO IMPORT OIL from the Middle East.

So why have they not done so? Because, while the $468 per barrel may be seen as being a cost the American taxpayers had to bear, and a negative social effect those living in the Gulf area had to bear, it meant only profits for American capitalists. "

Note: I added the bold caps emphasis on the barrel of oil price, money spent in one year and the need to import oil from the Middle East.

This totally unjustified profit, never mind the needless loss of lives, then increases the power of the fossil fuel corporations to perpetuate a biosphere harming dirty fuel status quo. How? By "funding" politicians with rather large "donations" to keep renewable energy from competing with dirty energy.

If all this was just about power politics, I might not be that concerned. Humans, particularly the overly ambitious and aggressive ones, have always fought and schemed to control and fleece the population at large.

But now we know the future of our planet is at stake. Now we know the entire edifice of dirty energy is a knife in the back of the biosphere that will destroy our species and many others.

THAT knowledge, once I became convinced of it, is what has spurred me to warn everyone out there that we must not let the wool be pulled over our eyes by bought and paid for politicians in the service of profit over planet predatory corporations. It is madness to think infinite growth of dirty energy economies can occur in a finite biosphere. In fact, it is easily labeled a form of delusional criminal insanity what has gripped our world today. The sensible and logical thing to work for is a steady state economy. But Wall Street is in too much denial to see this obvious truth.

The intransigence of the fossil fuel industry in this matter is a given. They wish to avoid liability for the damage they have caused so they have, for several decades, (See the George C. Marshal Institute) launched a campaign of disinformation to claim there is NO climate threat whatsoever.

Not only do they deny climate change, they scare monger people into thinking we are running out of oil! Well, hello? We are supposed to stop using it, aren't we? Now who do you suppose would want us to feel we were "running out" of something so we would VALUE it more?<strong> The truth is that oil is a liability, not an asset.</strong> But that is precisely what the propagandists work mightily to prevent the people form realizing. If somebody tells me we are running out of a something that , when you burn it, poisons the atmosphere, I'm rather pleased we are running out of it! <strong>But for some amazing reason, that obvious truth never makes the news either.</strong>

The worsening weather will be the ONLY thing that will spur change and even then we already passed the point a couple of decades ago when bioremediation was going to be fairly straight forward.

Dr. Hansen said oceanic inertia (acidification from CO2) is nearly 100 years. I had thought it was only about 30 years. That means we are experiencing NOW the effects of our generated pollutants (if you say the incubation inertia conservatively is half of 100 years) as of 1964!

Consider all the pollutants that have poured in to the biosphere since then and you start to understand why brilliant people like Guy McPherson are so despondent.

There is NO WAY we can stop the pollution/bad weather clock from CONTINUING to deteriorate for another 50 years (or 100 if Hansen is right) even if we STOPPED using all fossil fuels today.

We are now in a climate cake that has been baked for about 1,000 years according to atmospheric, objective, proven with experimental data, science.

What can we do?

Something similar to what we did with the Liberty Ship building effort in WWII but for a 100% transition to Renewable Energy

"A total of 2,710 Liberty ships were built, with an expected lifespan of just five years. A little more than 2,400 made it through the war, and 835 of these entered the US cargo fleet. Many others entered Greek and Italian fleets. Many of these ships were destroyed by leftover mines, which had been forgotten or inadequately cleared. Two ships survive today, both operating as museum ships. They are still seaworthy, and one (the Jeremiah O'Brien) sailed from San Francisco to England in 1994."
http://www.brighthubengineering.com/marine-history/88389-history-of-the-liberty-ships/

Today, several countries have, as do we, a much greater industrial capacity. It is inaccurate to claim that we cannot produce sufficient renewable energy devices in a decade or so to replace the internal combustion engine everywhere in our civilization.

The industrial capacity is there and is easily provable by asking some simple questions about the fossil fuel powered internal combustion engine status quo:

How long do internal combustion engine powered machines last?

How much energy does it require to mine the raw materials and manufacture the millions of engines wearing out and being replaced day in and day out?

What happens if ALL THAT INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY is, instead, dedicated to manufacturing Renewable Energy machines?

IOW, if there is a ten to twenty year turnover NOW in our present civilization involving manufacture and replacement of the internal combustion engines we use, why can't we retool and convert the entire internal combustion engine fossil fuel dependent civilization to a Renewable Energy Machine dependent civilization?

1) The industrial capacity is certainly there to do it EASILY in two decades and maybe just ten years with a concerted push.

2) Since Renewable Energy machines use LESS metal and do not require high temperature alloys, a cash for clunkers worldwide program could obtain more than enough metal raw material without ANY ADDITIONAL MINING (except for rare earth minerals - a drop in the bucket -- compared to all the mining presently done for metals to build the internal combustion engine) by just recycling the internal combustion engine parts into Renewable Energy machines.

3) Just as in WWII, but on a worldwide scale, the recession/depression would end as millions of people were put to work on the colossal transition to Renewable Energy.

It is TRUE that civilization will collapse and a huge die off will occur without fossil fuels IF, and ONLY IF, Renewable Energy does not replace fossil fuels. It is blatantly obvious that we need energy to run our civilization.

It is ALSO TRUE that if we continue to burn fossil fuels in internal combustion engines, Homo sapiens will become extinct. This is not hyperbole. We ALREADY have baked in conditions, that take about three decades to fully develop, that have placed us in a climate like the one that existed over 3 million years ago.

We DID NOT thrive in those conditions or multiply. This is a fact. We barely survived until a couple of hundred thousand years ago when the weather became friendlier and even then we didn't really start to populate the planet until about 10,000 years ago.

The climate 3 million years ago was, basically, mostly lethal to Homo Sapiens.

So, what happens, Care2, if my petition or some other effort does NOT succeed in getting our government (and several others too) to engage in a massive Transition to 100% Renewable energy NOW?

What can we expect from the somewhat dismal prospects for Homo sapiens?

1) Terrible weather and melted polar ice caps with an increase in average wind velocity in turn causing more beach erosion from gradually rising sea level and wave action. The oceans will become more difficult to traverse because of high wave action and more turbulent seas. The acidification will increase the dead zones and reduce aquatic life diversity. But you've heard all this before so I won't dwell on the biosphere problems that promise to do us in.

2) As Renewable Energy devices continue to make inroads in fossil fuel profits, expect an engineered partial civilizational collapse in a large city to underline the "you are all going to die without fossil fuels" propaganda pushed to avoid liability for the increasingly "in your face" climate extremes.

3) Less democracy and less freedom of expression from some governments and more democracy and freedom of expression from other governments in direct proportion to the percent penetration of Renewable energy machines in powering their countries (more Renewable Energy, more freedom) and an inverse proportion to the power of their "real politik" Fossil Fuel lobbies in countries. (more Fossil Fuel power, less freedom).

The bottom line, as Guy McPherson says, is that NATURE BATS LAST. Nature has millions of "bats". Homo SAP has a putrid fascist parasite bleeding it to death and poisoning it at the same time (the fossil fuels and nuclear power industries)..

A word about political power and real politik living in a fossil fuel fascist dystopia.

It simply DOES NOT MATTER what the 'real world", "real politik" geopolitical power structure mankind has now is. It DOES NOT MATTER how powerful the fossil fuel industry is in human affairs. <strong>The internal combustion engine and fossil fuels have to go or Mother Nature will kill us, PERIOD</strong>.

Will a massive public outcry born of demands like the one I make in the petition make a difference?

I think so. I know doing nothing is not optional for a caring human population. It is our thankless task to convince the powers that be that they are on a course for planetary suicide that can only be changed with a paradigm shift involving respect for all life, not just human life.

If we change, if we act to leave dirty and centralized, political power concentrating energy behind, we will give future generations a chance to live in a Viable Biospshere AND a political democracy.

If we don't, we will perish.

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Posters to download and print to publicize the petition:

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200614004325.png

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190614205808.png

A "friendly" note for those who deny the present and accelerating Species (including Homo sap!) Threatening World Climate Change or those who don't wish to bother signing or are concerned for their "privacy".

Hello? Hello? This is the year 2014! By 2030 periods where the "Humid Heat Stroke Index" is so high that the human body can no longer maintain a normal core temperature, will become common (according to Guy McPherson and I think he is RIGHT! ). Home Sap is on the short list for extinction! This NOT about some "new opportunity" for a profit-over-planet fossil fuel powered utility to push the use of more air conditioners! The ENTIRE biosphere will degrade to our detriment and that of millions of species that are sine qua non to viable biosphere. No Viable Biosphere, no Homo Sap, get it?

That is sorta more important than hiding from the NSA or the CIA now ISN'T IT? And I DO NOT see ANY of the home addresses or e-mail addresses anyway, Care2 does! So, if you CARE about future generations, you have ZERO excuse, unless you are a bought and paid for climate denying, war profiteering LOW LIFE GREEDBALL, for NOT signing.

Accept the fact you are a NIHILSTIC DEATH CULT ACCESSORY to the HOMO SAP SUICIDE or sign the petition (and pass this on to everyone you care about to sign too!).

Have a nice day.

Anthony G. Gelbert

http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Pass it on. The Planetary Biosphere you save may be your own.

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Thank you again. I did sign it and passed it on. I do hope others will too. The quote is true "the Planetary Biosphere you save may be your own." Thank you again for posting it and any others that you might find.

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

You are very welcome MrsBJLee.

Here is some more background on my decision to start the petiton to get us off of dirty energy once and for all.

This is what President Reagan did to thwart Renewable Energy in the service of fossil fuel profit over planet!

How Ronald Reagan Turned Out the Lights on Solar Power

In an excerpt from his new book, John Perlin reveals how one of the first actions of the new Reagan administration was to dim the lights on the solar energy program.

SNIPPET:

Dr. Barry Commoner, a distinguished scientist and strong solar advocate, was "surprised and troubled by the smallness of both the proposed solar research budget and expected results." He wanted to see the data from the National Science Foundation that supported the Atomic Energy Commission’s dismal view of the future of solar power, especially since Solar Subpanel IX, the scientific panel that appraised photovoltaics’ contribution, was made up of, in Commoner’s judgment, "a distinguished group of experts." A report by Solar Subpanel IX contained their findings, the scientist learned; when Commoner asked to see a copy of the report, the Nixon administration denied that such a report existed. Not believing the response credible, Commoner enlisted the support of Senator James Abourezk of South Dakota, a strong supporter of solar energy.

He received the same runaround. Finally, a solar-energy friendly "Deep Throat" told the senator that a copy existed and could be found at the Atomic Energy Commission’s document reading room. According to Commoner, "This turned out to be a dim photocopy of a hazy carbon; but it has brilliantly illuminated" the discrepancies between the science and politics of energy.

Unlike the author of The Nation’s Energy Future, the subpanel recommended an outlay of almost six times more money than the Atomic Energy Commission had requested for research and development of solar cells[/i]. Furthermore, the National Science Foundation had great expectations for solar electricity, predicting that with its suggested outlay of funds for photovoltaics, solar cells would supply "more than 7 percent of the required U.S. electrical generation capacity by the year 2000," even though the expenditure for the solar option would be 16 times less than for the nuclear choice.

The subpanel also found the solar option more appealing because "in contrast to problems incurred by nuclear plants, photovoltaic systems would find wide public acceptance because of their minimal impact on the environment."However, the report warned, if underfunded, "photovoltaics will not impact the energy [situation]" in future times.

http://www.alternet.org/how-ronald-reagan-turned-out-lights-solar-power

The planet and the biosphere, according to serious, objective, proven environmental science, will become uninhabitable if we do not stop burning fossil fuels within a couple of decades . As things are right now in June of 2014, the scientific community has estimated that it will take over one thousand years, even if we stopped all dirty energy use today, to get our atmosphere back to 350 ppm of CO2. And that is without even taking the other greenhouse gas dangers like methane into account.

The intransigence of the fossil fuel industry in this matter is a given. They wish to avoid liability for the damage they have caused so they have, for several decades, (See the George C. Marshal Institute) launched a campaign of disinformation to claim there is NO climate threat whatsoever.

Not only do they deny climate change, they scare monger people into thinking we are running out of oil! Well, hello? We are supposed to stop using it, aren't we? Now who do you suppose would want us to feel we were "running out" of something so we would VALUE it more? The truth is that oil is a liability, not an asset. But that is precisely what the propagandists work mightily to prevent the people form realizing. If somebody tells me we are running out of a something that , when you burn it, poisons the atmosphere, I'm rather pleased we are running out of it! But for some amazing reason, that obvious truth never makes the news either.

The worsening weather will be the ONLY thing that will spur change and even then we already passed the point a couple of decades ago when bioremediation was going to be fairly straight forward.

Dr. Hansen said oceanic inertia (acidification from CO2) is nearly 100 years. I had thought it was only about 30 years. That means we are experiencing NOW the effects of our generated pollutants (if you say the incubation inertia conservatively is half of 100 years) as of 1964!

Consider all the pollutants that have poured in to the biosphere since then and you start to understand why brilliant people like Guy McPherson are so despondent. There is NO WAY we can stop the pollution/bad weather clock from CONTINUING to deteriorate for another 50 years (or 100 if Hansen is right) even if we STOPPED using all fossil fuels today.

I'm not in charge and neither are you. But clinging to this fossil fuel fantasyland of cheap power and all we "owe" it for our civilization is not going to do anything but make things deteriorate faster.

If enough people reach the 1%, maybe they will wake up. It's all we can do in addition to trying to foster community.

The system, as defined by the fossil fuel fascist dystopia that currently runs most of the human affairs among the 1 billion population in the developed world that is saddling the other 6 billion, who are totally free of guilt for causing it, with this climate horror we are beginning to experience, IS quite stubborn and does not wish to change the status quo.

Mother nature will force it to do so.

