Saturday, August 3, 2013

Blow Dry

Does Rachel Maddow have any idea how idiotic that those commercials of hers are? Apparently not. My personal favorite is the one in which she's standing in the middle of this humongous (and no doubt heavily subsidized) wind farm and trying to sell us on the fact that THIS is somehow the answer to our energy and environmental needs. It's like, does she just not know the facts? a) That wind is highly intermittent and inefficient? b) That it is always in need of a fossil fuel back-up? c) That it is highly resource intensive (the fact that a lot of energy goes into its creation, the fact that you CAN make windmills out of steel but not vice versa)? d) That windmills have the second lowest power density level (only ethanol's is lower) of any major power source and that you would literally have to pave entire states in order to get the same amount of power as you get from fossil fuels, hydro, nuclear, etc.? e) That wind is significantly more expensive than fossil fuels? f) That when in fact you figure in the resource demands and necessary fossil fuel back-up, the carbon footprint really isn't any lower than fossil fuels and significantly higher than nuclear? g) That this type of energy on a mass scale would have significantly deleterious effects on wildlife and the environment (the cutting down of trees, the potential for forest fires, the construction of thousands of miles of power lines, the slaughtering of endangered species, etc.)? I mean, I know that the woman is a true-believer and all but maybe if she once and a while spoke to folks such as Bjorn Lomborg, Robert Bryce, and Vaclav Smil, it wouldn't be quite as embarrassing.

21 comments:

Les Carpenter said...

I don't think she cares if she looks or sounds foolish. She's a darling of the far left and has a image to maintain.

Les Carpenter said...

I don't think she cares if she looks or sounds foolish. She's a darling of the far left and has a image to maintain.

dmarks said...

According to the Pew Trust study, this is the official news channel of those in power in this country. No surprise that these commercials are like infomercials for the ObamaCo energy department.

The lickspittles keep licking.

-------
Windmills shouldn't happen on a "mass scale". It is simply sustainable without Herculean distortions of public policy and profligate squandering of national treasure. They probably only make sense in a tiny handful of places in the US on a very small scale. Drop the special tax advantages and outright subsidies, and that is where you would see them: hardly anywhere. A presence yes, but very small.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Robert Bryce would make absolute mincemeat of her on the subject and so would Lomborg. Don't expect them on any time soon.

Rusty Shackelford said...



I could watch her doing lesbian girl on girl.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I love lesbians, too, but I do have some limits and she just doesn't do it for me.

Ema Nymton said...

.

Subtlety and nuance are too much for some ...

"My personal favorite is the one in which she's standing in the middle of this humongous (and no doubt heavily subsidized) wind farm and trying to sell us on the fact that THIS is somehow the answer to our energy and environmental needs."

Can you name one person who of the "opinion" that 'wind-power' is _THE_ only answer to our energy and environmental needs? Can you name one person who is advocating _ONLY_ wind-power/other alternative sources of energy?

Going the sophistry route requires real talent; too bad you fail miserably. Too bad your straw-man argument is directed at what a person did not say.

So it is your position to try to ridicule the discussion of the idea of exploring alternatives to fossil fuels before fossil fuels run out. Your "reasoning" of don't do anything because whatever one tries is not perfect(and you can always find faults in the efforts), is ludicrous. You are like the person who would advise the King and Queen of Spain not to subsidize the search for a sea route to Asia because there is no need for it; there already exists a 'silk highway' land route. Or, "Why try to go to the moon? Don't we already have land on the earth? And the moon is made up of cheese (read this on the internets)"

Honestly. Your willingness to soil yourself in public over petty nonsense is hilarious.

Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.

dmarks said...

And Ema equates the moon landing with Obama's corrupt crony-capitalist and quite unsustainable green scam.

Les Carpenter said...

Ema is HERE! With her assumptions (always wrong) and her usual platitudinous drivel (always hilarious) to soil herself in public.

Gosh Ema, we can all play that game. Isn't is fun?!!?? :-)

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

One person? Try Matthew Fox, that idiot who directed the anti-fracking screed, "Gasland". He says that we need to get off of fossil fuels COMPLETELY. And there are thousands of other leftists out there who think that very same thing. Hell, even Barack Obama made the idiotic statement that we could reduce our carbon footprint by 80%!......The fact of the matter, Ema, is that Maddow is completely ignorant on this issue and doesn't know that in order to replace the capacity of just one nuclear power plant you would have to cover the entire state of Rhode Island with these God-forsaken eye-sores. She, and you, really need to open a book and get of of HuffPo.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Congratulations, though, you didn't mention the KKK for once.

Ema Nymton said...

.

"Try Matthew Fox, that idiot who directed the anti-fracking screed, "Gasland". He says that we need to get off of fossil fuels COMPLETELY."

I know this is hard for some to follow the concept here. Try to stay with it.

Getting off fossil fuels COMPLETELY, is NOT saying "'wind-power' is _THE_ only answer to our energy and environmental needs?"

Given how absolutely unhinged you have become over the messenger, are you capable of hearing the message? Getting off fossil fuels will happen. The question is when? Will USA lead in the efforts, or follow other forward looking peoples/nations/regions?

Your 'do nothing' advocacy will assure USA will lose. Why is one not surprised by this?

Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.

dmarks said...

Nor did she mention Rupert Murdoch this time. He really has nothing to do with anything.

BB-Idaho said...

KKK...King Koal Korp?

BB-Idaho said...

Recently returned from a trip and took time to tour the 'Thunder Basin' coal operations in Wyoming.
Over 100 coal trains a day, 450 million tons a year. It is thought
there are over 68 trillion tons of
coal there so it will last quite a few generations. THEN...
"Another recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science by a team at Harvard University assessed the global capacity for wind power. The team used a simulation of global wind fields from NASA's Goddard Earth Observing System Data Assimilation System. The analysis, based on using 2.5-megawatt (MW) turbines onshore restricted to non-forested, ice-free, non-urban areas operating at a capacity factor of 20%, could supply greater than 40 times current worldwide consumption of electricity, and greater than 5 times total global use of energy in all forms." ..our progeny will
have to put up with all the whirlygigs. (and the antelope can
get back to playing)

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Spain tried the green energy thing, Ema, and it failed so badly that even the Socialist Workers party asshole (your fine colleague) had to admit it. Green energy (with the possible exception of solar - which currently contributes only .2% of our total energy) isn't viable, affordable, and in many instances even green. Your abject ignorance on the subject is staggering.

dmarks said...

"our progeny will
have to put up with all the whirlygigs. (and the antelope can
get back to playing)"

And the sounds of the land carpeted with bird-bones crunching underfoot.

BB-Idaho said...

dmarks, I suspect that bird-bone crunching may be the least of the problems in the year 2650 AD!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

2,650, providing that we don't exterminate each other because of nationalism and religious hatred, is going to be awesome, BB. Cars are going to get 500 miles per gallon, new reserves of energy are constantly going to be found (as the price goes up, the incentive to find it in previously unprofitable areas goes way up), appliances are going to be 100 times more efficient, nuclear power (through smaller reactors, increased use of thorium, and better recycling) is going to far more safe, and, yeah, we might even learn how to make solar panels better and less costly. I'm actually pretty optimistic.

BB-Idaho said...

...don't forget the personal nuclear fusion power packs. Beam me up Scottie!

Rusty Shackelford said...





Will,have you been watching re-runs of the Jetsons?