A Sane Energy/Environmental Policy

President Obama said “my plan will necessarily make electricity prices skyrocket

These are the words of a madman, a societal saboteur. No one in their right mind would think or say anything like that. Sane energy policy requires low cost, abundant, reliable energy. It also requires that we stop wasting our reserves of hydrocarbon based fuels.


The picture above is not a sane way to live. Spending huge amounts of time stuck in traffic jams, wasting fuel and generating pollution. Government should undertake a massive influx of spending on mass transit, and start promoting working remotely and other technologies which reduce traffic and improve health and quality of life. We could probably reduce fuel usage by 50% and improve quality of life at the same time. I do almost all of my local transport by bicycle and mass transit, and it is fabulous. I would never go back to using a car. I can do this because Boulder, Colorado has spent a lot of money creating the necessary infrastructure.

This is what government should be focusing on, not trying to push a 100% fraudulent climate agenda. In the 1960’s and 1970’s I worked hard to get the Clean Air Act passed, as a quality of life issue. We put electrostatic precipitators on our coal plants in the US, and made our air clean.  By contrast, the Obama White House has helped keep the Chinese people breathing filthy air – by focusing on non-pollutant CO2 instead of actual pollutants which could have been cleaned up at minimal cost.


The global warming scam has been the most destructive thing to ever happen to the environmental movement, which I have been active in my entire life.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

193 Responses to A Sane Energy/Environmental Policy

  1. What we’ve seen over the last few decades is a ruthless repression of common sense. And in its place a Chinese industry promoting culture that has been constantly attacking industry, engineering, and law & order.

    Looking on from the UK, the key requirement of civilisation and common sense is those in power (like NOAA & NASA) are subject to the law. And that law should be, that like LIBOR bank rate rigging in the UK, if NOAA, NASA or indeed ANY academic researcher just makes up data or moulds the data to fit some political view, then they should be subject to legal proceedings.

    And once you get policy based on facts, the fact that city transportation infrastructure has been under constant attack by the green blob, will mean now is the time to invest (based not on some knee jerk reaction in a blog, or some made up research from an academic – but based on where the real problems are, and the real solutions to those problems.)

    • Andy Oz says:

      100% agree

    • Rosalind Newton says:

      Frankly, I prefer to research real science. The international scientific community
      has stated we are in a race to keep carbon emissions down. We have family members who are scientists in fields like biology and oceanography at doctorate levels. The heating of our planet is manmade and needs to be curbed. We cannot afford to back out of the Paris Accord.

      • Louis Hooffstetter says:

        “I prefer to research real science… The heating of our planet is manmade and needs to be curbed.”

        Good for you Rosalind. I also prefer to research real science. And based on decades of my own research, I’m convinced that most “Climate Science” is crap, and that more than 95% of current global warming is natural.

        Show us your research/evidence and provide convincing evidence that “The heating of our planet is manmade and needs to be curbed.” I want to believe, but my adherence to the scientific method just won’t let me.

  2. Stephen Richards says:

    I drive a lot now I’m retired but infrequently. Sounds silly I know but I travel around Europe where I live.
    Mass transit is still not an option for me. Nearest rail station 15km no bus service. Last time I left my car there it was keyed. Nearest town with an internal bus service 74kms.

  3. richard says:

    money wasted could have built a bullet train across the US.

  4. richard says:

    I know people who would rather sit in traffic by themselves than take public transport.

    • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N says:

      Even workmates that live near each other won’t car pool. Maybe it’s something to do with car ownership and selfishness or that everyone paid through the nose for their rego so they still want to get the most out of it?

      • Stephen Richards says:

        In mt memory car pooling was disaster unless you could match the occupants. I tried it some 40yrs ago but my co drivers were unreliable in both the cars and their timing.
        Even now, in france, I still get very annoyed when people are late for appointments.
        Retirement hasn’t slowed me.

        • griff says:

          The advent of smartphone apps makes organising car pooling easier and perhaps more likely to get people who get on…

          Try googling car pool app and your area…

          Or the car sharing schemes like zipcar work for occasional car users in even some small towns

      • Chris says:

        Studies have been done, and people like riding alone even if it is in traffic because it is alone time. It’s me time. The book traffic breaks it down more, but we need that time away from everyone, to pick our own music, and relax without a boss or spouse or children screaming at you.

        • Neal S says:

          Driving in rush hour traffic is hardly relaxing. I don’t doubt that people like riding alone, but certainly not to ‘relax’ if it is in rush hour. I wore a fitbit Charge HR 24/7 for a couple of months and checked my heart rate while driving. Sometimes (often actually) it would get as high as when doing aerobic exercise.