Whether it is done within the next two decades or not (i.e. a switch to 100% PLUS bioremediation Renewable Energy steady state economy) will dictate the size of the consequent die off, not only of humans but thousands of other species as well.

We are now in a climate cake that has been baked for about 1,000 years according to atmospheric, objective, proven with experimental data, science.

If the crash program to switch to renewable energy is to begin soon, I expect the trigger for the crash program will be the first ice free arctic summer (according to my estimates) in 2017.

So I would use that future melting now as a rallying point to wake people up and join in the effort to ban fossil fuel burning and internal combustion engines from planet earth. Expect the fossil fuelers to counter that polar ice melting catastrophic reality with propaganda about what a "wonderful" thing it is to have a new ocean to shorten ship traveling (i.e. TANKERS) distances. So it goes.

If things, by some miracle, go well for humanity and the 1% galvanize to save the biosphere and their stuff, we will witness the dismantling of the centralized fossil fuel infrastructure, it's use and, more importantly, the relinquishing of political power worldwide by big oil.

15 April 2013

James Hansen

1. Exaggeration?

I have been told of specific well-respected people who have asserted that "Jim Hansen exaggerates" the magnitude and imminence of the climate threat. If only that were true, I would be happy.

"Magnitude and imminence" compose most of the climate story.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130415_Exaggerations.pdf

The main reason that large dirty energy industries DO NOT want to transition to Renewable energy is because It has NEVER been about ENERGY beyond CONTROLLING the spigot to we-the-people.

That's why the fossil fuel industry simply didn't switch to the much more profitable and economical renewable energy technologies long ago (they certainly have the money to do so); they simply could not figure out a way to retain POWER and CONTROL with a distributed, rather than a centralized energy system.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr: In the next decade there will be an epic battle for survival for humanity against the forces of ignorance and greed. It’s going to be Armageddon, represented by the oil industry on one side, versus the renewable industry on the other.

And people are going to have to choose sides – including politically. They will have to choose sides because oil and coal, they will not be able to survive – they are not going to be able to burn their proven reserves.

If they do, then we are all dead. And they are quite willing to burn it. We’re all going to be part of that battle. We are going to watch governments being buffeted by the whims of money and greed on one side, and idealism and hope on the other.

http://cleantechnica.com/2013/02/06/interview-with-robert-f-kennedy-jr-on-environmental-activism-democratization-of-energy-more/

The fossil fuel industry and those who side with it, regardless of appearing to take a pro-environment position in their personal lives, are hurting our chances for a viable biosphere.

Those who, instead, simply stand their ground on the settled climate science and state unequivocally that fossil fuels must be BANNED from human use forever and the fossil fuel industries dismantled while a massive transition to a lower carbon footprint and 100% plus renewable energy economy takes place, are the only hope Homo sapiens has.

This is what we are up against with the 24/7 mendacity by the dirty energy proponents:

Typical phases of resistance to renewable energy, as described by Dr. Herman Scheer are as follows:

Phase 1 – Belittle & Deny the Renewable Energy Option

Phase 2 – Denounce & Mobilize Against the Renewable Energy Option

Phase 3 - Spread Doubt & Misrepresent the Challenges in the Disguise of General Support

(Note: reaching Phase 3 doesn’t mean that Phase 1 & 2 will disappear.)

I wrote the following about a year ago. It was key to my realization that there MIGHT be hope for us to transition rapidly and safely out of dirty energy for the sake of future generations. I sent a copy to Senator Sanders of Vermont last November. I have not heard anything back.

Note: The idea of the Green Leaf Star American on my petition came later when I saw a Blue Star Mother WWII poster.

Historic proof that manufacturing all the renewable energy machines and infrastructure needed to transition to a 100% Renewable Energy world economy can be achieved in two decades or less: The mass produced Liberty Ships of WWII.

The other day, a knowledgeable mechanical engineer I know stated this concern about the colossal challenge and, in his opinion, impossibility of switching to renewable energy machines in time to avoid a collapse from an energy to manufacture and global industrial capacity limitation in our civilizational infrastructure.

He said:

I admire your enthusiasm, and I agree with many of the points you make. Yes internal combustion engines waste high EROEI consistently, yes fossil fuels and conventional engineering has a warped distorted perspective because of the internal combustion engine, and yes we have an oil oligarchy protecting its turf.

However say we hypothetically made all the oil companies disappear tomorrow and where able to suspend the laws of time and implement our favorite renewables of choice and then where tasked with making certain all of societies critical needs were met we'd have a tall order. The devil is in the details and quantities.

Its the magnitudes, its 21 million barrels per day we are dependent on. Its created massive structural centralization that can only be sustained by incredible energetic inputs. Not enough wind, and not enough rare earth material for PV's to scale and replace. We have to structurally rearrange society to solve the problem. Distributed solar powered villages, not big cities and surely not suburbia. I fear we'll sink very useful resources and capital towards these energy sources (as we arguably have with wind) when the real answer is structural change.

I have shown evidence that there are several multiples of the energy we now consume available just from wind power. This data came from a recent study by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Scientists.

He thinks we CAN'T do it even if we had enough wind because of the colossal challenge and, in his opinion, impossibility of switching to renewable energy machines in time to avoid a collapse from an energy required to manufacture and global industrial capacity limitation in our civilizational infrastructure.

His solution is to survive the coming collapse with small distributed energy systems and a radically scaled down carbon footprint. Sadly, that option will not be available to a large percentage of humanity.

Hoping for a more positive future scenario, I analyzed his concerns to see if they are valid and we have no other option but to face a collapse and a die off with the surviving population living at much lower energy use levels.

I'm happy to report that, although the mechanical engineer has just cause to be concerned, we can, in reality, transition to 100% Renewable Energy without overtaxing our civilizational resources.

This a slim hope but a real one based on history and the word's present manufacturing might. Read on.

http://www.skylighters.org/troopships/libshipschematic1.jpg

I give you the logistics aiding marvel of WWII, the Liberty Ship. It was THE JIT (just in time), SIT (sometimes in time) and sometimes NIT (never in time because it was torpedoed) cargo delivery system that helped us win the war.

This was a mass produced ship. These ships are a testament to the ability to build an enormous quantity of machines on a global scale that the U.S. was capable of over half a century ago.

The Liberty ship model used two oil boilers and was propelled by a single-screw steam engine, which gave the liberty ship a cruise speed of 11 to 11.5 knots. The ships were 441.5 feet long, with a 57 foot beam and a 28 foot draft.

[img width=640 height=480]http://www.nps.gov/nr/twhp/wwwlps/lessons/116liberty_victory_ships/116images/116coverbl2.jpg[/img]

[img width=640 height=480]http://www.merchantnavyofficers.com/liberty2/libertyshipsforitaly.jpg[/img]

The ships were designed to minimize labor and material costs; this was done in part by replacing many rivets with welds. This was a new technique, so workers were inexperienced and engineers had little data to go on. Additionally, much of the shipyards' labor force had been replaced with women as men joined the armed forces. Because of this, early ships took quite a long time to build - the Patrick Henry taking 244 days -

but the average building time eventually came down to just 42 days.

[img width=640 height=480]http://www.skylighters.org/troopships/libertyship-hi-new.jpg[/img]

A total of 2,710 Liberty ships were built, with an expected lifespan of just five years. A little more than 2,400 made it through the war, and 835 of these entered the US cargo fleet. Many others entered Greek and Italian fleets. Many of these ships were destroyed by leftover mines, which had been forgotten or inadequately cleared. Two ships survive today, both operating as museum ships. They are still seaworthy, and one (the Jeremiah O'Brien) sailed from San Francisco to England in 1994.

http://www.brighthubengineering.com/marine-history/88389-history-of-the-liberty-ships/

Today, several countries have, as do we, a much greater industrial capacity. It is inaccurate to claim that we cannot produce sufficient renewable energy devices in a decade or so to replace the internal combustion engine everywhere in our civilization.

The industrial capacity is there and is easily provable by asking some simple questions about the fossil fuel powered internal combustion engine status quo:

How long do internal combustion engine powered machines last?

How much energy does it require to mine the raw materials and manufacture the millions of engines wearing out and being replaced day in and day out?

What happens if ALL THAT INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY is, instead, dedicated to manufacturing Renewable Energy machines?

IOW, if there is a ten to twenty year turnover NOW in our present civilization involving manufacture and replacement of the internal combustion engines we use, why can't we retool and convert the entire internal combustion engine fossil fuel dependent civilization to a Renewable Energy Machine dependent civilization?

1) The industrial capacity is certainly there to do it EASILY in two decades and maybe just ten years with a concerted push.

2) Since Renewable Energy machines use LESS metal and do not require high temperature alloys, a cash for clunkers worldwide program could obtain more than enough metal raw material without ANY ADDITIONAL MINING (except for rare earth minerals - a drop in the bucket -- compared to all the mining presently done for metals to build the internal combustion engine) by just recycling the internal combustion engine parts into Renewable Energy machines.

3) Just as in WWII, but on a worldwide scale, the recession/depression would end as millions of people were put to work on the colossal transition to Renewable Energy.

HOWEVER, despite our ABILITY to TRANSITION TO 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY, we "CAN'T DO IT" because the fossil fuel industry has tremendous influence on the worldwide political power structure from the USA to Middle East to Russia to China.

IOW, it was NEVER

1. An energy problem,

2. A "laws of thermodynamics" problem,

3. A mining waste and pollution problem,

4. A lack of wind or sun problem,

5. An environmental problem,

6. An industrial capacity problem or

7. A technology problem.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE ABOVE excuses for claiming Renewable Energy cannot replace Fossil Fuels are STRAWMEN presented to the public for the express purpose of convincing us of the half truth that without fossil fuels, civilization will collapse. It was ALWAYS a POLITICAL PROBLEM of the fossil fuel industry not wanting to relinquish their stranglehold on the world's geopolitical make up.

It drives them insane to think that Arizona and New Mexico can provide more power than all the oil in the Middle East. Their leverage over lawmakers and laws to avoid environmental liability is directly proportional to their market share of global energy supplies. They are threatened by Renewable Energy and have mobilized to hamper its growth as much as possible through various propaganda techniques using all the above strawmen.

It is TRUE that civilization will collapse and a huge die off will occur without fossil fuels IF, and ONLY IF, Renewable Energy does not replace fossil fuels. It is blatantly obvious that we need energy to run our civilization.

It is ALSO TRUE that if we continue to burn fossil fuels in iternal combustion engines, Homo sapiens will become extinct. This is not hyperbole. We ALREADY have baked in conditions, that take about three decades to fully develop, that have placed us in a climate like the one that existed over 3 million years ago.

We DID NOT thrive in those conditions or multiply. This is a fact. We barely survived until a couple of hundred thousand years ago when the weather became friendlier and even then we didn't really start to populate the planet until about 10,000 years ago.

The climate 3 million years ago was, basically, mostly lethal to Homo Sapiens. To say that we have technology and can handle it WHILE CONTINUING TO BURN FOSSIL FUELS is a massive dodge of our responsibility for causing this climate crisis (and ANOTHER strawman from Exxon "We will adapt to that" CEO).

Fossil fuel corporations DO NOT want to be held liable for the damage they have caused, so, even as they allow Renewable Energy to have a niche in the global energy picture, will use that VERY NICHE (see rare earth mining and energy to build PV and wind turbines) to blame Renewables for environmental damage.

In summary, the example of the Liberty ships is proof we CAN TRANSITION TO RENEWABLE ENERGY in, at most, a couple of decades if we decide to do it but WON'T do it because of the fossil fuel industry's stranglehold on political power, financing and laws along with the powerful propaganda machine they control.

In other words, what happens, if my petition or some other effort does NOT succeed in getting our government (and several others too) to engage in a massive Transition to 100% Renewable energy NOW?

What can we expect from the somewhat dismal prospects for Homo sapiens?

1) Terrible weather and melted polar ice caps with an increase in average wind velocity in turn causing more beach erosion from gradually rising sea level and wave action. The oceans will become more difficult to traverse because of high wave action and more turbulent seas. The acidification will increase the dead zones and reduce aquatic life diversity. But you've heard all this before so I won't dwell on the biosphere problems that promise to do us in.

2) As Renewable Energy devices continue to make inroads in fossil fuel profits, expect an engineered partial civilizational collapse in a large city to underline the "you are all going to die without fossil fuels" propaganda pushed to avoid liability for the increasingly "in your face" climate extremes.

3) Less democracy and less freedom of expression from some governments and more democracy and freedom of expression from other governments in direct proportion to the percent penetration of Renewable energy machines in powering their countries (more Renewable Energy, more freedom) and an inverse proportion to the power of their "real politik" Fossil Fuel lobbies in countries. (more Fossil Fuel power, less freedom).

The bottom line, as Guy McPherson says, is that NATURE BATS LAST. Nature has millions of "bats". Homo SAP has a putrid fascist parasite bleeding it to death and poisoning it at the same time. The parasite cannot survive without us so it is allowing us to get a tiny IV to keep us alive a little longer (a small percentage of renewable energy machines). It won't work.

But the parasite has a plan. The IV will be labeled a "parasite" (the villain and guilty party) when Homo SAP finally figures out he is going to DIE if he doesn't fix this "bleeding and poison" problem. Then the real parasite will try to morph into a partially symbiotic organism and Homo SAP will muddle through somehow.

I think that the parasite doesn't truly appreciate the severity of Mother Nature's "bat".

Three future Scenarios:

1. If the parasite (as a metaphor for a fossil fuel powered civilization) does not DIE TOTALLY, I don't think any of us will make it.

2. If the parasite takes MORE than 20 years to die, some of us will make it but most of us won't.

3. If, in 2017, when the north pole has the first ice free summer, all the governments of the Earth join in a crash program to deep six the use of fossil fuels and the internal combustion engine within a ten year period, most of us will make it.

