Posted by Central Metal Fabricators, Inc. on | Leave a Comment
Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, the largest independent environmental organization in the world, recently offered some facts about the benefits of carbon dioxide (CO2). He shared the information in The Truth About CO2, an educational video presented on the PragerU website. The purpose behind the creation of the video was to offer information “you won’t hear in the current debate” about CO2 and carbon emissions, and to counteract the EPA’s classification of CO2 as a “pollutant.”
You may be surprised by some of the facts he shares in the video, especially if you follow the news about regulations pertaining to carbon emissions and manufacturing. You might also be surprised by the information in the video if you’re aware of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) mandate that “CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, which constitute 85% of our energy use, must be reduced to zero by 2100,” as stated in the video. Moore says the common usage of the term “carbon emissions” to refer to the emissions from burning fossil fuels for energy is misleading. He goes on to explain that “carbon dioxide is not carbon… It is a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas which is an indispensable food for all living things.” According to Moore, while climate alarmists are saying you can have too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the big-picture outlook paints a different reality. He says that for most of the history of life on Earth, carbon dioxide has been present in the atmosphere at much higher levels than today. He cites the time of the Cambrian explosion, when CO2 levels in the atmosphere were as much as 10x higher than today.
Among the other information and facts Moore shares in the video, you’ll hear, “Fossil fuels are 100% organic” and they’re “positively green.” He also states, “If there were no carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the Earth would be a dead planet,” and he adds, “All life is carbon-based, and the carbon for all that life, originates from the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”
Moore claims, “We should celebrate CO2 as the giver of life it is…” rather than looking at CO2 as a bad thing. Wherever you stand in the debate about climate change, it takes less than five minutes to watch The Truth About CO2. We found Moore’s video presentation to be very interesting. What do you think?
Posted by Central Metal Fabricators, Inc. on | Leave a Comment
In the search for better renewable energy, we’ve come a long way. Technology has increased significantly in the past decade, and the use of solar energy to create useable electricity occurs much more than it used to. But there’s one major problem with solar energy—one that is simultaneously obvious yet somehow unexpected.
What happens when the sun just doesn’t shine enough?
This is the exact problem a major solar power plant is currently experiencing; due to the fact that the sun just isn’t shining enough over it, it’s producing half the amount of energy as was expected of it. The Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System, located in the desert bordering California and Nevada, is actually the largest facility of its kind in the world, and was built to produce enough power for 140,000 homes.
Built using innovative solar-thermal technology that works through 350,000 computer-controlled mirrors, the $2.2 billion project was supposed to be a breakthrough in alternative energy. However,“irregular weather patterns,” lack of sunlight, and “equipment challenges”* have posed problems for the ambitious project.
The problem is, as much potential as the sun has in terms of energy, it’s one thing that is beyond our control; we simply can’t alter the weather. Without enough sunlight, not enough power is generated, and it creates additional problems, including damaged equipment and even unsafe conditions.
While those involved in Ivanpah’s operation remain confident in the project, and the potential for its future success is still great, it does serve as a reminder that there are still some things that are out of our control, and that the most reliable forms of energy are still the ones we’ve been relying on for a very long time.
Posted by Central Metal Fabricators, Inc. on | Leave a Comment
With the EPA’s proposed Clean Power Plant Rule hearings now in the final stage, there are many questions surrounding them. There’s also plenty of controversy. Spanning a range of industries and locations, many people wonder how it will affect them; some are in favor, while others h2ly oppose.
In the interest of clarifying some confusion, we’d like to offer some information and help answer some questions regarding what you need to know.
How will coal-dependent states be affected?
Should the rule pass, many fear that the price of electricity will rise, especially for coal-dependent states. However, in actuality, some of the least coal-dependent states, including Maine, California, and Idaho, have the lowest electricity bills. At the same time, states such as West Virginia, the most coal-dependent, have much higher electricity bills. States like Iowa, with its nation-leading percentage of renewable electrons, have the lowest prices of electricity in the country.
How will electricity consumers be affected, overall?
The proposal aims to make states reach emission reductions through the most economical ways possible, while eliminating wasteful spending. By investing in renewables, focusing on efficiency, and balancing being clean with affordable, the goal is to make the cost to electricity consumers negligible, and in the future, lower than it is now.
Is this a purely partisan/Obama plan?
The short answer is no. Actually, George Bush proposed a “four pollutant” clean-up plan in 2000, but it was squashed due to opposition. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has ordered Obama to regulate carbon emissions following the Clean Air Act. The proposal, therefore, is not original to Obama, nor is it purely partisan. Both sides have tried to make it happen, and now the president must act on it. Supporting it is not supporting a party or a politician, and if all goes as planned, the hope is that it’s good for everyone.
Posted by Central Metal Fabricators, Inc. on | Leave a Comment
It’s fair to say that almost everyone would be in favor of energy that costs less and is better for the environment. This is precisely why so many businesses and countries have tried to do just that.
The problem is, many have failed, and until there’s a truly effective alternative, it’s
important that we take note of these failures and avoid them at all costs.
Case in point: Germany. In the past 20 years, Germany has undergone a drastic energy transformation, investing heavily in solar and wind energy with the goal of eliminating as much reliance as possible on fossil fuels.
If you do a quick internet search, you’ll see statistics that seemingly support Germany’s decision and suggest success. But what these statistics don’t show are the numbers just below the surface, and what’s actually going on in the country now, as a result of their $412 billion investment in renewables. These below-the-surface numbers include:
German households now pay the second highest electricity rates in the EU
Over the past ten years, Germans’ electricity rates have doubled
By 2022, the $412 billion investment could grow to $884 billion
Between 2000 and 2013, the electricity rate increased 107% while inflation over that period was 22%
The renewable energy subsidy—the reason for such significant rate increases—now costs the average German household over $320 a year
Over 300,000 German households lose electricity each year because they can’t afford to pay their bill
The facts are the facts, and they glaringly show that the plan is not working as hoped. This article, from which the above statistics come, states that “far from being a success, Germany’s rush into renewable energy has crushed households, taxpayers, and utilities.” Of course the intentions were good, but good intentions don’t pay bills.
This serves as a reminder that 1) Not all statistics are cut and dry—further facts must be considered; and 2) Investing heavily in alternative energy sources, before knowing the true costs, can be very dangerous. The hope is that Germany’s unfortunate circumstances can serve as a lesson for other countries.
