Story #1tells us Santorum is out. Romney is the Republican standard bearer. #2 is a fun article that shows the irony of the American left and what it does to the country. #3 relates the abundance of natural gas. There is a new age a dawning but we will need to get the democrats out of the way. #4 tells us that even T. Boone Pickens realizes this. The jobs aren’t green, but brown. #5 looks at a revolt of scientist at NASA regarding global warming. #6 reinforces the people at NASA. It seems all the warming we’ve had so far has only occurred with data that has been “adjusted.”
Today’s thoughts
1. Do you notice that we tend to get more economic progress when congress is in “gridlock” than when they are “helping” the economy?
2. I wonder if the latest polls out of Pennsylvania indicated that Santorum was going to lose his home state?
3. Obama will lose in November by at least the margin he won by in 2008.
4. I have no idea of who the VP candidate will be, but I have a number of candidates that I would be happy with. Paul Ryan is first on my list.
5. It’s now been 1075 days since the Senate passed a budget. Since that time, we’ve deficit spent $4.468 trillion. Great job, Harry Reid.
1. Santorum Out: Romney’s nomination now assured
Rick Santorum suspended his presidential campaign on Tuesday, bowing to the inevitability of Mitt Romney’s nomination and ending his improbable, come-from-behind quest to become the party’s conservative standard-bearer in the fall.
“We made a decision over the weekend, that while this presidential race for us is over, for me, and we will suspend our campaign today, we are not done fighting,” Mr. Santorum said.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/10/santorum-to-suspend-presidential-campaign/
Let the healing begin. It was time for the Republicans to unite behind a standard bearer. You will now hear about Romney not be a like the rest of us (I thought that was Obama’s claim to fame last election). You’ll hear about him being out of touch with the common man, but that is a charge the entire Democratic Party suffers from. Watch the momentum start building and Obama start taking a bath in the polls.
2. Only In America
1) Only in America could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000 a plate campaign fund raising event.
2) Only in America could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when we have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black.
3) Only in America could we have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the Treasury Department and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.
4) Only in America will you find people who burn the American flag and call America an "imperialist nation," but who get offended if you say they're not patriotic...
If you enjoy irony, you’ll like this article. My favorite is number nine… “Only in America could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country's Constitution be thought of as "extremists." I’m not sure they are thought of as being extremists. They are simply called that by the left most of whom are actually extremists.
3. Natural Gas and the Future
…The EPA's proposed regulation sets allowed CO2 emission levels at 1,000 pounds/megawatt-hour, which would stop the building of new coal-fired power plants. In Virginia, Dominion Power is already building a 1,300-megawatt gas-fired plant. Of course, it is quite possible that the EPA will try to extend their regulation to include all coal-fired plants -- and then perhaps lower their arbitrary 1,000-lb limit to go after gas-fired plants -- part of an ill-advised campaign against all fossil fuels, based on pathological fears of imagined climate catastrophes.
But it is ironic also that cheap gas will completely remove the need for electricity generated by solar or wind -- much to the chagrin of environmental zealots. And all those folks hoping that energy prices would continue to rise and that electricity costs would "skyrocket" will be sorely disappointed.
But there are also extra bonus points. "Combined-cycle" gas power plants can reach efficiencies of 60% or more, compared to heat efficiencies of nuclear power plants of 35% or coal plants of 40%.
It gets even better than that. Gas-fired electricity generation is essentially non-polluting and user-friendly, and it can be placed in close proximity to wherever power is needed, making distributed generation economically feasible. For example, a large apartment building of 1,000 units could use its own 10-megawatt power plant. But once installed, it becomes possible to consider co-generation, with the waste heat used for space heating, air-conditioning, hot water, laundry, and other process-heat applications -- and even desalination. One can imagine energy efficiencies of as much as 80%, more than double what is achieved today. It would also simplify the problem of waste-heat disposal.
Cheap gas will encourage the petrochemical industry to invest $30 billion in new U.S. plants over the next five years, according to Chevron-Phillips Chemical Co. Plastics producers will get a double-boost -- from cheaper feedstock gas, the raw material for their product, and lower electricity costs. When natural gas becomes really cheap -- say, less than $2 per mcf -- it will become more like nuclear energy, where the main cost is not fuel, but the capital cost of the power plant.