A word about political power and real politik living in a fossil fuel fascist dystopia.

It simply DOES NOT MATTER what the 'real world", "real politik" geopolitical power structure mankind has now is. It DOES NOT MATTER how powerful the fossil fuel industry is in human affairs. The internal combustion engine and fossil fuels have to go or Mother Nature will kill us, PERIOD.

As a Christian, I take very seriously the commandment to respect my fellow human beings as myself. Because the life giving biosphere is God's creation, I take equally seriously our responsibility to be good stewards of our home. We have not been good stewards. Help me with this petition and future generations will thank you. We really, really ARE all in this together.

Will a massive public outcry born of demands like the one I make in the petition (link at close of post) make a difference?

I think so. I know doing nothing is not optional for a caring human population. It is our thankless task to convince the powers that be that they are on a course for planetary suicide that can only be changed with a paradigm shift involving respect for all life, not just human life.

If we change, if we act to leave dirty and centralized, political power concentrating energy behind, we will give future generations a chance to live in a Viable Biospshere AND a political democracy.

If we don't, we will perish.

Anthony G. Gelbert

Renewable Revolution Forum/blog

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/general-discussion/you-will-have-to-pick-a-side-there-is-no-longer-room-for-procrastination/msg46/#msg46

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/general-discussion/historical-documentaries/msg1214/#msg1214

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/nuke-puke/no-we-never-needed-lwr-nuclear-power-plants-to-make-nuclear-weapons/msg1332/#msg1332

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/fossil-fuel-folly/fossil-fuel-subsidies-in-the-u-s/msg353/#msg353

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/fossil-fuel-folly/how-the-promise-of-chemurgy-was-dashed-by-big-oil/msg3/#msg3

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/fossil-fuel-folly/how-the-promise-of-chemurgy-was-dashed-by-big-oil/msg89/#msg89

Petition to Demand a WWII Style Massive Effort to Transition to 100% Renewable Energy within a decade: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Thank you and please pass it on. The Bisophere you save may be your own.

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

From a knock down drag out between some nukers and some responsible humans at this link:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/06/nuclear-giant-exelon-launches-front-group-to-cover-its-assets-undermine-renewable-energy

A. G. Gelbert

June 24, 2014

Final Statement to Bill the "biologist" who, in so many words, is repeating the mantra that the solution to nuclear pollution is dilution. This totally ignores food chain realities expressed by the ingestion and concentration of radionuclides in bivalves and other bottom of the food chain filter feeders which are then ingested by fish, thereby increasing the concentration, not decreasing it (as Bill claims) in higher order life forms like Homo sapiens.

Cardiovascular disease and death increases in that area you claim "only" had increases in thyroid cancer are linked DIRECTLY to guess what radionuclide that is distributed uniformly in human muscle tissues? You obviously haven't looked at the Chernobyl effects data very closely. Also, you claim that my statement that 1 in three persons will get cancer at present is false. Google it! And yes Bill, the increase in cardiovascular disease and deaths, though you nukers will deny it, is definitely linked to radionuclide absorption in muscle tissue. It's not just about cholesterol and sugar! The radionuclide Ce-137 deposition map of the USA is public information LONG before Fufkushima.

Do you want to prepare a graph showing cancer and cardiovascular disease rate increases in this country and Ce-137 deposition from power plants and nuclear bomb tests? Probably not. You prefer to reach for your "correlation is not causation" straw.

If you really think my answer was long or disjointed and irrelevant, you have never read a research paper. If you want to descend into nitpicking minutiae to muddle the issues so I can be accused of getting "off topic" by the anonyMouse Steven, only for you to leap back to generalizations after I give you proof in a detailed answer, that again shows you are into propaganda, not science.

So, for the readers, I will present a really brief summary of the points I made . The proof is in that "long" answer I gave for those who have scientist level attention spans.

1. Mutagenicity of ionizing radiation was proven as far back as the discovery that Drosophila melanogaster has DOUBLE or more the mutation rate (none of said mutations beneficial, by the way) in an abandoned uranium mine. Of note to the readers is that Insects are more resistant to ionizing radiation than mammals because of the higher percentage of water in our tissues. One of the PRIMARY targets of therapy for cancer caused by radiation (Acute Radiation Sickness) are the non-receptor and receptor tyrosine kinase enzymes because of the PROVEN link between radionucllde exposure and tumorigenesis.

2. Target theory, as opposed to LNT is the only way to accurately measure damage from ionizing radiation. The damage is inversely proportional to the distance of the emitter. That is nuclear physics 101. Ingestion of radionuclides is far more damaging than the LNT standards people like Bill and AEC accept (wrongly and inaccurately) because the distance is in nanometers. I can give you a web sight where you can do the math on the group of photon energies for any radionuclide. At nanometer distances, it AIN'T PRETTY, Bill.

3. The main subject here, energy sources and COST, is defined rather selectively by the nukers to exclude AND minimize the health costs to, not just human populations, but the biosphere as a whole that we require to be a viable species, never mind a few centuries of baby sitting used fuel rod assemblies on the taxpayer dime.

The facts prove that, not only is Renewable Energy cheaper, it is the only sustainable alternative because of it's potential for zero waste products that damage the life forms in the food chain vital to our existence. The only nuclear powered furnace we need is the sun. We not only can scale up to 100% renewable energy, any other option is unsustainable and undermines the viability of the biosphere and that of future generations of Homo sapiens.

If you agree, please sign this petition to President Obama:

Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort

Petition to Demand a WWII Style Massive Effort to Transition to 100% Renewable Energy within a decade: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

We did it with the Liberty Ship massive building effort in WWII; we can do it again with Renewable energy technology and infrastructure.

Thank you,

Anthony G. Gelbert

Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

WE SIGNED: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort

Ms. Kimberly Mandel, OR

Jun 27, 09:57

# 140

This planet is our home! Please learn about it and care for it as if your life depends upon it. IT DOES!

Ms. Karen Thatcher-Smith, CA

Jun 27, 06:58

# 139

The future of our planet is of far more consequence than the pursuit of corporate profits.


Mr. Roy Wright, NH

Jun 26, 20:12

# 138

please!

Ms. Danielle Owen, SC

Jun 26, 17:41

# 137

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270614141615.jpeg

This is our country on (mostly) DIRTY ENERGY: Power plants in the USA
http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270614141845.png

We have to pressure our government to take major action to stop the degradation of the biosphere from climate change.

Fracking is poisoning aquifers and destroying good farm land while sickening us, our animals and the wildlife! We must stop this despicable profit-over-planet horror!

It's time to eliminate the excuse our fossil fuel loving oligarchy uses for pollutiong our biosphere and contriving "resources" wars for oil that bring nothing but misery to us and profits for them.

The chemical corporations are also just as guilty of polluting our air, ground and water because they use fossil fuels and do not employ closed loop recycling to keep harmful chemicals from damaging the biosphere.

Help stop this pollution by making oil a liability, not an asset!

Why? Because that is what it actually is!

Burning fossil fuels is killing us. the sooner we stop "valuing" that poison, the sooner we strip the power away from the war lovers that wield it. Our very democracy is in jeopardy because of centralized energy corporations. That's right; it's just as much about political power as about energy.

Demanding 100% Renewable energy is the way, not only to the extremely important goal of a viable biosphere, but absolutely essential to regaining our democracy from the fossil fuel industry that buys our politicians with the profits from pollution fuels while said politicians keep fossil fuel and nuclear power plant "subsides" (taxpayer theft!) to tilt the energy playing field against renewable energy.

Read this quote from a peer reviewed book by Dilworth and pass it on so people can learn what oil REALLY costs we-the-people:

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/climate-change/progress-of-petition-to-rid-the-planet-of-dirty-energy-through-100-renewables/msg1455/#msg1455

This is a chart of the fossil fuel subsidies versus renewable energy! If that isn't a "level" energy playing field that looks like an alpine slope, I don't know what is.

http://wilderness.org/sites/default/files/legacy/userfiles/federal-subsidies-chart-550(1).jpg

I started a petition on Care2: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort. I'm hoping that if enough people sign my petition, we can make a difference. Will you help me collect signatures by adding your name?
Here's a link to the petition:

http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Posters you can print to publicize the petition:
http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200614004325.png
http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200614004325.png

Thank you and please pass it on. We'll have real traction against the polluters if we can get 100,000 to several million signatures by September when the petition is to be delivered to the White House.

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

I signed the petition and don't see my name listed. I am actually glad to see that my name is not posted on this board. I don't think others would be happy to know that you have posted their names on THIS board. Why did you do that? PLEASE DON'T POST MY NAME ON THIS BOARD OR ANY OTHER BOARD

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

The person who posted this thread lacks the engineering and economic expertise to fully understand what is being talked about.

Robindell's picture
Robindell
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Our society doesn't put a price on our water supplies or our clean air.

Nuclear and fossil fuel producers pollute and consume these resources to unsustainable levels, and then these damages are externalized and borne by society at large.

Thermoelectric power plants fueled by coal, natural gas, oil and nuclear fission all boil water to produce steam, which then turns a turbine that generates the electricity. This water comes from our streams, lakes and rivers, with the power plants also drawing in and killing millions of fish per year. After the water passes through the turbine, more water is needed to cool the steam back into water for reuse.

Nationwide, electricity production is the largest user of water.

Human society deserves an honest discussion of the Renewable Energy potential as well as its benefits to society and to our natural environment. Let's not be hijacked by those with vested interests in the fossil fuel industry.

The facts prove that, not only is Renewable Energy cheaper, it is the only sustainable alternative because of it's potential for zero waste products that damage the life forms in the food chain vital to our existence. The only nuclear powered furnace we need is the sun.

And, the continued burning of Fossil Fuels is a death sentence to a Viable Biosphere for humans and thousands of other species that have done nothing to deserve extinction at our hands.

We not only can scale up to 100% renewable energy, any other option is unsustainable and undermines the viability of the biosphere and that of future generations of Homo sapiens. We did something similar with the massive building campaign of Liberty Ships to help us win WWII. We can do it again for Renewable Energy to help us win the Climate Victory!

If you agree, please sign this petition to President Obama:

Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through WWII Style Effort to Transition to 100% Renewable Energy

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

We did it with the Liberty Ship massive building effort in WWII; we can do it again with Renewable energy technology and infrastructure.

Thank you,

Anthony G. Gelbert

Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

WE SIGNED: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort
, TX
Jun 25, 22:27
# 108
I come from a Texas oil family, and I have known since grade school that the production, processing, transport, and burning of oil and gas is DIRTY, and that the politics behind oil is even dirtier. We need to turn away from oil, gas, and coal as fast as we can and use wind and solar power to produce electricity for electric powered mass transit, freight trains, and passenger trains, both high speed and conventional Amtrak.Stop the Keystone XL pipeline, the mountaintop removal method of coal mining, fracking on public lands, the oil wars in the Middle East, and wean us away from fossil fuels. n 25, 22:26
# 107
Please do all you can to bring renewable biofuels to our gas/filling stations ASAP.
# 104
Using renewable energy will save the planet, the environment and We The People...we need to put people over profits NOW....

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Very well, I will not post your name on this or any other board. Although I figured working to keep the human species from going extinct is more important than privacy concerns. I disagree with your view but will respect your wishes. Your fear should be based on our potential extinction from the idiots and greedballs like the moron that just posted saying I don't understand "what I speak of". The Chief Scientist of RMI (Amory Lovins) agrees with everything I say AND did a refit on the Empire State building saving hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in energy.

And I am certain this man does not wish his name to be hidden from public view. In fact what he says should be shouted from the rooftoops directrly into the ears of the Robindell stuffed shirt ostriches of this world who think we can survive with our suicidal economic status quo..

Mr. Richard Hughes, PhilippinesJun 28, 17:10# 154
I have been working actively on the global warming problem since mid-70s, including in Pres. Carter's renewables program out of Los Alamos Lab.

As an architect, I have designed many dozens of solar buildings and other applications, including the first solar county courthouse in America. It is a disgrace that we had a 40 year lead time on this and blew it to profit a few fatcats. Hey Thom, Mr. Hughes might be a great choice for you to interview on your show!

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Sure, YOUR economics of Profit over planet. It's really not that hard to understand it. What I don't understand about it is why you conscience free crooks have gotten away with it so long. You should be in prison for criminal negligence.

Here's an education on energy from Amory Lovins. Having done a refit on many buildings in the world, including the Empire State building, to save hundreds of thousands of dollars A YEAR in "negawatts" (a term he coined), this Chief Scientist of the RMI agrees that we CAN transition to 100% Renewable Energy. I know you won't watch the videos; you are just here to attack the messenger in order to undermine the message. But for those who wish to see how much MASSIVE waste goes on right now that we could EASILY shave off in order to be much more energy efficient (something the dirty energy corporations DO NOT WANT, by the way), watch the videos and be amazed at the FACT that we can reduce our energy output over 80% without ANY loss in our production and standard of living. We are being robbed. Help stop it. If the videos are too technical (It's an energy efficiency conference ), get someone with engineering knowledge to watch them. They are really paradigm shift material! And don't listen to the nasty, negative naysaying greedballs that worship the suicidal status quo.

Energy efficiency 1 Amory Lovins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=O5txQlEI7bc

Money quote for the truly impatient

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=O5txQlEI7bc#t=5191

Energy efficiency 2 Amory Lovins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8kUih_t9aCs

Some Key points about "rocket science"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8kUih_t9aCs#t=4292

Energy efficiency 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RjcWx7U1sjQ

Energy efficiency 4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=zW6gWZD4394

Energy efficiency 5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=x-9jd2OMwJQ

The next industrial revolution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=1zfO3HW6xCw

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Exposed: The 1950s mendacious pro-nuclear propaganda (that most Americans still wrongly believe) for MIC predatory corporate profit that building over 400 nuclear power plants during the postwar period was justified in order to make Weapons Grade Plutonium for "national security".

