So You Want "Green Jobs"
I got one of those early morning sick feelings after reading that the House passed HR 2998, the ‘‘American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009’’. This 1,201 page clunker not only wasn’t read by those voting on the bill – I couldn’t get through it – but had 300 pages of amendments added around 3 AM on Friday! Again, who answers that 3 AM phone call?
Anyway, I digress. This bill, which proponents say will create millions of new green jobs and ensure the security of the United States by capping greenhouse gasses – specifically carbon dioxide, will go to the Senate for debate and a vote. Now there, don’t you feel more secure?
To be sure, eight Republican Congressman decided to vote for this bill and sent it over the top in the 219-212 vote. For those of you who are counting I present the Carbon 8, as I like to call them:
· Mary Bono Mack (Calif.-45)
· Mike Castle (Del.)
· Mark Steven Kirk (Ill.-10)
· Leonard Lance (N.J.-7)
· Frank LoBiondo (N.J.-2)
· John McHugh (N.Y.-23)
· Dave Reichert (Wash.-8)
· Chris Smith (N.J.-4)
What is striking in this vote is the fact that numerous deals had to be cut with many of the House members who were initially opposed to the bill. This would be termed “bribery” in any other modern economy – but here in America, it was simply political haggling. You vote for my bill and I will make sure you and your constituents get something that the rest of the country won’t. In other words, we will redistribute certain privileges to certain groups without concern for others so that we can pass this important cap & tax legislation. Now it is less certain that the Senate will go along with this folly, so all is not lost.
However, let me point out that this notion of energy security involves alternative energy as its primary vehicle for change and the increase in costs to traditional energy producers while incentivizing alternative energy sources. When looking at all energy consumption in the US, and this includes transportation, we find that the majority of this energy is derived from fossil fuels: in 2005, it was estimated that 40% of the nation's energy came from petroleum, 23% from coal, and 23% from natural gas. Nuclear power supplied 8.4% and renewable energy supplied 6.8%, which was mainly from hydroelectric dams although other renewables are included such as geothermal and solar energy. It should be noted that renewables also include biofuels and ethanol. So as we found out last year when grocery costs skyrocketed, burning our food isn’t a great way to increase our energy independence! In fact excluding hydro and all biomass, we find that the saving grace of renewables produces a whopping 0.67 percent, yes that is approximately 2/3 of one percent!
What? That’s not what the government has been telling us. Oh yes they have and the statistics are available from the Energy Information Administration website and these are “Official Statistics from the US Government”. So who is lying, ahem, I mean misstating the facts here? Well for one, figures lie and liars figure. You see, when looking at all energy production and consumption, you need to assess the total energy picture. All too often the statistics that get quoted relate to electrical energy production, which actually makes the numbers look better. That is why nuclear represents nearly 20% of total ELECTRICAL energy and only 6.8% of TOTAL energy production in the US. Now to come back to the number of renewable sources, you need to consider that renewables include production and use of all biomass fuels which includes ethanol, wood derived fuels and waste – which of course you need to burn to produce energy and which results in a large carbon footprint. Then you need to reduce this number by hydroelectric production, which isn’t a second or third generation source – in fact the TVA was founded in 1931– and I am proud to call myself a Tennessean! No, the reality is that all of these exotic technologies contribute exactly “spit” to the production of energy in this country. Oh, and spit is a technical term that basically means very little for those of you in Rio Linda. So, to summarize, the production of all forms of energy in this country that is generated from fuel sources that burn something represents nearly 90% of total energy production of the United States.
So when we re-look at the 1,201 page American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, we are struck by the fact that this bill is not about security at all and has little chance of changing the carbon footprint of all energy production in the US; but it does mandate control of 90 percent of the energy production of the US and gives the administration and its special interests a stake in controlling all aspects of that energy production. Essentially, the US government and specifically the Democrat controlled Congress have accomplished taking over the processes and the management of the majority of all energy production in this country. Feel your liberties slipping away?
And you will have the joy of paying for this opportunity to the tune of $174 to $3,946 per year, depending on which liar, ahem, agency you want to believe. So if you, like me, are committed to staying in the 21st century and not having government tell you when to put on a sweater – think Jimmy Carter here – then you need to oppose this bill in the Senate by contacting your state Senator.



I am sickened, outraged, and angry!! It is one thing to be shafted by the Dems but quite another to have members of your own party turn traitor! I am ready to take to the streets and disappointed beyond belief that i have to be out of town from July 2-6 for a wedding and can't attend any of the Memphis Tea Parties!! But I will be there in spirit and I will be there for sure for the rest of the tea parties planned. Is there still one planned for Labor Day? I wanted to be more active in the July tea party but could not due to family illness and work issues. Those have been resolved and I am ready to go to work now for the next tea party. I signed up long ago for the revolution. Now I am ready to be a street soldier!
Reply to this
May I suggest that everyone stop concentrating on these 8 congressmen, and start concentrating on the faulty science behind "manmade climate change". These people cannot win a scientific debate, so they are desperate to stifle any discussion of science; don't let them get away with it. Always challenge their suppositions. Always point out the demonstrable errors in computer projections.
Locally, Chris Peck (Editior of the CA) has openly declared that he will not print any articles contrary to the Manmade Global Climate Change theory. Challenge him on this. Write to the Scripps headquarters in Cincinnati and protest the onesided coverage (Mark Contreras is in charge of their newspaper division).
Forty-four democrats voted against this stupid law, scare just a few more with facts and the battle will be won.
Reply to this