So what needs to be done? The first step is to have a White House that strongly believes in the need for low-cost energy to promote economic growth, increase prosperity, and fight poverty. Electricity costs should "skyrocket" downward, not upward. While new gas-fired combined-cycle plants are being built, existing coal-fired and nuclear plants, representing "sunk costs," should be kept in operation for as long as possible…
This revolution is astounding. The current administration is trying to do everything it can to derail it. That is only one of the reasons Obama and the Democrats need to be voted out of office.
4. Where the Jobs Are
Oilman T. Boone Pickens made a statement on MSNBC's Morning Joe Wednesday that should make every green jobs advocate including Barack Obama, Al Gore, and Van Jones sit up and take notice.
"I've lost my a--" in wind power. This came moments after he said, "The jobs are in the oil and gas industry in the United States"…
…With this in mind, Barnicle asked about so-called “green jobs” in America. “Are there jobs in this?”
“Sure,” answered Pickens, “if you go out and subsidize some of these things to develop them – yeah, you get jobs out of them, of course. The jobs are in the oil and gas industry in the United States. I mean, that’s where it is. You have an industry that is superb in comparison of oil companies around the world. They are the best.”
Pickens continued, “They found the oil the cheapest, they found the gas the cheapest for you and all, and you have somebody saying, ‘Hey, they’re not paying their fair share, and they make too much money, they need to be taxed more.’ Hey, they’ve gone out and done exactly what you wanted. They got jobs for you, they got the oil and gas cheaper for you. The problem is nobody understands energy in America. If they understood energy, they would know that, hey, something good is happening here.”…
… Pickens continued, “Obama needs to go in, study it, look at it, and decide what an energy plan is, and then go forward with it. He needs to explain to his people, ‘Hey, we can get on everything green. We can get on everything renewable. Then the cost of power will go up ten times.' So be careful when you start fooling with it. Know what you’re working with.”
Pickens is telling the truth. What Obama and the greenies want to do will cost every American as much as 10 times what they are spending now on energy which will translate into higher prices for everything and a lower standard of living for the poor and the middle class. The left is not the friend of the working man.
5. Revolt at NASA
49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden last week admonishing the agency for it’s role in advocating a high degree of certainty that man-made CO2 is a major cause of climate change while neglecting empirical evidence that calls the theory into question.
The group, which includes seven Apollo astronauts and two former directors of NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, are dismayed over the failure of NASA, and specifically the Goddard Institute For Space Studies (GISS), to make an objective assessment of all available scientific data on climate change. They charge that NASA is relying too heavily on complex climate models that have proven scientifically inadequate in predicting climate only one or two decades in advance…
Hansen stopped being a scientist a long time ago and is now an advocate. His constant “adjusting” of temperature history is actually an embarrassment to the climate science establishment. His temperature records change more often than pictures of fallen soviet commissars in the old USSR.
6. Where the Warming is coming from
Since NOAA encourages the use the USHCN station network as the official U.S. climate record, I have analyzed the average [(Tmax+Tmin)/2] USHCN version 2 dataset in the same way I analyzed the CRUTem3 and International Surface Hourly (ISH) data.
The main conclusions are:
1) The linear warming trend during 1973-2012 is greatest in USHCN (+0.245 C/decade), followed by CRUTem3 (+0.198 C/decade), then my ISH population density adjusted temperatures (PDAT) as a distant third (+0.013 C/decade)
2) Virtually all of the USHCN warming since 1973 appears to be the result of adjustments NOAA has made to the data, mainly in the 1995-97 timeframe
… Given the amount of work NOAA has put into the USHCN dataset to increase the agreement between neighboring stations, I don’t have an explanation for this result. I have to wonder whether their adjustment procedures added more spurious effects than they removed, at least as far as their impact on temperature trends goes.
And I must admit that those adjustments constituting virtually all of the warming signal in the last 40 years is disconcerting. When “global warming” only shows up after the data are adjusted, one can understand why so many people are suspicious of the adjustments.
This phenomenon is something that really makes you not simply suspicious of the adjustments but of the scientists involved in the global warming movement. It appears that this may be the biggest scientific scandal of the last 50 years.
No comments:
Post a Comment