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/nuke-puke/no-we-never-needed-lwr-nuclear-power-plants-to-make-nuclear-weapons/msg1332/#msg1332

We have been lied to over and over and over again for short term profits (not for us, but for a few well connected "investors") that have fleeced us 24/7 for well over half a century from over 400 nuclear power plants that were totally unnecessary (and not even designed for that purpose) for weapons grade plutonium. But YOU thought we needed them to make bombs and it "helped" our national security in the cold war, right? WRONG! All the details with the appropriate references are at the link. The story of Fossil fuels is WORSE because it has gone on for over a century!

We need to stop this fleecing, not simply because of the uncalled for profits of the few over the many, but because of the degradation of our biosphere. Our survival is at stake. This is not just about distribution of wealth.

Watch this video and you will see what we ALL must do NOW, to stop the insanity of the current world dystopic economic system that is a cancer killing the biosphere that we all require to live and thrive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=WibmcsEGLKo

The next short video explains graphically how the dirty energy industry has ALWAYS dealt with the TRUTH that renewable energy is the ONLY energy resource that is sane in a world of finite resources.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oADlQPJ_Zfc

We just have to keep pushing to make Victor Hugo's saying come true in our time:

“There Is Nothing So Powerful As An Idea Whose Time Has Come.”

Here’s to the crazy ones.

The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently.

They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo.You can praise them, disagree with them, quote them, disbelieve them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them.

“Because The People Who Are Crazy Enough To Think They Can Change The World, Are The Ones Who Do.”

:>)

Let's DO IT!

If you agree, please sign this petition to President Obama:

Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through WWII Style Effort to Transition to 100% Renewable Energy

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Here's the main problem I have with the fossil fueler defense of the fossil fuel energy status quo as if it was something reasonably priced, economical, viable and sane as opposed to their continuous and mendacious insistence in claiming that renewable energy is too costly and/or unreliable:

Fossil fuel energy was never, and I mean never, cost effective.
In a sane society that doesn't pretend you can add and subtract whatever factors you wish in order to come up with a profit that will attract investment capital, you figure in all the costs to human society.

From the moment John D. Rockefeller started flushing gasoline down the rivers in Pennsylvania in the late 19th century (it was a waste product then) after refining crude oil for lubricants and lamp oil, huge costs were being foisted on society.

Coal is even worse. Status quo defenders pretend all that is water under the bridge. They pretend all the benefits of modern society are an acceptable tradeoff.

Well, they aren't. The only premise that is logical and sane now, with the continued damage that adds insult to injury to the biosphere we all depend on, is to admit that fossil fuels were never a viable, cost effective, sustainable source of energy for mankind and press on to renewable energy simply because there is no other alternative.

Argue this isn't real and those who defend fossil fuel energy are not in la la land in regard to the actual cost of these poisons if you dare.

From wikipedia:

The subsidies the fossil-fuel (and nuclear) industry receive — and have received for many years — make their product "affordable." Those subsidies take many forms, but the most significant are their "externalities." Externalities are real costs, but they are foisted off on the community instead of being paid by the companies that caused them.[18]

Paul Epstein, director of Harvard Medical School Center for Health and the Global Environment, has examined the health and environmental impacts of coal, including: mining, transportation, combustion in power plants and the impact of coal’s waste stream. He found that the "life cycle effects of coal and its waste cost the American public $333 billion to over $500 billion dollars annually". These are costs the coal industry is not paying and which fall to the community in general. Eliminating that subsidy would dramatically increase the price of coal-fired electricity.[18]

IEA position on subsidies

According to IEA (2011) energy subsidies artificially lower the price of energy paid by consumers, raise the price received by producers or lower the cost of production. ,"Fossil fuels subsidies costs generally outweigh the benefits.

Subsidies to renewables and low-carbon energy technologies can bring long-term economic and environmental benefits".[19] In November 2011, an IEA report entitled Deploying Renewables 2011 said "subsidies in green energy technologies that were not yet competitive are justified in order to give an incentive to investing into technologies with clear environmental and energy security benefits".

The IEA's report disagreed with claims that renewable energy technologies are only viable through costly subsidies and not able to produce energy reliably to meet demand. "A portfolio of renewable energy technologies is becoming cost-competitive in an increasingly broad range of circumstances, in some cases providing investment opportunities without the need for specific economic support," the IEA said, and added that "cost reductions in critical technologies, such as wind and solar, are set to continue."[20]

Fossil-fuel consumption subsidies were $409 billion in 2010, oil products claim half of it. Renewable-energy subsidies were $66 billion in 2010 and will reach according to IEA $250 billion by 2035. Renewable energy is subsidized in order to compete in the market, increase their volume and develop the technology so that the subsidies become unnecessary with the development.

Eliminating fossil-fuel subsidies could bring economic and environmental benefits. Phasing out fossil-fuel subsidies by 2020 would cut primary energy demand 5%. Since the start of 2010, at least 15 countries have taken steps to phase out fossil-fuel subsidies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies

Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through WWII Style Effort to Transition to 100% Renewable Energy

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

We did it with the Liberty Ship massive building effort in WWII; we can do it again with Renewable energy technology and infrastructure.

Thank you,

Anthony G. Gelbert

Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Have you ever heard of Chemurgy? It was a huge threat to the oil, chemical and paper corporations in the 1930s because the technology, developed by George Washington Carver, allowed farmers to RENEWABLY grow their own fuel and feed stock for paints, pharmaceuticals, paper, plastics and textiles hitherto obtained exclusively from hydrocarbons that big oil supplied and logging that the paper giants supplied the mills.

Here's the sad story of corruption and skullduggery that eliminated the competition for the vested interests in paper and oil. You see, Rockefeller of the "Competition is a Sin" famous quote, already had some "experience" in creating his own "opportunities" for profit. Few people are aware that ethanol became illegal as a fuel when Prohibition was passed around 1920. This was a profit bonanza for Rockefeller because farmers could no longer grow their own fuel. An "amazing coincidence" involves the FACT that Rockefeller, who allegedly never drank a drop, paid several million dollars to a suffrage group of ladies. It was THAT funding that made the difference in getting Prohibition passed. Only a "conspiracy" theorist (or someone that can add two and two...) would claim Rockefeller deliberately set out to "destroy the competition". But that's another story that I will post another day to explain to readers the history of gasoline and what it was before the automobile (a poisonous waste product looking for a market).

The story of the crushing of Chemurgy:

How the Promise of Chemurgy Was Dashed by Big Oil

Why do I bring up ancient history? Because they are STILL AT IT TODAY. It's called "subsides".

Fossil Fuel Subsidies in the U.S.

What is a fossil fuel subsidy?

A fossil fuel subsidy is any government action that lowers the cost of fossil fuel energy production, raises the price received by energy producers or lowers the price paid by energy consumers. There are a lot of activities under this simple definition—tax breaks and giveaways, but also loans at favorable rates, price controls, purchase requirements and a whole lot of other things.

How much money does the U.S. government give oil, gas and coal companies?

In the United States, credible estimates of annual fossil fuel subsidies range from $14 billion to $52 billion annually, while even efforts to remove small portions of those subsidies have been defeated in Congress, as shown in the graphic below

http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2012/05/FIN.USCapitolSubsidyGraphicFlyer.pdf

http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

You see, Renewable Energy has been around a long, long time. But it has been ACTIVELY supressed.

1931: Edison Advocates for Solar Energy over Fossil Fuels

In a conversation with fellow inventors and entrepreneurs Harvey Firestone and Henry Ford, Thomas Edison says of renewable energy sources: “We are like tenant farmers chopping down the fence around our house for fuel when we should be using nature’s inexhaustible sources of energy—sun, wind, and tide.… I’d put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don’t have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that.” [US History, 2013; About Thomas Edison, 8/19/2013]

Entity Tags: Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Harvey Firestone

Timeline Tags: US Solar Industry

More on Renewable Energy and the ethanol defamation campaign by the fossil fuel industry later.

Renewable energy is the only sane option for a Viable viosphere.

If you agree, please sign this petition to President Obama:

Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through WWII Style Effort to Transition to 100% Renewable Energy

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Pass it on. The Biopshere you save may be your own.

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Op-Ed: Big Oil Tells More Lies About Ethanol, Only Idiots Believe Them

SNIPPET:

In a move that should surprise no-one, the whining cry-baby rich-boys at Big Oil are butt-hurt over the latest federal court ruling that upholds the EPA’s E15 mandate. In a legal brief filed with the US Supreme Court, the American Petroleum Institute – a powerful, well-funded lobbyist group that represents more than 500 oil and natural gas companies – insisted that transportation fuels containing 15 percent ethanol (E15) could damage cars and trucks.

Should we believe them?

Obviously, the answer is a resounding "Haha! F**k no we should not!"

Let’s get one thing clear: the oil industry does not give one fat rat’s arse about the health, safety, future, or security of you, me, or anyone else.

The horrible people involved in the oil industry have proven, again and again – from Washington DC to Canada to Saudi Arabia to the Mississippi Gulf – that lining their own pockets with cash is more important to them than the your continued health or your children’s clean drinking water. Still, that hasn’t stopped them from faking a concern for your safety.

http://gas2.org/2013/06/11/op-ed-big-oil-tells-more-lies-about-ethanol-only-idiots-believe-them/

Here's a small anecdote from my days as an air taxi pilot to help you understand how water contamination and consequent damage to your engine is far more likely with gasoline than ethanol.

I flew light twin aircraft for a number of years. Unfortunately, to this day the gasoline on internal combustion engine powered aircraft is the really bad stuff with tetra-ethyl lead (and you thought it was banned from use, didn't you?). Of course they could run these aircraft engines on ethanol but apparently big oil is exerting influence there too. Remember that if you are on an approach path to a busy general aviation airport; you are getting showered with lead poisons. It's legal.

http://www.onearth.org/articles/2013/08/aiplanes-flying-on-leaded-gasoline-are-still-poisoning-us?iref=obinsite

But getting back to my flying experience and water contamination causing corrosion or faulty engine performance, let me explain what big oil doesn't want to explain to you.

As a pilot you are concerned with water in your fuel. All pilots are trained to fill the tanks on their aircraft when they finish flying that day. Why? Because any air in those tanks contains a certain amount of water vapor. When the aircraft tank cools at night, water vapor inside a half filled tank will condense into the gasoline.

Gasoline and water do not mix. Water is heavier and always sinks to the lowest part of the tank which just happens to be where the fuel line to the engine is located. As an air taxi pilot, you don't own the aircraft and cannot tell if the tanks were topped off the day before until you check. If you are making the first flight on an aircraft on a given day and you find partially filled fuel tanks, that's a danger sign.

I would carry a fuel contamination tester for each preflight. The aircraft fuel tanks have sump drains that are just a hair lower than the fuel line location. You open the sump and take a sample. If you don't see water in the bottom, you are good to go. If you do find water, you keep draining the sump until there is no evidence of water.

As a flight instructor, I would put some spit in the gasoline to show my students how easy it is to tell if you have water contamination. The spit will turn into a shiny bead and sink to the bottom of the sample. In other words, if you run gasoline in your tank and don't fill it up each night (nobody that owns an internal combustion engine powered car does, do they? ), you have water in your fuel guaranteed!

The irony of this fossil fuel founded disinformation about ethanol is that ethanol, unlike gasoline, DOES mix quite well with water! It does NOT separate out. How many times have you seen water in your whisky bottle? You aren't drinking anhydrous 200 proof are you? Of course not! Humans can't handle those levels. You probably have between 80 and 130 proof hard liquor ethanol and the rest is WATER (80 proof = 40% ethanol and 60% water).

So boys and girls, if you have ethanol in your fuel tank, you have LESS chance of water corrosion than with gasoline in an inverse proportion to the ethanol percentage. The greater percentage of ethanol in your fuel, the less chance of corrosion in your tank.

Because your tank was designed for gasoline, you are ALREADY home free for ethanol. IOW, a tank for ethanol does NOT require the same level of corrosion resistance as a tank designed for gasoline.

Why? Because water condensation from cooled air inside your fuel tank will mix freely with the alcohol molecules in a state of equilibrium and will NOT sink to the bottom.

However, if gasoline is what is in your tank, condensed water will sink right to the bottom of your tank and be positioned for hours to DAYS on that bottom ready to aid corrosion when it encounters a bit of oxygen from the air swishing around your tank. You can put that in the next fossil fueler's pipe and make them smoke it the next time you hear some lies about ethanol caused water corrosion.

Ethanol CAN be made renewably.Corn was the absolute WORSE choice we could have made to make ethanol from. It has just made ethanol production look bad. Sugar cane is 8 times more productive. Corn was, for ethanol, a crop designed to FAIL!

But there is a crop that, unlike sugar cane, we can grow all over the United States in places WHERE THERE IS NO SUITABLE FARMLAND! That way, crops can be grown exclusively for food. This ideal ethanol crop biofuel (it's far better than switchgrass because of its low lignin content), not only is a first rate producer of ethanol as well as feedstock for plastics, pharmaceuticals, animal feed and even human nutrition supllements, but is a carbon sequester too!

