Who needs a constitution or congress when you alone know what’s good for the American people?![jasonseiler1[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/jasonseiler11.jpg?w=228)
New EPA boss promises dictatorial action on global warming
While speaking at the University of Colorado in Boulder, Gina McCarthy, the new head of the EPA, said Wednesday the administration is finished waiting on Congress and is set to take unilateral action on measures aimed at global warming, the Washington Times reported.
In June, Obama gave “what I really think is a most remarkable speech by a president of the United States,” she said.
“Essentially, he said that it is time to act,” she said. “And he said he wasn’t going to wait for Congress, but that he had administrative authorities and that it was time to start utilizing those more effectively and in a more concerted way.”
McCarthy insisted the administration could reduce so-called greenhouse gas emissions without harming economic growth, and could do it without any congressional approval.
http://www.examiner.com/article/new-epa-boss-promises-dictatorial-action-on-global-warming
===============================================================
Controlled Tornadoes Create Renewable Energy
Waste heat from power plants could be twisted into a nonpolluting source of energy.
http://discovermagazine.com/2013/september/08-tornado-tech
===============================================================
Replication may be possible some day in the distant future. Of course if Cook acted like a scientist rather than a propagandist with Nazi fantasies, Tol could have all the data and do it now.
As predicted, John Cook releases a bit more data, but not all data, making sure that data quality and results cannot be checked.
— Richard Tol (@RichardTol) August 16, 2013
===============================================================
The chill goes deep:
Atlanta breaks a century-old temperature record – CBS Atlanta 46 http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/23151205/atlanta-breaks-a-century-old-temperature-record
Record low set in Wilmington | StarNewsOnline.com
Thursday’s 71-degree high temperature was the area’s lowest for an Aug. 15 and the seventh-coldest in August since records began to be kept in 1874, according to the National Weather Service.
Chilly temperatures set new record lows | Ohio – wkyc.com
The temperature at Mansfield’s Lahm Airport fell to 46 degrees at 7:00 a.m. and tied a record low set in 1979.
Snow already falling in China – in August!
“Rare summer snowfall in Xinjiang,” reads the headline.
===============================================================
Windows XP, the next climate forcing?
Stacey writes in tips and notes:
Next Year Microsoft is ending support for Windows XP. Many companies will need to purchase new computers to run Windows 8. This will result in millions of perfectly working older machines being trashed.
Part of Microsoft’s statement on Climate Change follows, the irony is obvious:-
Climate change is a serious challenge that requires a comprehensive and global response from all sectors of society. To address it, Microsoft is committed to measuring, transparently reporting, and reducing the carbon footprint of our own operations. We are also pursuing opportunities with our partners to increase the energy efficiency of computing.
While energy efficiency is important, long-term solutions to climate change will require dramatic innovations to transition the world to a sustainable low-carbon economy while expanding substantially the number of people who have access to electricity. Software will play a key role in enabling this transformation. Microsoft is working to apply information technology innovation to help people and businesses around the world address climate change. We are also supporting research efforts on this topic being conducted by leading environmental groups, scientists, and governments around the world.
===============================================================
Mike Jowsey says in Tips and Notes
Quote of The Week contender:
In its article, Spiegel calls the growing disagreement between model results and measured observations “the wound of climate science“.
===============================================================
Gee, apparently farming practices, demand, availability, and selective breeding to make better crops had nothing to do with our crops of today, it was all the unseen guiding hand of climate change wot did it:
Ancient climate change picked the crops we eat today – environment – 15 August 2013 – New Scientist
Thank climate change for our daily bread. High levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere after the last ice age drove us to cultivate wheat.
…
All the plants grew larger under high levels of CO2, but the relatives of wheat and barley grew twice as large and produced double the seeds. This suggests the species are especially sensitive to high levels of CO2, Frenck says, making them the best choice for cultivation after the last ice age.
===============================================================
Busted! Green Hypocrisy Marks a New Low | Power Line
The four-minute video below shows brave anti-coal folks protesting . . . with gourmet food on a luxury yacht.
