James P Reardon Sr. | |
Saturday June 29th Rich Karlgaard, a publisher of Forbes Digital Rules touched on a topic of the Waxman-Markey bill when it was passed in late June of this year. I am disappointed with the current events of that the economical situation continues to decline. At first I was all for President elect Obama, I honestly felt that he was going to get in with promising changes and the changes would start with him. I also wished nothing but the best for him as well. I however do not want to single out Obama alone, A chain of events shows that the problem was - is and has been the Capital of the United States, Washington.
Karlgaard continued into a story of a couple he knew a hot June Saturday evening in California. The couple had went to see [i]The Taking of Pelham[/i], A movie staring John Travolta and Denzel Washington. But they were to leave with the movie unfinished due to brownouts caused by excessive use of air contioners because of a heat wave.
Which brings me to the current subject of electricity. Electricity has been a great thing for steady economic growth. Everywhere you look and just about everything you use is operated and needs electricity.
So the burning question remains where does it all come from?
About 48 and a half percent come from Coal Generated Electricity, 21 and a half percent come from Natural Gas, 19 and a half percent come from Nuclear and only 1 percent of which comes from petroleum. Around 90% of the Electriciy comes from only 3 sources at present. Coal, Gas and Nuclear.
So The Waxman markey bill that passed in the House by a 219 to 212 margin in late June seeks to punitively tax America's electric utilities.
Doing the Math according to Rich Karlgaard, At best solar, wind, batteries, geothermal and cellulosic ethanol COMBINED would only meet a mere 20% of our needs by 2025. They also don't deliver a constant supply of energy that is needed for those services or plants that just can't afford to be without electric. Such as services NICU units that keep preemies alive in hospitals and the vast markets and fast food services that need a constant supply of electric to keep their refridgerators running to prevent meat from rotting.
I am in agreement with Rich Karlgaard, Giving the resources that we have available in the United States today. The only options that we have in my opinion are Coal or Nuclear. They provide a steadily supply electric that is needed in vast majorities than any others. In the exception for gas, but using gas powered plants to generate electricity would again put in a supply and demand situation that would send the prices of gas once again through the roof. Where would we all be then? I don't feel that's a good alternative. As for Hydroelectric, isn't a bad source of going green... But, the supply of energy is minimal not to mention that there aren't to many other places to be building major dams. Wind and Solar Power? There pretty interesting sources of a Green Global economy but does that mean we wouldn't have power all night? Besides they rely on a source that isn't always readily available and unpredictable, Which would make the electric supplied un-reliable!
Once again I am very disappointed of the direction that Washington is taking us in and it's time to stand up and say something.
THOMAS JEFFERSON :A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.
|
|
RICH KARLGAARD, forbes blog publisher (READ HIS POST)
|
Thanks, From : (BetterMember) James P Reardon Sr.
Owner of the [BNO] Network - http://bno-network.ryze.com/
Administration of BetterMember.net - http://www.bettermember.net
Commissioner of the BMFFL - http://www.bmffl.com
Private Reply to James P Reardon Sr. |