What is it? It's called Lemna minor. It is the tiniest (and fastest growing) flowering plant (angiosperm) known to science. You've all probably seen it. It grows so fast it is considered a "problem" by many people with exceptionally poor insight on what we need for carbon sequestration and biofuel. It has been studied intensly by a team of scientists at Rutgers (the Chinese were there too and VERY interested in the results). North Carolina State University also has a great scientist lady that has done much work on it. It can double it's mass in 24 to forty eight hours and does not require chemical fertilizers, pesticidesm, plowing or expensive fossil fuel intensive harvesting (it FLOATS) All you need to do is to set up shallow ponds two to three feet deep and feed it water with a high coliform count (pig feces will do nicely). There is no run off, extremely low water use (LESS than on land crops because after the initial filling the water is recycled and the green floating blanket of biomass prevents evaporation). The plant is a floating, super efficient, photosynthesis factory making a high percentage of starch without wasting energy on stalks or roots. Ducks like it too. The common name is Duckweed. It has a growing season that does not EVER end (it goes dormant when it gets real cold but it doesn't die). It grows wild from Siberia to the tropics. It can be grown indoors easily and can be harvested and dried with much less enegy than algae. Although algae grows faster, becasue it is microscopic, it is extremely energy intensive to dry it sufficiently for processing. Duckweed can be dried quite cheaply and pelletized for animal feed or even furnace fuel.

Duckweed Ethanol

Christodoulos A. Floudas, Xin Xiao and colleagues explain that duckweed, an aquatic plant that floats on or near the surface of still or slow-moving freshwater, is ideal as a raw material for biofuel production. It grows fast, thrives in wastewater that has no other use, does not impact the food supply and can be harvested more easily than algae and other aquatic plants.

They describe four scenarios for duckweed refineries that use proven existing technology to produce gasoline, diesel and kerosene. Those technologies include conversion of biomass to a gas; conversion of the gas to methanol, or wood alcohol; and conversion of methanol to gasoline and other fuels. The results show that small-scale duckweed refineries could produce cost-competitive fuel when the price of oil reaches $100 per barrel. Oil would have to cost only about $72 per barrel for larger duckweed refiners to be cost-competitive.

The article is titled "Thermochemical Conversion of Duckweed Biomass to Gasoline, Diesel, and Jet Fuel: Process Synthesis and Global Optimization."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-03-duckweed-cost-competitive-raw-material-biofuel.html#jCp

More about Duckweed

Snippet 1:
"Researchers at North Carolina State University have found that a tiny aquatic plant can be used to clean up animal waste at industrial hog farms and potentially be part of the answer for the global energy crisis. Their research shows that growing duckweed on hog wastewater can produce five to six times more starch per acre than corn, according to researcher Dr. Jay Cheng. This means that ethanol production using duckweed could be "faster and cheaper than from corn," [/i]says fellow researcher Dr. Anne-Marie Stomp.
"We can kill two birds – biofuel production and wastewater treatment – with one stone – duckweed," Cheng says. Starch from duckweed can be readily converted into ethanol using the same facilities currently used for corn, Cheng adds."

Snippet 2:
"The duckweed system consists of shallow ponds that can be built on land unsuitable for conventional crops, and is so efficient it generates water clean enough for re-use. The technology can utilize any nutrient-rich wastewater, from livestock production to municipal wastewater."

Snippet 3:
"Cheng says, "Duckweed could be an environmentally friendly, economically viable feedstock for ethanol."
"There's a bias in agriculture that all the crops that could be discovered have been discovered," Stomp says, "but duckweed could be the first of the new, 21st century crops. In the spirit of George Washington Carver, who turned peanuts into a major crop, Jay and I are on a mission to turn duckweed into a new industrial crop, providing an innovative approach to alternative fuel production.""
Source:
http://environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/article/yournews/38605

Duckweed, The Little Green Plant that Could (with great video!):

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/plant-based-products-for-transprtation-and-building-materials/msg1012/#msg1012.

It's time to get REAL about Renewable Energy. We need fossil and nuclear poisons like a dog needs ticks with radioactive lyme disease.

If you agree, please sign this petition to President Obama:

Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through WWII Style Effort to Transition to 100% Renewable Energy

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

We did it with the Liberty Ship massive building effort in WWII; we can do it again with Renewable energy technology and infrastructure.

Thank you,

Anthony G. Gelbert

Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php

Pass it on. The Biosphere you save may be your own. And like Thom says, "TAG, you ARE it!".

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am
Quote drbjmn:Even if man's effect on climate were insignificant, even if the rest of the entire world bought into it, and acted accordingly,why wouldn't it be preferrable to more urgently move towards more environmentally friendly alternatives, we know exist, and can reasonbaly be expected to significanly enhance the health and safety of the planet?If your only answer is that it affects your livelyhood, which you alluded to before,then STFU already.
Yet there are no solar panels on your roof. Money is not a factor, right? get out there and borrow the money if you have to, give up your other expenditures and install those panels now!!

Plus click your mouse on that petition, you guys!

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Speaking of solar panels......here is an interesting article to share with you all. Maybe it should be an entirely new topic......???

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/25/1309388/-Solar-Panel-Acreage-Ne...

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Yes, I agree it's a great article! I posted at KOS a request to sign the petition in reply to it. As a matter of fact, this data on the tiny (as compared to all of earth's surface) area needed to provide an immense amount of solar power that puts planet pollluting fossil fuels to shame was in a video some time earlier. I just prepared this screen shot for you to view and pass on to others to show them how obviously DOABLE a transition to 100% renewable energy actually is. http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-290614142238.png

If you haven't seen that video, I recommend it for your viewing pleasure.

It says everything I am saying about solar power (and more!) in a much more persuasive and eloquent manner. And of course, we can add all the other renewable energy technologies with tremendous potential out there (e.g. tidal power) to solar to obtain a Viable Biosphere! Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nr-grdspEWQ

We are now in a climate cake that has been baked for about 1,000 years according to atmospheric, objective, proven with experimental data, science.

If the crash program to switch to renewable energy is to begin soon, I expect the trigger for the crash program will be the first ice free arctic summer (according to my estimates) in 2017. But millions of people demanding a transition to 100% renewable Energy will give us a fighting chance to win the Climate Victory.

You can help us leave dirty energy sources that are killing us behind. I started a petition on Care2: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort. I'm hoping that if enough people sign my petition, we can make a difference. Will you help me collect more by adding your name?

[b]Posters to download and print to publicize the petition:[/b]

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200614004325.png

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190614205808.png

Here is the link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Note: I wrote to Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont about the Liberty Ship model for transitioning to 100% Renewable Energy. If you know him and have close contact with him, please urge him to back the petition. He can help us immensely in this effort if he actively supports the World War II style transition to TOTAL Renewable Sources that will provide a massive boost to our economy in jobs while saving the biosphere for future generations. Senator Sanders, WE NEED YOUR HELP!

For those who don't wish to bother signing or are concerned for your "privacy". Hello? Hello? This is the year 2014! By 2030 periods where the "Humid Heat Stroke Index" is so high that the human body can no longer maintain a normal core temperature will become common. Home Sap is on the short list for extinction! That is sorta more important than hiding from the NSA or the CIA now ISN'T IT? And I DO NOT see ANY of the home addresses or e-mail addresses anyway, Care2 does! So, if you CARE about future generations, you have ZERO excuse, [I]unless you are a bought and paid for climate denying, war profiteering LOW LIFE GREEDBALL,[/I] for NOT signing.

For the sake of Future Generations, as well as Common Sense, sign here and pass this on to everyone you care about to sign too!.

http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Pass it on. The planetary biosphere you save may be your own...

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

I did sign it! What I was mentioning in an earlier comment was that I didn't think everyone signing would appreciate you displaying their names on other sites. When I sign a petition on the internet be it from care2, or forcechange, or any of the other 50 or so sites I sign petitions on, I don't expect to see someone posting a list of the signers somewhere else. I don't use my full name on THIS website but if you posted my signature from a petition here my full name would be revealed for all to see. And YES they could put it together especially by knowing that I signed it. That is what I am refering to. Please don't do that. You WANT people to sign it, and not to shy away because of something like that. BTW......I'm not the enemy.

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Of course money IS a factor. That's why we need to get rid of all the fossil fuel and nuclear power WELFARE QUEEN subsidies you parasites that fleece we-the-people for your dirty energy profits get!

You know darned good and well that you dirty energy, war profiteering, conscience challenged greedballs work 24/7 to MAKE SURE the "level" energy playing field looks like an ALPINE SLOPE with dirty energy at the top and renewable energy at the bottom while you have lots of "boulders" (bought and paid for politicians) to roll down at any renewable energy that starts to make headway up that slope!

THEN you have the brass to come here and talk about money and costs! Your hypocrisy is breathtaking. Your accusation of hypocrsy towards the poor and middle class for not having solar panels on their roofs is absolutely Orwellian! And let's not forget the 24/7 whining about the Renewable Energy subsidies that are IN REALITY, a PITTANCE compared with what dirty energy gets.

I'll make a deal with ya, pal! You support the elimination of ALL energy subsidies and I'll agree. Of course you WON'T because the "subsidy" game is just a taxpayer ripoff in favor of dirty energy that you welfare queens don't want to part with. Without any subsidies and when YOU have to pay for carbon pollution, your dirty energy CANNOT COMPETE price wise with Renewable Energy.

History of Renewable Energy THE FOSSIL FUELERS DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/history-of-renewable-energy-the-fossil-fuelers-don't-want-you-to-know/

I know your game. You want to leave Renewable Energy in the 15 to 20 % niche status while you come up with new ways to corner it in a regulatory box canyon, stifle it and strangle it out of the energy marketplace by hook or by crook. All the while you will mendaciously claim you are "all for renewable energy when it is competitive enough". Su-r-r-re. Meanwhile, your pals in the subsidy game will DO ALL THEY CAN to provide a rather selective meaning to that word "competitive". LOL!

It's not going to work this time, PAL!

Legislation to End Fossil Fuel Tax Breaks Introduced by Sen. Sanders, Rep. Ellison
Friday, November 22, 2013

WASHINGTON, Nov. 21 – As House and Senate budget negotiators look for ways to lower deficits,

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) today introduced legislation to eliminate tax loopholes and subsidies that support the oil, gas and coal industries.

The End Polluter Welfare Act of 2013 would remove tax breaks, close loopholes, end taxpayer-funded fossil fuel research and prevent companies from escaping liability for spills or deducting cleanup costs. Under current law, these subsidies are expected to cost taxpayers more than $100 billion in the coming decade.

The White House budget proposal for next year calls for eliminating several of the same provisions that the legislation by Sanders and Ellison would end.

“At a time when fossil fuel companies are racking up record profits, it is time to end the absurdity of American taxpayers providing massive subsidies to these hugely profitable fossil fuel corporations,” Sanders said.

“The five biggest oil companies made $23 billion in the third quarter of 2013 alone. They don’t need any more tax giveaways,” Ellison said. “We should invest in the American people by creating good jobs and ending cuts to food assistance instead of throwing tens of billions of taxpayer dollars at one of the biggest and most profitable industries in the world.”

The five most profitable oil companies (ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP and ConocoPhilips) together made more than $1 trillion in profits over the past decade.

The Sanders and Ellison legislation is supported by environmental groups including Friends of the Earth, Oil Change International and 350.org.

The fiscal watchdog Taxpayers for Common Sense, which has worked for nearly two decades to eliminate wasteful energy subsidies, also supports the bills.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/legislation-to-end-fossil-fuel-tax-breaks-introduced-by-sen-sanders-rep-ellison

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

I know you signed and I thank you for it. The reason I put the request to sign in answers to your posts is so other people that read them will be motivated to sign. I see that could be interpreted wrongly so I'll put a note about the fact that you already signed in each post I answer to you. The main thing is to keep the dialog going so new people reading can get educated on what Renewable energy is all about and how much daily damage fossil fuels and nuclear power do to us and our environment.

Thank you for posting often. I am very grateful for your support! All people of good will owe you a debt of gratitude for signing and posting about it, MrsBJLee. You make the world a better place!

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

What if we could live in a clean world? A world in which energy would be 100% renewable, water no longer polluted, transportation truly green and production methods clean and regenerative? There will be such a world. In this documentary VPRO Backlight explores the unprecedented possibilities of a new industrial revolution: Cleantech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9noGsz_HVcI

Signs of a new future are visible everywhere, from China to the US and from Europe to Thailand. Green mobility powered by sustainable energy, clean drinking water for all thanks to nanotechnology, dyeing textiles using recycled CO2. All of this is possible and is happening successfully now! Working together with Cleantech-founder Nick Parker, this film shows what our world will be like in the decades to come.VPRO Backlight travels the world in search of a clean future.

Duration: 60'
Director: Rob van Hattum
Producer: VPRO Television

You can help us leave dirty energy sources that are killing us behind. I started a petition on Care2: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort. I'm hoping that if enough people sign my petition, we can make a difference. Will you help me collect more by adding your name?

Posters to download and print to publicize the petition:

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200614004325.png

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190614205808.png

Here is the link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Thank you MrsBJLee and all those other people of good will and common sense for signing. You are fellow Green Leaf Star Americans in the Service of Future Generations.

Anthony G. Gelbert

Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am
Quote stwo:
Quote drbjmn:Even if man's effect on climate were insignificant, even if the rest of the entire world bought into it, and acted accordingly,why wouldn't it be preferrable to more urgently move towards more environmentally friendly alternatives, we know exist, and can reasonbaly be expected to significanly enhance the health and safety of the planet?If your only answer is that it affects your livelyhood, which you alluded to before,then STFU already.
Yet there are no solar panels on your roof. Money is not a factor, right? get out there and borrow the money if you have to, give up your other expenditures and install those panels now!!

Plus click your mouse on that petition, you guys!