===============================================================
Letter to the Editor – Watts Up With That? 16th August 2013
Green Energy is Part of the Past, not Fuel for the Future
The growing failure of green energy in Europe should warn Australia to abandon its bi-partisan policies dictating targets, mandates and subsidies for “green” energy.
I grew up at the end of the last green energy era – solar energy powered our growing crops and dried the washing, but it was weak in winter and ceased under clouds and at night; wind energy pumped water, but only when the wind blew; draft horses powered farm machinery, but they had to be fed whether they were working or not; wood gave us home heating and cooking, but it consumed energy to collect and chop it up; kids walked to school or rode bikes or ponies and ladies took the horse and sulky.
Our only help from carbon energy was kerosene for the kitchen lamp and coke used in smelters and forges to produce our metal tools and machinery.
We also practiced “sustainability” – we purchased little, and most of the farm produce was consumed on the farm by family, farm labourers and draft horses.
We were rescued from this life of hard labour by carbon energy – a kerosene-powered tractor, a petrol-powered truck, and coal-powered electricity for lighting, heating, cooking, refrigeration, milking machines and pumps. The horses and farm labour were no longer needed and, at last, the farms produced a decent surplus of food for the growing cities.
Wind, solar, wood and muscle power are tools of the past and they work no better now than they did then. Forcing people to use these ancient technologies will just return us to laborious poverty on the farms and hunger in the cities.
Green energy should not be forced on consumers – those who want it should pay for it.
Green energy will eventually be abandoned, but the cost rises for each day’s delay
Viv Forbes, Rosewood Qld Australia
Gail Combs says:
August 16, 2013 at 5:12 pm
I was at part of an event Tuesday – the mayor and City Council of Concord NH had a discussion item about accepting a federal grant (i.e. our money) in the form of a BEARCAT (Ballistic Engineered Armored Response Counter Attack Truck).
In the application, the police chief claimed “[On] the domestic front, the threat is real and here. Groups such as the Sovereign Citizens, Free Staters and Occupy New Hampshire are active and present daily challenges.” Only us Free Staters (I was here before the FSP got created) are active, and we took notice. The hearing room was full, some 150 people, and about that many didn’t make it in.
On person to testify against accepting the grant was not a FSP member but, as reported in the Huffington Post:
Well worth reading and watching.
I was at CMU during the Kent State “incident”. The school closed and all the students went home to an early summer break – and wound up at hometown schools, like CMU. He riled up the crowd and started a march on CMU’s ROTC offices, which got well trashed but did not get set on fire. Almost, but the guy with the lighter got booed down.
One thing I like about New Hampshire is that we not only have the right to revolt, but the duty. From the Bill of Rights of the NH State Constitution:
I don’t know who wrote the last sentence, but it adds a good exclamation mark.
Outrageous Ampersand says: @ur momisugly August 16, 2013 at 5:04 pm
I hate to preach, I really do. But right now I feel I must….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ampersand, thank you for putting my feelings into words. I am old, I have no children. I fight with words because like you I look into the future and I see the coming of a Dark Age that makes the last one look benevolent.
The scary part is, the Republicans are only wolves in sheeps clothing.
So, now what ?
Ric Werme,
Thanks I was aware of Concord asking for the military equipment but not of the hearing. I used to live in NH while working in MA. I just could not force myself to live in the People’s Republic until I married a native.
u.k.(us) says:
August 16, 2013 at 7:13 pm
The scary part is, the Republicans are only wolves in sheeps clothing.
So, now what ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Time for a third party or better yet time to kick the RINOs out and return the Republicans to Classic Liberals.
“THEY thought the laws would mean farmers would sell out but I won’t I will be G… D… if I will let the Sons of Syphilitic Camels have my land.”
WOW, Gail you’re really wound up. – Good for you…
@Gail Combs –
Loved the part about the “sons of syphilitic camels’ – right on! Just the sort of resolve and determination we need to beat back the AGW fanatics.
@rw –
I would caution anyone not to think these people have the will to act out their intentions and destroy science, freedom and the economy. We should be prepared for them to cling to AGW and to their claims of authority outside of the Constitution to the bitter end, and they can do tremendous damage before they are finally stopped. . They will do that until physically compelled to stop.
2 thoughts:
1) How appropriate that the new EPA bosses quote was at the Univ of Colo Boulder – also know as the Peoples Republic of Boulder by most in Colorado – ‘nuf said there.
2) The chill goes deep – it has snowed at least 3 times (that I am aware of ) the Colorado mountains this month. A occasional late August snow isn’t uncommon but 3 snows in the first half of August – pretty uncommon , at least based on my years of observation.
I’ve been subjected often in my reading lately to “syphilitic camels’ “.
Is this like a metaphor, or something more serious ?
u.k.(us),
A quick Google search shows that “syphilitic camels” gets thrown around a lot in politics. I would call it a playground level insult in most cases, however it can be more serious.
http://joelsgulch.com/insert-blessing-that-involves-the-fleas-of-a-thousand-camels/
“This Is Why” – The Decemberists
Come the war
Come the avarice
Come the war
Come hell
Come attrition
Come the reek of bones
Come attrition
Come hell
This is why
Why we fight
Why we lie awake
And this is why
This is why we fight
When we die
We will die
With our arms unbound
And this is why
This is why
Why we fight
Come hell
Bride of quiet
Bride of all unquiet things
Bride of quiet
Bride of hell
Come the archers
Come the infantry
Come the archers
Of hell
This is why
Why we fight
Why we lie awake
This is why
This is why we fight
And when we die
We will die
With our arms unbound
And this is why
This is why we fight
Come hell
Come hell
This is why
Why we fight
Why we lie awake
This is why
This is why we fight
When we die
We will die with our arms unbound
And this is why
This is why we fight
So come to me
Come to me now
Lay your arms around me
And this is why
This is why
We fight
Come hell
Come hell
Come hell
Come hell
richardscourtney says:
August 16, 2013 at 12:35 pm
The device proposed in the above article is not some green dream like windfarms. It is a proposal for increasing the output of thermal power stations by utilising their low grade heat instead of dumping that heat from cooling towers.
At this stage it cannot be known if the proposal is technically, financially and economically feasible. But, at present, power stations dump more energy as low grade heat than the energy they provide as electricity. The proposal certainly seems worthy of investigation.
Richard
=========================================================================
Actually it can be known. I don’t care if we use artificial tornadoes, Stirling engines, or unicorn merry-go-rounds, Carnot thermal efficiency still applies. It is uneconomical to extract more mechanical work from the waste heat from power plants now because the inlet and rejection temperatures are simply too close to one another. I find it hard to believe that this scheme will achieve a 40% increase in total electrical power for the same thermal input. Even assuming they’re talking coal or nuclear baseload which are in the neighborhood of 30-35% efficient, we’re supposed to believe that we’re going to improve this to somewhere near 50%. I’m not buying it til someone shows me some real data or sound calculations.
Gail Combs says:
August 16, 2013 at 7:20 pm
u.k.(us) says:
August 16, 2013 at 7:13 pm
The scary part is, the Republicans are only wolves in sheeps clothing.
So, now what ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Time for a third party or better yet time to kick the RINOs out and return the Republicans to Classic Liberals.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I whole heartedly agree!
The Republican Party has simply become the armature Democrat-lite party, that believes in gigantic government, huge deficits, crony crapitalism, massive entitlement programs, the Constitution is a hurdle to be circumvented rather than the law of the land, massive rules and regulations, weak monetary policies, etc.
Why would anyone vote for a rank armature piker when you can get the real deal with a professional Democrat? Why indeed…
Americans are now fed up with both parties, (Congressional approval rating is at an hilarious 12%) and are open to an alternative. Unfortunately, the Constitution established a two party system, so third-parties are not possible to maintain. Somehow, the Republican Party must be reformed to a Libertarian ideology, but there are now only 3 Senators in Washington able to pull it off: Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee…
The other problem is that 49% of Americans don’t pay any income taxes, 48 million are on food stamps, 47 million are on Social Security, 314 million soon to be on Obamacare and 24 million work for state or federal governments…
With such a vast majority of Americans now willing to just vote themselves more money without regard to the socio-economic consequences, it’s really difficult to effect change.