          • Robert says:

            I get absolute FITS stuck in the traffic around Providence, RI, and I have no choice because I drive a company vehicle work all day long. Not so much because of the traffic itself, I think, but because it’s so ridiculous for the smallest state! 3 in the afternoon, and traffic will be jammed up, IN AND OUT of town!

      • Robert says:


  5. RAH says:

    And I suspect that is one reason why the green blob wants to concentrate the population into urban areas. There they can be forced into public transit.

  6. Steve Case says:

    Here in Milwaukee most buses run nearly empty most of the time. I wonder the the gallons per passenger mile is.

    • Bytor says:

      And therein lies the problem. Mass transit means you are beholden to someone else’s schedule. I adamantly disagree with almost everything Tony has to say on this subject, except for the “remote” topic. I am fortunate to work for a very large energy equipment manufacturer who encourages “work from home”. It saves lives and it saves money for both the worker and the company. Otherwise, sorry, I’m not giving up my own personal transportation and bicycling is simply out of the question. Rarely, if ever, is there a practical time where I could ride bicycle, and where I live, public transportation would be completely impractical, and cost more than personal transportation as well. As my area continues to expand and sprawl, public transportation becomes more impractical every day.

      • Ken says:

        More and more, work from home is a great option, especially for IT workers. I retired almost 3 years ago as an IT worker from a big, nasty fossil fuel company. Really, really big. Really, really nasty, CO2 spewing company. (Hee hee). Great company. Great pay. Sterling safety record. Treated employees great. But I digress. I worked on databases in the North Sea, Alaska, Canada, even Texas, all from the comfort of my home. But where I live, there are no viable public transportation options. I have traveled a lot both for business and for pleasure. Have been to probably half of the biggest cities in the Northern Hemisphere and have used public trans in many of them. In some, it is great. In some, it is horrible. My favorite is in Paris. But I am pretty sure that in none of those places does it pay for itself. It is heavily gov’t subsidized. Of course, gigantic superhighways are not heavily subsidized, they are 100% paid for by the gov’t. Toll roads, I believe, pay for themselves. For the convenience of having my own “time travel machine” (ie, a car), I am willing and able to pay tolls and expenses for my cars. I am not an economist, but I think somewhere in there an argument can be made that public trans is not, in the majority of cases, more economical than private.

        • John G Frykman says:

          The government pays for nothing because every penny it has is collected fron the public Toll roads are taxpayer regressive and do not recognize that roads and other taxpayer funded infrastructure stimulate the economy and thereby generate tax revenue and economic growth.

      • Robert says:

        Exactly, mass transit has its place, but are you really going to bring home a weeks shopping for a family of 4 on the BUS?!?

  7. Robertv says:

    I suppose that for most people in that picture it must be the fastest or cheapest or only option.

  8. James Anderson says:

    If we just focused on the computer control of traffic lights we could save at least 25 percent. In my town the cities goal is to make you stop at as many traffic signals as possible so you will be discouraged and take mass transit. Since the city imposes a 5 center per gallon gas tax they also have a vested interest in making you use as much gas as possible.

    • Winnipeg Boy says:

      Agreed. That technology exists right now. It is so frustrating. “City” milage would improve drastically across the globe.

  9. the tarscraper says:

    We have tried; dirty buses, crowed rapid transit trains and trolleys, dangerous bike lanes, costly commuter lanes, slow and undependable Amtrack that takes you to a crowded transfer spot that still requires one of the above in order to get to your final destination. People still choose their warm, clean, quiet, entertaining,dependable, independent and “they” say self driving car. We have a tremendous supply of energy sources that will last for generations and will only get cleaner and cheaper with technology. Why not improve the road systems to hold more cars and more buses.

    • Kent Clizbe says:

      Amen, Tarscraper!

      It is a really bad idea to give the government (since that is who runs all mass transit in the USA) more power over our lives.

      For a case study in the insanity of mass transit systems, see the Metro in DC.

      DC Metro is exemplary of the pig-at-the-trough sucking up of our tax dollars for bureaucrats to live luxurious lives of leisure–traveling the world for “conferences” in first class, building luxurious office buildings, sucking up fat salaries with pensions, subsidizing union workers who do nothing and do it poorly, feeding into a dysfunctional racial spoils system, and much, much, much worse. All for making green PC-Progs feel good about themselves.

      It sounds nice in theory (as do all socialist schemes), but the practice is appalling and dehumanizing.

      America is a huge country with vast distances to cover. We are also a free people who do not want to be shoved into a unionized tin can to travel.

      And the bureaucrats, sucking up billions of tax dollars moan: Just give us more money! That’ll fix it!


      Make America Great! (NOT Make America Europe!)

    • Gail Combs says:

      To make Mass Transit viable you have to have other things besides the mass transit system.

      (1) A SAFE place to leave your car/bike/ horse and buggy (grin) for the day. I commuted in Boston with a bike and Mass transit and had my bikes stolen or turned into pretzels by angry thieves fairly often.