I never said cost wasn't an issue. For me, the state rebate isn't guarenteed. If it was, I would have them. I don't think many people realize how close it is for them to be affordable.

drbjmn
Joined:
Jul. 22, 2013 5:52 am

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GL5j1HJXNGE/U5HAcjeP3KI/AAAAAAABEGY/ZBbqo0mVQi0/s1600/06-06-2014c.gif

Under sea turbines gif above shows the tremendous power in ocean tides and currents

Water, Energy and Waste Sustainable Development in Large Cities

Masdar Engage Contest Entry Submitted December 20, 2013

http://public.wsu.edu/~mreed/380American%20Consumption_files/image002.jpg

Share of World's Private Consumption, 2005 (World Bank Development Indicators 2008)

There is no doubt that humans in general, and those concentrated in cities in particular, are responsible for much of the massive demand for potable of water and energy. There is also agreement that this demand is, at present not healthy for the biosphere in general and humans in particular. There is too much waste, inefficient energy use, lack of renewable energy infrastructure, pollution from fossil fuels and inefficient water use as well.

In summary, there is a consensus among knowledgeable and observant people in the reality based community that our present trajectory in the above issues is unsustainable.

The solution requires the phasing out of all fossil fuels and nuclear fission power plants and replacing them with Renewable energy. This energy needs to be harvested within 100 miles or less from the highest energy users on the planet, the large cities, in order to have lower transmission and infrastructure costs.

The energy must be baseload quality 24 hours a day with wind and solar to supplement demand spikes along with pumped water storage energy, fuel cell or battery storage technologies.

The renewable energy source that is best suited on a global scale because it is constant, powerful and close to the major cities is the energy from ocean currents.

Observe the two maps below.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-H6e11TQ_hvE/UO5qL-oVmSI/AAAAAAABN90/ag5rEdPU6p8/s1600/youtube_logo.gif

World population concentration

http://www.miamisci.org/ecolinks/img/maphydrospheremed.jpg

Hydrosphere

Now look at the one below where I merged the two.

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-191213230928.jpeg

Get it?

The energy is renewable, does not disturb the biosphere or hydrosphere and can completely replace the polluting energy we now suffer from. The densely populated areas have this powerful source nearby.

Ocean currents have far more energy potential than ocean tides. The tides alone are estimated to have a potential tidal stream energy capacity of over 120GW globally. Using both plus wind and PV would make a 100% Renewable Energy transition to the 18TW the planet required feasible with technology we now have.

Just in the UK alone, the marine power resource is estimated to be more than 10GW, representing about 50% of Europe’s tidal energy capacity.

In the USA a project is now in the works to provide wind turbine power to the East Coast for up to 1.9 million households. When built out, the Atlantic Wind Connection (AWC) backbone will stretch 350 miles off the coast from New Jersey to Virginia and will be able to connect 6,000MW of offshore wind turbines.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7ZYqYi4xigk/TLPB6bft9VI/AAAAAAAAG5o/lnS4tAR8QT0/s1600/transmission.png

Atlantic Wind Connection (AWC) backbone

Now look at where those wind turbines will be and realize that undersea turbines can be placed close by and save on cabling the energy to the shore. Much more energy can be harvested 24 hours a day from the ocean current. Sharing energy transmission cables from wind and ocean current turbines will save millions of dollars and hasten the transition to 100% clean energy.

http://marinebio.org/i/currents/Ocean_currents_1943.jpg

World Ocean Currents

http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/storymaker-five-ocean-power-plants-1112010-515x388.jpg

Undersea Turbines

As the new, clean energy replaces dirty energy, full electrification of the economies to eliminate the internal combustion engine for power plants, vehicles and factories will clean the air in large cities.

With plenty of renewable energy to electrify the planet and eliminate the internal combustion engine pollution, the worldwide potable water problem can be solved anywhere on the planet that the relative humidity is above 23% (any place without a desert climate) by extracting water from the ambient air.

The waste water can, given all the ocean current energy, be processed for agricultural fertilizer (eliminating petrochemical fertilizers).

In this way, we will imitate the biosphere in turning our waste into a nutrient that benefits all life on earth, not just humans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEe1bVjORN4&feature=player_embedded

Perpetual Ocean by NASA

You can help us leave dirty energy sources that are killing us behind. I started a petition on Care2: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort. I'm hoping that if enough people sign my petition, we can make a difference. Will you help me collect more by adding your name?

Posters to download and print to publicize the petition:

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200614004325.png

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190614205808.png

Here is the link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Join me and MrsBJLee among the millions of people of good will and common sense in becoming a Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations.

Note: Fly this Banner http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110614145742.jpeg or put it on a coffee cup, bumper sticker or wherever you wish to show your support for a 100% Renewable Energy Steady State (NOT growing) economy in harmony with nature for a Viable Biosphere. This can provide encouragement and solidarity for all of us in the face of the powerful forces of dirty energy now being wielded to destroy all Renewable Energy because it threatens those profit-over-planet morality challenged predators. Let's let everyone KNOW we don't just want a "better" world; we want a world with a VIABLE BIOSPHERE for our SURVIVAL!

Thank you,

Anthony G. Gelbert

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Thank you, drbjmn.

The cost issue in the energy area is, of course, a thoroughly loaded subject. Why? Becasue the dirty energy profit-over-planet goons have many rather devious ways of muddling the picture to make dirty energy appear less costly than Renewable Energy. They are experts in creative accounting and influence peddling in government to project a false appearance of "just providing a service" for we-the-people who "demand" (NOT!) to be little piggies forever consuming more and more energy. Of course the fossil fuelers get miffed at being labelled drug pushers but, that is really what they HAVE ALWAYS BEEN. This is OLD NEWS that most Americans are unaware of. There is a century old trail of hand outs to the fossil fuel industry on the taxpayer dime.

Their mendacious claims of having a high Energy Return On Energy Invested (EROI), especially at the beginning of the 20th century, conveniently leave out climate costs and human and biosphere health costs that we are STILL PAYING FOR and will continue to pay for in the centruries to come! And of course coal was "cheap" ("high" EROI!) when miners could get shot for complaining about slave wages early in the 20th century! The fossil fueler mentallity is an Orwellian masterpiece of mindfork! They state that is COSTS MONEY to supply ENERGY. Well, no S**t, Sherlock! I agree. But they STOP agreeing when the following sore subjects are brought up.

Does it take ENERGY to cure a patient sickened by a contaminated aquifer?

Does it take ENERGY to cure a patient sickened by coal emissions?

Does it take ENERGY to bioremediate a Uranium mine?

Does it take ENERGY to bioremediate an oil spill?

Does it take ENERGY to bioremediate all the pollution that OIL TANKERS add to the oceans? What pollution? The one they produce on EVERY TRIP when they go back to get another load. You see, they DON'T go back embty or they would be unstable in the ocean. They fill a portion of their holds with SEA WATER and DUMP it when they go to load up again. I've written extensively about how they HELD BACK regulations on tanker hold caused pollution and tanker hull requirements (contributing to the Exxon Valdez disaster in the process) during the Reagan Administration.

The regulations are STILL a joke because they are mainly either unenforced at U.S. ports OR they pay a U.S. Coaust Guard fine that is microscopic (thanks to our politicians!) in comparison with the crude oil profit on the haul. THAT is the old "cost (to YOU)/benefit (to THEM)" analysis model that externalizes the damage to the biosphere so dear to the heart of fossil fuelers everywhere. Yeah, they were doing it before Wall Street and Banking started doing it. J.D. Rockefeller was a great teacher of how to cheat the public while looking like he was serving it!

If any person here requests it, I will post the several page study of the history of what damage oil tankers have done (and still DO!), the laws concerning oil tankers with a history of how they came about and why right here. It's NOT pretty.

ALL the numerous IGNORED (because WE PAY FOR THEM) energy costs that are inseparable from human society on fossil fuel and nuclear power poisons are ALWAYS not part of the "discussion" when EROI (energy return on energy invested) is creatively calculated from such "luminaries" as Charles Hall. I have also written a long article, with references, on the flaws in Charles Hall's EROI math that plays fast and loose with the laws of thermodynamics. It's called "Hope for a Viable Biosphere; Renewables, Why they work and Fossil and nuclear Fuels NEVER DID"; EROEI (or sometimes referred to as EROI - same thing) numbers have been used to justify horrendously polluting practices like gas and oil fracking.

They have also been used to demonize ethanol energy efficiency in comparison with gasoline. They acheived this slight of hand by using enthalpy, rather than actual mpg fuel economy in a high compression engine (where the higher octane ethanol outperforms gasoline), to game the results.

It's time to call out these energy liars on the TRUE costs of fossil and nuclear fuels as compared with renewables.

" One can judge from experiment or one can blindly accept authority. To the scientific mind experimental proof is all important and theory is merely a convenience in description to be junked when it no longer fits. To the academic mind authority is everything and facts are junked when they do not fit theory laid down by authority." Robert Heinlein

100% Renewable Energy FITS! Let's DO IT!

Posters to download and print to publicize the petition:

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200614004325.png

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190614205808.png

Here is the link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Thank you,

Anthony G. Gelbert

Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations

Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations Banner http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110614145742.jpeg to put on a coffee cup, bumper sticker or wherever you wish to show your support for a 100% Renewable Energy Steady State (NOT growing) economy in harmony with nature for a Viable Biosphere. This can provide encouragement and solidarity for all of us in the face of the powerful forces of dirty energy now being wielded to destroy all Renewable Energy because it threatens those profit-over-planet morality challenged predators. Let's let everyone KNOW we don't just want a "better" world; we want a world with a VIABLE BIOSPHERE for our SURVIVAL! - See more at: http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2014/06/petition-president-obama-be-de...

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am
Quote drbjmn:I never said cost wasn't an issue. For me, the state rebate isn't guarenteed. If it was, I would have them. I don't think many people realize how close it is for them to be affordable.
But if my support for renewables is affected by concerns for my liveIihood (and I have NOT alluded to that) I am to STFU. Nice. Best news I heard all week: Niger just fired up a new coal fired electrical generation plant --

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote stwo:
Quote drbjmn:I never said cost wasn't an issue. For me, the state rebate isn't guarenteed. If it was, I would have them. I don't think many people realize how close it is for them to be affordable.
But if my support for renewables is affected by concerns for my liveIihood (and I have NOT alluded to that) I am to STFU. Nice. Best news I heard all week: Niger just fired up a new coal fired electrical generation plant --

Are the tax breaks energy corps get, distributed by a lottery? Even if they were, I' pretty sure they could afford the risk alot more than I could. I just simply asked if you had any recognition of the effects. Is it presumptious of me to think you don't give a shit, regardless of what you do for a living? Is there a softer side of stwo, hiding in those countless posts of mockery and derision? Yea for Niger....

drbjmn
Joined:
Jul. 22, 2013 5:52 am

stwo is an example of the guy I had to get up and move away from when he began with "solar doesn't pencil out." Not in his box, it doesn't, and I did not have time to work on opening up any doors or windows.

"Expertise" is an interesting phenomenon. It is a two-edged sword, and when I hear people hack up religion and say amateur and naive comments on the superficial rhetoric of these issues, I appreciate knowing something in depth. Ironically, religion is among the least "expertise" worthy areas of life, and I am more often condemned for knowing too much than for lacking the knowledge that could help them.

stwo keeps reminding me that we do need to get our facts right, and that when we miss something it is worth listening. However, the big picture has not changed for his quibbles. His box is showing signs of wear and tear, or even of "falling apart."

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 12:15 pm

Were there any wisdom here, my posts would garner no replies. I am but the traffic noise in the background at the outdoor cafe.

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

"I am but the traffic noise in the background at the outdoor cafe."

More like the exhaust fumes of said "traffic" (i.e. it appears to be innocuos but we know better).

I've watched and read the comments and articles of many intelligent fellows like yourself and have a fairly good working knowledge of your modus operandi.

1. You are quite selective about who you "quibble" with in what appears to be a lack of logic for continually ignoring the 24/7 dirty energy fleecing of the American taxpayer. But it's not lack of logic or intelligence. It's corvus oculum corvi non eruit.

2. You enjoy the corruptus in extremis energy playing field status quo and vigorously defend it because cui prodest scelus is fecit.

3. You sir, are clinging to a past from which you profited economcally and refuse to accept the damage to other humans and the biosphere that you have been a party to. Instead, you wish to claim that anyone who uses ANY energy that came from fossil fuels or nuclear and advocates a 100% transition to Renewable Energy is a hypocrite. You know that isn't true but those "exhaust fumes" of yours sometimes reach those without metaphoric "gas masks" to see through your empty rhetoric disguised as impish comments.

But just for the hell of it, let's say you are right and all of us who want dirty energy out now are hypocrites, fools or worse. What have you got to lose by signing the petition? After all, nobody is going to listen to us because we are bonkers, right? YOU are the one that is supposed to be grounded in "reality" so we haven't got a prayer of getting traction on our "silly demand" so why not humor us "poor deluded souls"?

Do your good deed for today: Sign here. http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

And while you are at it, why don't you argue this with your SAME ARGUMENT against pro-renewable energy people that still use some fossil fuels in daily life (see Dilworth quote below)? That is. that we are HYPOCRITES to support WARS FOR OIL and a BLOATED MILITARY? It's EXACTLY the same argument. If the shoe fits and all that, eh?

The following quote from a peer reviewed book is of extreme importance to all Americans:

Dilworth (2010-03-12). Too Smart for our Own Good (pp. 399-400). Cambridge University Press. Kindle Edition.

"As suggested earlier, war, for example, which represents a cost for society, is a source of profit to capitalists. In this way we can partly understand e.g. the American military expenditures in the Persian Gulf area. Already before the first Gulf War, i.e. in 1985, the United States spent $47 billion projecting power into the region. If seen as being spent to obtain Gulf oil, It AMOUNTED TO $468 PER BARREL, or 18 TIMES the $27 or so that at that time was paid for the oil itself.

In fact, if Americans had spent as much to make buildings heat-tight as they spent in ONE YEAR at the end of the 1980s on the military forces meant to protect the Middle Eastern oil fields, THEY COULD HAVE ELIMINATED THE NEED TO IMPORT OIL from the Middle East.

