Thursday, January 31, 2013

Miscellaneous 166

1) According to the International Energy Agency, there exists on the planet 30,000 trillion cubic feet of RECOVERABLE (and, please, keep in mind here that the technology to recover these resources is growing exponentially) natural gas, and that this will be more than enough to sustain us for another 280 years at current consumption rates....Now, granted, consumption in places like China, India, and Indonesia is undoubtedly likely to rise but, so, too, is efficiency. I think that we just have to face it here. This whole notion that we are going to get off of these carbon-based fuels in the not too distant future is a pipe-dream.............2) According to environmentnewjersey.org, in 2008 the United States' consumption of wind and solar energy translated into approximately 88,000 barrels of oil a day. That sounds like a lot and it is, but when you compare it to the 815,000 barrels of oil equivalent that the natural gas industry of Oklahoma alone puts out (data from Alliance Resource Partners), it isn't really....Of course, the fact that these politicians and activists are so seemingly unaware of this humongous distinction in scale is troubling, too, I think.............3) According to the Detroit News, ethanol subsidies have cost the American taxpayers a whopping $45 billion. To say that this has been a boondoggle is soft-peddling it, folks. And even though the subsidies have technically ceased, the fact that the 10% mandate still exists is prima facie evidence that the scam is more than likely going to continue. There are a hell of a lot of close calls in politics, folks. Ethanol is NOT one of them. a) It has a pitifully low power density, b) it's just as bad for the environment as oil, c) it drives up the price of food, and d) it's terrible for engines. How this blankety blank ever got any traction is beyond me.............4) Am I in favor of universal background checks for gun purchases? Yes. Do I think that these universal background checks will in any way reduce violent criminality? No, not really.

No comments: