For most people living in the United States, the first thing they do in the morning is turn on the lights and the last thing they do before going to sleep is turn off the lights. Using their appliances, cars, computers and phones all require a form of energy. At home, they turn on their TVs and regulate the temperature using the heating or cooling system. All of these actions require energy. Absent energy, we are back in the Middle Ages.

My point is that we live in an energy intensive society. Is this good or bad? If you stop and think about it for a minute or two, I believe you will agree that it is good because all of these energy activities make you more productive and make it easier to live your life. Only when you do not have to spend all your time gathering food and providing shelter do you have time to begin to think of how you may help others.

Now how dependable must this energy be? For most people, their power must be available 24 hours per day 365 days per year. It is probably fair to say most people do not have a clue how this power is generated—and for most part, they do not care as long as it is available. This ignorance lets others get the uniformed to agree on ways to furnish the power needed whether these methods are practical or not. The only things about which the uninformed are concerned are cost and availability.

It would seem that the need for energy is irrefutable—only the fuel to accomplish this need is in question. Global warming became climate change when the climate data showed that global warming was not happening. Climate change is a scam used by the unscrupulous politicians to promote the need for more big government control. Junk science (science with data falsified to support an agenda instead being reported truthfully as observed and recorded) was used to show global warming by so-called scientists. It has been documented that the climate data was falsified by some to support global warming claims in order to continue to receive “research” monies.

Politics and the truth never seem to be found in the same place.

The scam continues with the method of generating power. It has been demonstrated that the wind and solar power special interest groups have greatly benefitted from government sponsorship with government tax monies and energy subsidies. When subsidies are needed to make a power source competitive, how does the taxpayer benefit? Should not any monies be used for research and development instead of full scale production? When the alternate energy can be furnished at a competitive cost, then it is the time to consider full scale plants.

Wind power has been promoted as an energy source, but the wind does not always blow at a high enough velocity. Many of the sites where there is sufficient wind are in remote parts of the country where there are no power lines to transmit the generated power to the urban areas where the demand exists. Who is going to pay for the new power lines needed? If we do, it is a subsidy. The government currently subsidizes the cost of generating wind power. On a recent trip out West, we drove by about 200 wind turbines with about 40-50% operating. One week later on the way home, none were operating. Where was the power being used generated?

You want your power 24/7/365. When there is no wind, where do you get your power? To meet those needs, a standby power plant burning fossil fuel is needed. Typically these standby units are powered by natural gas turbines because they can quickly be brought online to produce power. So we now need two power sources to generate power instead of one. Doesn’t this seem wasteful? It is against the law to kill eagles, but these wind turbine installations routinely kill eagles and the federal government says that it is okay.

The same argument can be made about solar power. Both the construction and power generated are subsidized by our tax dollars. Where do we get the power when there is no sun at night?  Once again, we need a standby power plant that can quickly produce power. It has recently become known that some of these solar plants located in the California desert may require large amounts of water for steam generation and cooling—during a drought? Some plants which redirect the sunlight to towers have been reported to have instantly incinerated birds flying into the sunlight beams. In several recent metropolitan area newspaper articles, the writers extolled the advantages of solar power without one mention of where the power comes from when there is no sun.

Thus it can be reported that using wind and solar power increases consumer costs because each requires a standby power generation plant which burns fossil fuel to provide power 24/7/365.

The fossil fuel that is really hit hard is coal. President Obama declared after being elected in 2008 that he was going to raise our power costs to very high levels and declared war on coal as a fuel source. On what scientific basis was he making this prediction? It is very likely that he and his minions did not need a valid reason. They were only advertising that since they were in control of government force, they were going to implement laws and regulations whether cost effective or not and were daring the public to protest. They won because there have been no public protests.

In the past, it was the coal fired flue gas contaminants mercury and fly ash that concerned everyone, but they can be greatly reduced by flue gas scrubbing. This cleanup method can also reduce the amount of carbon dioxide as well. When you remove carbon dioxide from the flue gas, what do you do with it so that it does not enter the atmosphere? Have we created a carbon dioxide storage problem and added more cost to our electric bill? Answer. Yes. If the EPA reduces the flue gas carbon dioxide content to levels that cannot be reached or only can be achieved at prohibitive cost, then coal cannot be used as a fuel. This is what the EPA wants to do. The Obama administration is famous for manufacturing so called “facts” to support their actions. Isn’t this an abuse of government power?

In a country where millions of people cannot find a decent job, the inability to use coal is putting thousands of coal miners out of work. How does this benefit the country? As more expensive fuels must be combusted to produce more expensive electricity, only the climate change control freaks benefit by convincing a somewhat stupid populace that more government control is needed to fix a fictional problem.

Climate change has been happening on this planet for millions of years. Climate change is cyclic and there have been times that scientists tell us the earth was warmer than now and there were times when we had ice ages. The largest heater in our solar system is the sun. Does it not make sense that the most likely source of climate change is the sun? How are we supposed to control the sun?

As more and more research is done on how the earth’s ecosystems work, we will learn more about how this wonderful planet on which we live operates and adapts to changes. Consider what happened when a large foreign body from space hit our planet, probably created the Gulf of Mexico and most likely killed the dinosaurs. The planet survived. Man has proven to be quite adaptable to changing conditions. We were supposed to run out of food to feed the world’s population years ago. It didn’t happen. It could, but not now.

Once again, climate change is a political scam to convince the world that more government control is necessary to save the planet. Horsefeathers. Power hungry politicians and not fossil fuels are the problem.