So why have they not done so? Because, while the $468 per barrel may be seen as being a cost the American taxpayers had to bear, and a negative social effect those living in the Gulf area had to bear, it meant only profits for American capitalists. "

Note: I added the bold caps emphasis on the barrel of oil price, money spent in one year and the need to import oil from the Middle East.

This totally unjustified profit, never mind the needless loss of lives, then increases the power of the fossil fuel corporations to perpetuate a biosphere harming dirty fuel status quo. How? By "funding" politicians with rather large "donations" to keep renewable energy from competing with dirty energy. It's still going on RIGHT NOW!

Sign here. http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb or buy more stock in oil and coal corporations that have rewarded you ( war profiteering and contrived artificial made-in-Wall Street oil price shock welfare queen, much?). with all those dividends that the REST OF US have funded by paying our taxes so you could enjoy la dolce vita.

We aren't hypocrites but we HAVE BEEN SUCKERS! You sir, are the hypocrite. But you knew that. It's part of the fun to do an Orwellian flip in true psychological projection, isn't it?

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Excess Water from Iceland Geothermal Plant Source of Thriving Spa Business

Alexander Richter
July 01, 2014

The above article portrays just one more benefit from the 100% Renewable Energy bonanza that geothermal power represents.

Also, the nuclear power plant polluting white elephant advocates are always silent as tombs about the FACT that the nuclear power plant boiler and steam turbine equipment that require 600 degrees C for efficient operation CAN be removed from a nuclear power plant (after decommissioning) and used AS IS in a geothermal power plant, thereby saving millions of dollars in setting up a geothermal power plant that will last Generations without any damage to the environment, not 50 years or so with radionuclides sickening the surrounding life forms (including our children!) for a much longer time period.

Testament to the corruptus in extremis cui prodest scelus is fecit is the fact that the proponents of the so-called "Nuclear Renaissance" brazenly ignore mountains of irrefutable evidence/proof regarding the negative aspects of ‘radioactive experimentation’ we have been subjected to. All humans have measurable levels of radioactive contamination in their bodies, mothers pass it along in breast milk and fathers, through their sperm. Simple lab tests can accurately pinpoint the age of a person by measuring the percentage and calibrating the placement of radioactive markers in teeth and bones. There really is no argument… The corporate government invented one.

The United States enjoys the greatest opportunity to move things in a healthy direction. Yet the powers controlling our government effectively do just the opposite.

It's criminal negligence, not just laziness, of the otherwise brilliant and well educated proponents of nuclear power poisons to choose temporal comfort now which will eventually render huge tracts of the only Earth uninhabitable, at the price of the health and happiness of future generation.

The news and our leaders assure us that the juice required to fire up TV screens and operate the ski-lifts and casinos flows necessarily from nuclear generating facilities.

Many among us know that isn't so, indeed, there have been, since at least the mid-20th century (and geothermal energy technology 50 years before THAT!), numerous proven technologies which are relatively clean, green and renewable. They have been ruthlessly blacklisted, slandered and suppressed.

Actually, we can live very comfortably without any nukes and even without burning much more fossil fuels , but the situation is not portrayed that way.

Even if nukes were essential to the provision of our creature-comforts, clearly the poisonous DNA damaging radionuclide poisons they emit are not worth the price that cancer victims pay at present and those in future generations will inherit.

Too many intelligent humans have relinquished any remaining hint of critical thinking ability, ‘donned the sheep skin’, so to speak, and followed the herd in any direction that the political faces push.

That is a big mistake since the political faces are (can only be) the puppets of the most gratuitously greedy among us. The greed is so extreme (and irrational) that they knowingly sell the well-being of their very own children and grandchildren for bigger yachts.

We can stop it if more of us just get up off our pastry-stuffed butts and say NO to dirty energy and YES to 100% Renewable Energy NOW!

Demanding 100% Renewable energy is the way, not only to the extremely important goal of a viable biosphere, but absolutely essential to regaining our democracy from the fossil fuels and nuclear power industries that buy our politicians with the profits from pollution producing fuels while said politicians keep fossil fuel and nuclear power plant "subsides" (taxpayer theft!) firmly in place to tilt the energy playing field against renewable energy.

I started a petition on Care2: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort. I'm hoping that if enough people sign my petition, we can make a difference. Will you help me collect more by adding your name?

Posters to download and print to publicize the petition:
http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200614004325.png
http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-190614205808.png

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Thank you and please pass it on. We'll have real traction against the polluters if we can get 100,000 to several million signatures by September when the petition is to be delivered to the White House.

Anthony G. Gelbert

Green Leaf Star American in the Service of Future Generations

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

I'm not one of the Ravens, Anthony. I'm a cynic, not a profiteer. I think cronyism and complexity have taken things far beyond the level that any cyber petition can affect. Exhaust fumes-- Hah!. My words hold no influence and like Twain said, if voting mattered, they wouldn't let us do it.

Still, I'll sign your petition.

LOL, now that I signed it, I realize that this petition site is a marketing ploy by Abesmarket.com -

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Hey stwo, now that you have signed, for all it matters, I will not suggest that you are a fish out of water and that it is not the exhaust fumes....

Instead, I will give you your due as another fish in the pond and hope that your appreciation for healthy water is not based on the expectation that frat boys and toddlers are not going to piss in our pond. We know better, so we do something to neutralize its effects.

If signing a petition could get a lot done, we would not need much motivation to get it done. It is not a life or death issue of conscience or political strategy to sign on for some naive and broad ideas because they are ideas, not strategy, and education is the point. That means the issue should not be whether or not we have gathered enough signatures instead of what the petition is about.

Let us presume that signing petitions is akin to dropping a coin in the charity box as we go back to work on the issues of poverty or war or fill in your own. Why spend a lot of time arguing about how trivial and typical of "liberals" this is and why you have lost patience with such irrelevance! If it really is so pointless, why say anything about it unless you really want to have a viable Progressive Movement bringing lots of what you say you are against?

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 12:15 pm
Quote drc2:Hey stwo, now that you have signed, for all it matters, I will not suggest that you are a fish out of water and that it is not the exhaust fumes....
Heh, I don't know about that drc2. I once dressed in drag to sneak into the girls dorm at Old Faithful Lodge in Yellowstone ala bossom buddies, but my motive was not an embrace of the LBGT agenda.

Instead, I will give you your due as another fish in the pond and hope that your appreciation for healthy water is not based on the expectation that frat boys and toddlers are not going to piss in our pond. We know better, so we do something to neutralize its effects.
My passion for clean water is what led me to my chosen field and in 30 years my passion has not waned. I know better than most how the pond gets pissed in and with only one or two exceptions in the past 30 years, the culpable party was horrified that their mistake spoiled the environment and they worked hard to pay for the remediation and improved practices. Nearly all of them rightwing businessmen that are charactureized as evil greedy money grubbing polluters.

If signing a petition could get a lot done, we would not need much motivation to get it done. It is not a life or death issue of conscience or political strategy to sign on for some naive and broad ideas because they are ideas, not strategy, and education is the point. That means the issue should not be whether or not we have gathered enough signatures instead of what the petition is about.
Perhaps. Still, an unread book teaches little.

Let us presume that signing petitions is akin to dropping a coin in the charity box as we go back to work on the issues of poverty or war or fill in your own. Why spend a lot of time arguing about how trivial and typical of "liberals" this is and why you have lost patience with such irrelevance! If it really is so pointless, why say anything about it unless you really want to have a viable Progressive Movement bringing lots of what you say you are against?
I dont think you will find my posts generalizing about people nearly as much as folks seem to read into them. I'm ususally a pretty damned specific speaker and writer and I love too many who identify as liberals and progressives to lump them all together. I also dont think an objective reader can consider many of my posts to be "argument"; Mostly observation and immature snark. I dont put too much time and effort into my posts here mostly because there seems to be far more projection than comprehension on the part of those responding to me- I'd say you and .ren are among the very few who pretty consistently hit on my words and not your perception of me based on my (apparent) ideology on the occasions you address my posts. [As an aside, I''d be mighty interested to see if .ren could edit his thoughts down to about a third of the words, but we all have our own writing style, dont we? :o) ]

drc2, believe it or not, I'm a fan of concise, sound logic- I'm not too worried about empowering progressives. Even though I presume to be utterly dismissed by the vaxt majority of those who see my posts, I suppose my efforts are rooted in the belief that the further we venture away from overblown hyperbole for the sake of venting one's spleen and/or convincing newly awakening bystanders to join our cause out of ignorant fear, the sooner that an issue or two that the left and right coud possibly agree on could get attacked effectively. Militarization of police, disgusting cronyism in politics, horrible amounts of spending on foreign ventures/war, & goverment intrusion into our private lives are a few that come to mind. and yes Ddc, the war on drugs too. :o)

When I first arrived here, I was curious as to how many "progressives" engage in hyperbole as tactic and how many are absolutly hook line and sinker believers. I'm not much closer to answering that. Too damned many seem to be the hook line and sinker variety-- sort of like those who fail to see allegory in the Testaments and seem to believe that a stenographer took down the words as God spoke them (in english).

If all right leaning people are stupid racist,dittohead, planet destroying, war on womening, deniers, well... here we are and here we'll stay. Plus, this isnt a right leaning libertarian free market message board and all :o)

stwo's picture
stwo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

stwo said, "Still, I'll sign your petition". Thank you stwo. Remember that cynicism has its place but beware the nihistic box canyon of depression that it can lead to. I've been there and done that.

This is not a marketing ploy. This is, realistically speaking, a quixotic effort by a trailer treasure retired guy in Vermont that still holds out some hope the we-the-people can face this curruptos in extremis cui prodest scelus is fecit corporate/government tag team that insists on doing a Thelma and Louise just because they can.

But hey, those comments from people signing around the world are huge endorphin rushes! Those people are speaking from their heart with a goodness ,honesty and purity that makes me shed a few tears every now and then knowing how wonderful and caring humans can be. Who knows? We might get the fossil fuelers a bit worried! I hope so!

Meanwhile enjoy this video and pass it on. That one should DEFINETELY go viral just to watch the fossil fuelers go ape shit!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6x43h2DX7D0

Here's some of the latest comments on the petition:

# 215

I don't believe the President will ever see, much less act on this petition, but I told Anthony I'd sign it. :o)

# 211

Dear Mr. President, If the human race makes it through the next century with less than catastrophic climate change, you will be remembered as the leader who made possible America's definitive turn toward clean energy. You have my full attention and support at this critical time.

# 210

This petition should be popping up all the time on this site. It is SO IMPORTANT. In the Summer of 2013 work started at the Euro 1.7 billion Castor underground gas storage plant off the Valencian coast. After 220 mini earthquakes in the area in less than a month the government sent in the Guardia Civil ( Civil Guard ) to stop the work. ( see YouTube video ) Local residents reported temors following the injections of natural gas preparing Castor for use. The Catalan government censured the project and are investigating due dilligence undertaken for the project. Several Spanish civil society groups sent an open letter in October 2013 to the European Investment Bank and the European Commission asking questions about the Castor project in Spain because of its environmental impact and the potential costs for Spanish taxpayers. The communities affected linked in solidarity organising demonstrations. The groups were especially worred because a Tsunami was feared and because of the vicinity of nuclear plants. The Public Prosecutor in the Spanish region of Castellon opened an investigation into potential criminal liabilities. The newspaper El Pais ( The Country ) confirmed a report earth temors in Valencia were caused by undersea gas plant saying scientists linked the off shore Castor storage project to 512 quakes the largest of which was 4.2 magnitude. The Castor project is stopped. Reuters announced on 27th June, 2014 that the Spanish government have been told by the court that they still have to pay Castor owners the money for the project. WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE UNHEALTHY PROJECTS WITH OUR HEALTH AS WELL AS OUR MONEY. STOP FRACKING. ALL GREEN ENERGY PLEASE. Thank you.

# 209

take a lead from germany who are well off the starting blocks in making change which are better for our enviroment.Ot is not too late to say enough is enough. Change can and must happen

# 207

Do this America. The world certainly does watch - and copy - what you do.

# 196

There are more renewable energy sources than most are aware, but they are suppressed by those who want to keep the status quo.

# 195

For the children, the grandchildren, and the children of the grandchildren.

# 194

Natural gas is worse than dirty coal. It is due to methane leaking. Also, via fracking, it is destroying our water supply.

# 192

This is a tremendously important and crucial opportunity to do what's right for the people and our planet!

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Here are some of the latest comments on the petition:

CA Jul 05, 07:16 # 227 Our local, family owned company has been providing solar services to the OC and desert communities for 38 yrs.

Spain Jul 04, 07:39 # 224 I have a dream and many of us we share the same dream. We want, we wish, we dream of a better world to live in, a world where our children can grow healthy and free. Because of this, we sign this petition. I have luckily lived in peace all my life and I believed I was "free". I have had plenty of opportunities in my life and I have the chance to realize how special we are the human beings. I have a dream and many of us we share the same dream. We want, we wish, we dream of a better world to live in, where our children can grow healthy and free. Because of this, we sign this petition. I have luckily lived in peace all my life and I believed I was "free". I have had plenty of opportunities in my life and I have the chance to realize how special we are the human beings because we are intelligent, we are creative and we dream. I have learnt that my life has the same value as the life of a person that lived in the past and the life of person who will live in the future. They probably dream also of a better future for us or for the future predecessors..We all have different dreams but I hope that we humans keep on dreaming and carry on with this miracle of having an intelligent life in a marvelous place like planet earth. For us, for the people. Andres

CA Jul 03, 17:33 # 221 I've been off grid using solar electrcity and solar heating for more than 25 years. I also worked for an electric utility and saw how their investments in massive central coal, nuclear and natural gas plants and the interstate transmission lines required to get the energy was actually more expensive and less reliable than the long term costs of solar, wind and geothermal power. But the utility used very sophisticated bookkeeeping to hide the real cost of energy and the greater customer benefits of investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Turkey Jul 02, 23:40 # 220 All over the world we, people and NGOs have to be more proactive for changing the energy sources to renewables as gifted by our nature, stopping using the fossil fuel sources killing our nature and future.

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Thank you and please pass it on. The Biosphere you save may be your own...

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Petition Progress:

CA Jul 09, 18:22 # 243

Stop Oil - Start Future _ NOW !

OR Jul 09, 17:12 # 241

What we pay for fossil fuel is way more than what we shell out at the pump, when you consider the fossil-fuel-pillage wars and the trashing of our environment. Fossil fuel = tyranny and death.

DC Jul 08, 18:55 # 236

Anything less than total renewable energy is at best irresponsible and at worst irrational.

NJ Jul 08, 18:38 # 235

How and where will the 1% live after they have destroyed our world? If we do not act and act with courage. It will be as predicted we will all die not with a bang but a wimper. Please consider our children and grandchildren. What will they think of us if we do nothing?

OR Jul 08, 01:26 # 233

why are our "leaders" such followers? idiots.

NM Jul 07, 16:40 # 232

Ahole Hannity is forever complaining that President Obama is destroying the economy and that there will not be anything left for his grandchildren and great grandchildren. He is an utter POS.He is leading the charge to destroy the planet for OUR grandchildren and great grandchildren. He really doesn't give a damn about his children and grandchildren.

"Release of the International Surface Temperature Initiative’s (ISTI’s) Global Land Surface Databank, an expanded set of fundamental surface temperature records "

Calling GW deniers everywhere. Go crawling to your Koch dirty energy funded mendacity for profit-over-planet mindfork propaganda "think"(septic) tanks for your "talking points". The liars are going to have to come up with some world class BS verbal gymnastics to find ANY questionable data in this COMPREHENSIVE, PEER REVIEWED DATA SET.

"Guest post by Jared Rennie, Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites, North Carolina on behalf of the databank working group of the International Surface Temperature Initiative.

In the 21st Century, when multi-billion dollar decisions are being made to mitigate and adapt to climate change, society rightly expects openness and transparency in climate science to enable a greater understanding of how climate has changed and how it will continue to change. Arguably the very foundation of our understanding is the observational record.

Today a new set of fundamental holdings of land surface air temperature records stretching back deep into the 19th Century has been released as a result of several years of effort by a multinational group of scientists.

The International Surface Temperature Initiative (ISTI) was launched by an international and multi-disciplinary group of scientists in 2010 to improve understanding of the Earth’s climate from the global to local scale. The Databank Working Group, under the leadership of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), has produced an innovative data holding that largely leverages off existing data sources, but also incorporates many previously unavailable sources of surface air temperature.

This data holding provides users a way to better track the origin of the data from its collection through its integration. By providing the data in various stages that lead to the integrated product, by including data origin tracking flags with information on each observation, and by providing the software used to process all observations, the processes involved in creating the observed fundamental climate record are completely open and transparent to the extent humanly possible. - "

Full READ IT AND WEEP (for fossil fuelers ) fact filled article at link below:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2014/07/release-of-the-international-surface-temperature-initiatives-istis-global-land-surface-databank-an-expanded-set-of-fundamental-surface-temperature-records/#sthash.B3iSoqwu.dpuf

Demand an END to DIRTY ENERGY NOW!

"Approximately 13 percent of the U.S. electricity supply was powered by renewables as of the end of 2013, roughly half of Germany’s rate."

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/07/08/3456934/renewable-one-third-germany/

The USA, a historic leader in new technology, is getting left behind because of the profit-over-planet biosphere degrading fossil fuel industry that buys our politicians with the profits from pollution producing fuels while said politicians keep fossil fuel and nuclear power plant "subsides" (taxpayer theft!) to tilt the energy playing field against renewable energy.

We need to ELIMINATE DIRTY ENERGY SUBSIDIES and start the FULL TRANSITION to CLEAN ENERGY NOW!

America DOES NOT have to play second fiddle to being the first country to win the Climate Victory because of idiot greedball, war loving fossil fuelers. As part of being responsible, caring human beings, we have to pressure our government to take major action to stop the degradation of the biosphere from climate change. This is causing death and disease to both domestic animals and wildlife, all of which have done nothing to deserve such a horrible fate at our hands. It's time to eliminate the excuse our fossil fuel loving oligarchy uses for "resources" wars for oil that bring nothing but misery to us and profits for them.

I started a petition on Care2: Demand Liberty From Fossil Fuels Through 100% Renewable Energy WWII Style Effort. I'm hoping that if enough people sign my petition, we can make a difference. Will you help me collect more by adding your name?

Here's a link to the petition: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

Thank you and please pass it on. The biosphere you save may be your own.

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

I just found out this PARADIGM SHIFT LEVEL FANTASTIC NEWS!

This is a GREAT DAY for Homo sapiens!

Group Representing 590 Million Christians Divests From Fossil Fuel!!! ;>)

Fri Jul 11, 2014 at 01:54 PM EDT.

"Perhaps recalling the parts of the Bible in which God asks that his followers be good stewards to the Earth, the World Council of Churches, a global coalition of 345 churches moved to no longer invest in oil, gas, or coal companies and urged their members to follow their lead. "

The move is the biggest one yet by Christian groups attempting to reconcile the damages that climate change is causing with their beliefs to serve the planet well.

http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/renewables/the-big-picture-of-renewable-energy-growth/msg1524/#msg1524

Please Pass it on. This is positively EARTH SHAKING! We might win the Climate Victory yet!

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

Progress on Petition to:

Demand a 100% World War 2 Style Transition to Renewable energy using the Manufacturing Miracle Model of the Liberty Ships:

AB Jul 13, 15:01 # 288 The technology for renewable energy has already been developed and just needs investment.Leave fossil fuels down in the ground, No more pipelines!

NY Jul 13, 09:10 # 285 Let's move on to renewables while there's still time to lessen greenhouse gases that heat the planet.

PA Jul 13, 07:56 # 283 Don't let the fossil fuel industry destroy the country.

AB Jul 11, 11:20 # 272 We need the fossil fuel fossils to join the rest of us in the 21st century!

NH Jul 10, 16:56 # 266 If we had only started this in the 70's , think where we'd be today !!

TX Jul 10, 14:08 # 265 This Whole Government is nothing but a Corporation, filled with a bunch of hypocrites, greedy bastards, looking out for their own self's and what they can screw the people out of. In this case, the people's money, the people's land, the people's Air, and dignity. With lies, Pollution, using slowly Genocide to kill, and rub the people of their life. Look around, open your eyes, such is all around you, if you only see reality instead of the lies they tell you. The USA, a historic leader in new technology, is getting left behind because of the profit-over-planet biosphere degrading fossil fuel industry that buys our politicians with the profits from pollution producing fuels while said politicians keep fossil fuel and nuclear power plant "subsides" (taxpayer theft!) to tilt the energy playing field against renewable energy. We need to ELIMINATE DIRTY ENERGY SUBSIDIES and start the FULL TRANSITION to CLEAN ENERGY NOW! America DOES NOT have to play second fiddle to being the first country to win the Climate Victory because of idiot greedball, war loving fossil fuelers. As part of being responsible, caring human beings, we have to pressure our government to take major action to stop the degradation of the biosphere from climate change. This is causing death and disease to both domestic animals and wildlife, all of which have done nothing to deserve such a horrible fate at our hands. It's time to eliminate the excuse our fossil fuel loving oligarchy uses for "resources" wars for oil that bring nothing but misery to us and profits for them.

CA Jul 10, 11:14 # 261 The biosphere WE save WILL be our own. So far there is only one.

Mr. Todd K, NC Jul 10, 05:57 # 256 This is the most important issue of most of our lives...we should already have been 100% renewable by now.

NH Jul 10, 03:57 # 254 effort long overdue...

IL Jul 09, 21:41 # 251 Greed and stupidity versus commen sense before its possibly too late. This has to happen eventually, we play chess with life on the planet. Not smart.

CA Jul 09, 18:22 # 243 Stop Oil - Start Future _ NOW !

OR Jul 09, 17:12 # 241 What we pay for fossil fuel is way more than what we shell out at the pump, when you consider the fossil-fuel-pillage wars and the trashing of our environment. Fossil fuel = tyranny and death.

DC Jul 08, 18:55 # 236 Anything less than total renewable energy is at best irresponsible and at worst irrational.

NJ Jul 08, 18:38 # 235 How and where will the 1% live after they have destroyed our world? If we do not act and act with courage. It will be as predicted we will all die not with a bang but a wimper. Please consider our children and grandchildren. What will they think of us if we do nothing?

OR Jul 08, 01:26 # 233 why are our "leaders" such followers? idiots.

NM Jul 07, 16:40 # 232 Ahole Hannity is forever complaining that President Obama is destroying the economy and that there will not be anything left for his grandchildren and great grandchildren. He is an utter POS.He is leading the charge to destroy the planet for OUR grandchildren and great grandchildren. He really doesn't give a damn about his children and grandchildren.

CA Jul 05, 07:16 # 227 Our local, family owned company has been providing solar services to the OC and desert communities for 38 yrs.

[b]Here is the link to the petition:[/b] http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ai3Tb

http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300614160245.gif

http://www.pic4ever.com/images/computer3.gif

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

WOW.....DOES THAT INCLUDE REPUBLICAN or SOUTHERN CHRISTIANS? Just checking........

Not trying to make fun. I do hope it spreads like wildlife through all the churches! We need their support! It's about time they woke up to what we are doing to mother earth! I have not read the article yet just excited by what you wrote. Going to read the article now. Thanks for posting it!

Speaking of divesting......did you see what I recently posted?

http://ecowatch.com/2014/02/03/divestment-mainstream-kick-fossil-fuel-ha...

Check out what our college students are up to! They're getting our universities to divest!!!!

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am
Quote MrsBJLee:

Speaking of solar panels......here is an interesting article to share with you all. Maybe it should be an entirely new topic......???

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/25/1309388/-Solar-Panel-Acreage-Ne...

The problem becomes transmitting the power back into areas where people actually live and keeping the panels clean and free of sand so they can absorb solar energy. Also, batteries that can power a car for more than 40 miles or so between charges are heavy and very expensive. Until technology can make car batteries lighter and less expensive it looks like we will be burning gasoline and diesel in our cars and trucks.

The hybred technology is an interesting concept, where the car moving down the road generates its own electricity from the rotating wheels, but you will still need a gasoline engine (or generator) for back up when the car is not moving enough to keep the battery charged. So the upfront cost is high. That's my understanding of a hybred, let me know if I am mistaken on that point.

Mauiman2's picture
Mauiman2
Joined:
Jul. 27, 2012 7:24 am

Hybrid cars that generate it's own electricity from the rotating wheels seems like a cool idea to me. I believe Chevy has a model like that and there must be others out there. Even though you still need a gasoline engine for back up I imagine the fuel costs drop considerably! I'm just very happy that the trend for hybrid vehicles is growing and our auto makers keep moving in that direction. As long as the demand continues to grow I believe they will keep working on better batteries for storage. I'm not sure but I would imagine it has breathed new life into the battery industry.

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am
Quote MrsBJLee:

Hybrid cars that generate it's own electricity from the rotating wheels seems like a cool idea to me. I believe Chevy has a model like that and there must be others out there. Even though you still need a gasoline engine for back up I imagine the fuel costs drop considerably! I'm just very happy that the trend for hybrid vehicles is growing and our auto makers keep moving in that direction. As long as the demand continues to grow I believe they will keep working on better batteries for storage. I'm not sure but I would imagine it has breathed new life into the battery industry.

An interesting concept, but with the current technology you will not save enough on gas to recover the higher up front cost. Will that equation change in the future? I don't know.

Mauiman2's picture
Mauiman2
Joined:
Jul. 27, 2012 7:24 am
Quote Mauiman2:
Quote MrsBJLee:

Hybrid cars that generate it's own electricity from the rotating wheels seems like a cool idea to me. I believe Chevy has a model like that and there must be others out there. Even though you still need a gasoline engine for back up I imagine the fuel costs drop considerably! I'm just very happy that the trend for hybrid vehicles is growing and our auto makers keep moving in that direction. As long as the demand continues to grow I believe they will keep working on better batteries for storage. I'm not sure but I would imagine it has breathed new life into the battery industry.

An interesting concept, but with the current technology you will not save enough on gas to recover the higher up front cost. Will that equation change in the future? I don't know.

Is the goal to recover the higher up front cost or is it to do what you personally can do to mitigate climate change in meaningful ways? I do hope the equation changes in the very near future as more car companies offer their updated versions and the designs become even more appealing. I can remember not long ago when a hybrid on the road was a rare site. Now they're everywhere!

Solar roads might help with the battery charging if they work like projected by the company that is trying to go into full production. As the research continues I'm sure we will see great strides in the right direction. :-)

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Hadn't seen it. Divesting is the key to make dirty energy producers GO AWAY! I agree it's GREAT NEWS!

agelbert's picture
agelbert
Joined:
Jun. 16, 2014 11:41 am

If you like that then check out this link. I am so proud of what our students are accomplishing at our universities. They are the future and they see that they MUST be involved RIGHT NOW in making it what they want it to be for themselves and THEIR children (our grandchildren). They are OUR children that we raised RIGHT THANK GOODNESS! Scan the articles. I am sure you will agree, they are making GREAT progress in many areas! :-)

http://ecowatch.com/university/on-campus/

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Did Trump Commit Treason?

Thom plus logo News reports increasingly are suggesting that Donald Trump has committed treason in making a promise to a foreign leader. The question is, who is the foreign leader and what was the promise?
Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system