      (2) An easy and SAFE way to get to the transit station. I just about wiped out a gaggle of bikers(~30) all over the road going around a blind curve with a semi coming the other way. Thank goodness for good brakes and barely enough room to stop.

      (3) plenty of bike racks in the commuter railcars/buses.

      (4) You STILL need cars for the handicapped and older folks so it is not THE answer just an alternate method.

      • You also have to recognize that for most cycling is a leisure activity. In Northern England, where I live, cycling is great for some days in the summer months of the year. You can cycle to and from work in the sunshine. But from November to March you are commuting in dark, cold and and often wet and windy conditions. Which is why there about 10 times the number of cyclists on sunny July days than in windy and wet January days.

        • Albert Stienstra says:

          You could use an electric bike. They are popular here in the Netherlands, help you against high winds, across steep bridges etc. Quiet, range about 100 km/charge and not a lot more expensive than a normal bike. Much better idea than an electric car!

  10. B says:

    The problem is that transportation politics is dominated these days by anti-car control freaks. They are intentionally causing more traffic congestion and refuse to build useful transit. The opposition to transit and bicycling projects that don’t take away general road space makes their intent so very obvious.

    Transit and bicycling is being used for a program of limiting people’s mobility. They are making driving worse to get people to use an inadequate transit system. They build absurd bicycle infrastructure that is to me, as vehicular bicyclist worse than doing nothing.

    In other words it is compliment to the climate change agenda to control people. Where wind and solar are used to limit the availability of energy. But the reduction of the availability of energy is the goal.

    • tonyheller says:

      Mass transit and bicycling greatly increase mobility.

      • James Nelson says:

        Only of you live in a place where you can bicycle or you are physically able to bicycle. Add rain, snow or freezing temperatures and bicycling becomes a horror show

      • B says:

        If the design goal isn’t to make driving more painful but rather to make good transit and good bicycling.

        At every turn the priority is to make driving more painful, not to make good transit and certainly not to make for fast bicycling.

      • Alayna says:

        In order to increase mobility, a system (or vehicle) would have to either A.) increase the range or number of locations to which a person could travel, B.) decrease the time it takes to travel between locations, allowing for more time to travel to additional locations, or C.) remove some other limiting factor to mobility such as cost or inconvenience. When compared against travel by foot, mass travel and the bicycle absolutely improve both A and B, and would address the limiting factor of inconvenience, while adding only a minimal extra cost, which would be more than compensated by the ‘cost’ of time saved. However, generally in this country we are comparing mobility against individual transportation in the form of cars. Compared against cars, both mass transit and bicycling decrease mobility as judged by condition A. Mass transit does not travel everywhere; one’s destination needs to be near a stop, or one must have an additional form of transportation to get from the stop to their destination. Bicycling doesn’t limit the location to which one can travel the way a bus/subway does, but it does significantly limit the range one can travel compared to a car. With regards to the second criteria – the amount of time taken – there are limited conditions in which mass transit may improve mobility versus a car. During peak traffic times, trains or subways could decreased travel time relative to traffic, but they are subject to the same decreases in efficiency relative to their carrying capacity that roads are. They also decrease in efficiency relative to the number of stops a person is making on a particular outing. When traffic isn’t heavy, mass transit is generally much less time efficient than individual traffic. If the condition of wasting time inefficiently in traffic is a problem, then wasting time inefficiently while making unnecessary stops and an taking indirect route, with the possible additional problem of waits for transfers between buses/trains is also a problem. Also, buses are subject to the same traffic delay during rush hour as cars, and its success in decreasing the amount of traffic on the road requires compliance from a significant portion of the population that is not guaranteed to happen voluntarily. The ability of bikes to improve mobility with regards to condition B is even more limited than mass transit, given the relative speeds of bicycles compared to cars. Mass Transit can compare favorably to cars with regards to costs – if one counts only upfront costs. As long as a person never becomes a tax-payer, and therefore liable for the bonds and municiple expenses that exist for mass transit, then mass transit is cheaper than driving. When you factor in the hidden costs, and then spread them across a population who is largely not utilizing the system, mass transit could possibly be cheaper than driving, but only if one never buys a car to mitigate the inconveniences than are posed by the limitations of the mass transit system. Bicycling is cheaper in dollar costs, but that dollar savings would need to be weighed against opportunity costs. There are additional limitations to both mass transit and bicycling that move them from the increased mobility to decreased mobility category – the most significant of which would be children. A single person can navigate the world carlessly with some inconvenience (I did for about 8 years), but it can be done. A family with young children is a totally different story. I could carry groceries for one home on my bicycle – there is no way I could do the same with groceries for my current family of 6. While I could transport groceries on mass transport, the bus doesn’t stop at my front door. I could not possibly transport groceries from the bus stop to my home. There are also safety considerations that must be taken into account. My chances of being mugged while bringing high value items from a store to my home in my car are fairly low. They would be higher on mass transit, especially if it became necessary for large numbers of people to use mass transit while traveling with things they’ve bought. There’s also the difficulty of using mass transit – and the near impossibility of using bikes – with small children. There are some situations where it works – we’ve taken the train into town for large events where parking was going to be difficult and where we only had one destination to reach on our trip – but those types of trips are the exception rather than the rule. If I had to rely on mass transit or bicycling with my family, then my mobility would be reduced to almost zero. In order to say that mass transit is a better solution to mobility issues than cars, one would need to show that there isn’t a solution to traffic problems that could be obtained by improvements to road infrastructure. Given that much of current traffic ‘solutions’ have come at the price of making traffic conditions for cars worse – turning vehicle lanes into bike lanes, for instance – as opposed to fixing the timing of traffic lights or adding lanes in places where that is possible, I would say that mass transit and bicycling often make the problem worse, both by providing solutions that come at the cost of drivers, and also by allowing city planners not to address possible solutions that would improve mobility for drivers while still claiming to be addressing traffic issues.