The only way to overcome these depressing numbers is to somehow convince a large number of people that such an economic and social construct is unsustainable and that eventually US’ $20 trillion federal and state debt and $100~200 trillion unfunded liabilities (depends on computation assumptions) will eventually lead most of them to poverty….
A tall order, with very little time to accomplish it. Moreover, the changes that are required to fix the problems will initially be very painful with millions of public sector employees fired, entitlements severely cut, interest rates increased, default on a large portion of US debt, a spike in unemployment, a drop in GDP, a banking/financial crisis will ensue, etc… I.e. vote for me and I’ll make your life miserable for a couple for a few years…. Oh, goody….
Anyway, that’s what we’re up against… Short-term pain for long-term gain.
@Tsk Tsk – Combined heat and power (cogeneration) facilities feed the steam from generation into industrial processes to capture its energy to do useful work. Also, combined cycle gas generation uses the steam heat as well as the combustion heat, to generate added power.
SAMURAI says:
August 16, 2013 at 9:44 pm
The Republican Party has simply become the armature Democrat-lite party,
armature? Do you mean amateur?
I don’t think the US Constitution established a two party system, or any parties, for that matter.
It may have facilitated the formation of two dominant parties allowing a situtation where the work together to prevent other parties from becoming a threat.
In New Hampshire, the Libertarian party gained major party status, then the legislature changed the qualification, and we lost major party status in the next election and never regained it. This wasn’t the only reason we lost major party status, but it is the most important.
And when Gina was head of air quality at EPA she was asked if she knew the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. She had to admit that she did not. How can someone with such ignorance rise to a position such as this? Shocking.
“I don’t think the US Constitution established a two party system, or any parties, for that matter.” [Ric Werme]
You are correct.
nzrobin says:
August 16, 2013 at 11:13 pm
And when Gina was head of air quality at EPA she was asked if she knew the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. She had to admit that she did not. How can someone with such ignorance rise to a position such as this? Shocking.
=====================================================================
Hmm. It looks as though the US is very similar to the UK in this regard. Here it almost seems like an act of faith to appoint to top jobs, not least as government ministers, people with absolutely no knowledge of the subject on which they’re supposed to lead. Either that, or we pick people with such a vested interest that they will only pursue their own agenda without any regard for facts or evidence.
It’s working SO well …
Gail Combs says…
Regarding Gen Petraeus:
“So he carried water for the Admin. and has been rewarded.”
I would use a more credible source than Media Matters to make that argument. They always put the Administration’s spin on their ‘news’ reporting.
The fact is that Gen Petraeus has been completely co-opted, which was the point I made. His groveling resignation letter kissing up to Obama was disgusting: [“…This afternoon, the President graciously accepted my resignation… you (Obama) did extraordinary work on a host of critical missions during my time as director, and I am deeply grateful to you for that… Thank you for your extraordinary service to our country, and best wishes for continued success in the important endeavors that lie ahead for our country… With admiration and appreciation… David Petraeus”]. <— [that letter was written to the guy who publicly stuck it to Petraeus. Now Obama owns him.]
I argued that the U.S. military has been co-opted along with the courts. Who will protect American citizens now from the American government? Petraeus was publicly humiliated for a specific reason. The fact that they threw him a bone afterward means nothing; it just keeps him in line, with something else he can lose. Every general officer in the military saw and understood exactly what had happened. None of them want to be in Petraeus’ shoes. They will be putty in Obama’s hands now.
I was surprised at how easy it was to cow the military by making an example of Petraeus [and he was certainly made an example; there was no reason to go pubic with his sins. He could have simply been forced to retire for ‘personal/family reasons’, like many before him. But that would not have had the intended effect: publicly making a high ranking general officer into a chump, and thus herding the rest into line.
Tsk Tsk:
At August 16, 2013 at 9:32 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/16/the-wuwt-hot-sheet-for-august-16th-2013/#comment-1392825
you write to me
But nobody is suggesting defying Carnot Cycle limits.
As you say, conventional coal-fired PF and nuclear plant operate at ~35% thermal efficiency using single cycle steam turbines.
Operation at over 50% thermal efficiency is obtained using combined cycle plants; e.g. combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT) burning gas, or pressurised fluidised bed combustion (PFBC) burning coal. They use gas and steam turbines where the exhaust heat of the gas turbine provides the heat for the steam turbine. The gas and steam turbines each operate at less than maximum efficiency but their combination provides higher efficiency than either can alone.
Conventional PF and nuclear plant operating combined heat and power (CHP or ‘cogeneration’) operate at over 80% thermal efficiency. They utilise the low-grade waste heat for heating buildings.
Please think about CHP.
Low grade heat from a power station is dumped by the condenser cycle. This heat is often dumped using cooling towers that evapourate water. CHP does it by heating buildings that would otherwise use electricity from the power station to heat them.
A power station’s condenser cycle need not evaporate water: it could accelerate air. The potential device suggested in the above article does this and uses wind turbibes to convert the energy of the moving air to electricity. In principle this is no different from CHP.
Combined cycles and CHP reduce the thermal efficiencies of their turbines to obtain maximum thermal efficiency of their total systems. CHP more than doubles the thermal efficiency of a nuclear or a coal-fired conventional PF power station.
As I said,
Richard
DirkH:
I am replying to your post addressed to me at August 16, 2013 at 3:02 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/16/the-wuwt-hot-sheet-for-august-16th-2013/#comment-1392638
It says
Your opinion is noted, but not understood. It seems to reflect your ‘gut reaction’ to the press release claiming the potential device is ‘green’. That claim is clearly a big ‘nod’ to the existing need to claim any power generation research is for ‘green’ technology if the research is to obtain funds.
Please read my reply to Tsk Tsk at August 17, 2013 at 1:28 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/16/the-wuwt-hot-sheet-for-august-16th-2013/#comment-1392946
If the device were – like CHP – to double the thermal efficiency of a power station then it would have the same effect as building a new (i.e. additional) power station but would have LESS capital cost than a new power station.
And I fail to see where “subsidies” and “taxes” come into this.
As I said in my first post about this above at August 16, 2013 at 10:42 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/16/the-wuwt-hot-sheet-for-august-16th-2013/#comment-1392344
Richard
DirKH:
As a point of information concerning my answer to you at August 17, 2013 at 2:25 am (which inexplicably is in moderation) I add the following.
Pointing me to a wicki article on combined cycles was not needed. For decades I worked on development of pressurised fluidised combustion (PFBC) and air blown gasification combined cycle (ABGC) systems.
Richard
Why is it that no country on this planet ever tried to be true Libertarian if it’s so plausible?
Minimal government, free trade, open borders, decriminalized drugs, no welfare state and no public education system.
Dear Richard S. Courtney,
In the “Tornado Turbine” designs, there is an external heat exchanger somewhere producing the warm air from the plant’s warm water.
Thus you’ll already be building something about as grand as a cooling tower as just one component, to dump the heat to air.
So why not just use a cooling tower? Take a bog-standard hyperboloid natural draft cooling tower, except at the bottom you rework the air intake so the incoming air passes through a turbine first. You don’t want evaporative cooling, you want to use air, so size it for dry cooling.
All the energy in the warm water is available there as would be for a Tornado Turbine. Anything more fancy invites additional efficiency losses. You can get the swirling by offsetting the turbine outflow into the central “tube”, which is more efficient than aimed at center anyway, take it in tangential, even have it in the right direction for a Coriolis force assist.
Will it work? You know much more than I about such, you tell me. Any removal of energy will slow the air stream. There are more air flow restrictions than a standard tower, sapping more available energy. How much can be removed before natural draft stops working?
Which is interesting as a theoretical max, as there is a more important consideration, the rate the heat from the plant is shed. As you remove more energy and slow the air stream, you slow the cooling rate. But the plant MUST dump heat at a certain rate. How much energy is recoverable before the cooling systems aren’t cooling fast enough?
I don’t see the Tornado Turbine being of any benefit over my redone cooling tower. Except where one involves known proven technology whose pros and cons presumably can be rather readily evaluated, the other is screaming for a giant federal research grant to build a giant structure to test the concept. Without being anywhere near as sexy as hot fusion or subatomic particle collisions.