  11. John F Hultquist says:

    There is no short term solution to this issue.
    Incrementalism is the near future.
    [Electricity from coal or nuclear power – neither currently acceptable in most places – could run the vast intra-city commuter flow.]

  12. Latitude says:

    Only someone that has no choice…or is a complete idiot…would ride mass transit in south Florida
    It’s not safe…..

  13. John Silver says:

    Is that picture from Hong Kong? That’s China, you know.
    (Where I live, I can take my bike on the train)

  14. Hell_Is_Like_Newark says:

    I moved to the city to avoid spending my life sitting in traffic. I still have a car, I just don’t use it that much. I take the subway to work, on occasional bus, light rail, or just walk (everything is close by).

    In the past eight years, I have put less than 55k miles on my car. My commute into work is about 35 minutes (15 minutes train, the rest walking).

    Unfortunately, expanding public transportation is just insanely expensive (prevailing wage laws have a lot to do with this). For example: to extend the PATH (subway btw NYC and NJ) a few miles, over an existing rail right of way to Newark Airport is project to cost over $1billlion. That is just insane…

    • griff says:

      Have you considered giving up your car and going for one of those car sharing/on demand schemes like zipcar? gives you a car when you need to go out of the city or transport something across town…

      • Hell_Is_Like_Newark says:

        I manage a small portfolio of rental properties, so I really need the car and my truck (I do a lot of work on the same properties). If I didn’t have the real estate, I could probably use a service like that.

  15. Robertv says:

    The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

  16. GoneWithTheWind says:

    Mass transit ‘could’ be practical and successful. There are certainly examples of this especially in large cities like New York. But as it is actually implemented it is ineffective and expensive. A good example of this is a city near me; Eugene Oregon. They had a effective bus service which the unions and Democrat leaders over time expanded to the point where it wasted more and more money. But still effective. Then the Democrats conspired with the federal government to using matching funds to replace the busses with double busses on dedicated street lanes. This costs millions and millions to build these dedicated street lanes and millions and millions to buy the double busses. The result of spending close to a billion dollars. Same service, i.e. you can still get a bus that takes you somewhere along a specific route. There still is no over crowded busses and all of that lack of any progress merely cost a billion or so for a distance of about 6 miles. Whoop, whoop.

  17. Jonathan P says:

    The simple fact is that so many American cities have been built around the use of cars (Houston, Dallas, Phoenix, Vegas, San Antonio, San Diego, etc.). These cities were towns prior to the arrival of the automobile. It would be as difficult to make mass transit work in these cities as it is proving difficult for cities like Moscow to accommodate all the new car traffic. (Which raises the point some have already made here: Why are the Muscovites rushing to buy cars when they could just take mass transit?) ;)

    • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N says:

      Precisely what I was thinking of.

      Most towns began with streets that were designed for horse and cart. Then rail was invented and a single line through town was built. It was all that was needed at the time.

      The automobile was invented and took over the stink of poo and dead animals, while the rail line remained largely unchanged.

      To accommodate more rail, existing infrastructure and housing needs to be demolished or put the rail underground, which is vastly more expensive.

      It’s difficult for most big cities with current designs born out of evolution to accommodate easy mass-transit at a whim. They have to be designed with this in mind from the outset.

    • Ernest Bush says:

      San Diego has mass transit. I have ridden it from a less expensive motel outside of the downtown area to the Convention Center, which sits on the harbor. It beat the daylights out of trying to drive and park there, as I had done in the past. I don’t know how the locals there feel about it, tho.

    • griff says:

      Towns like LA had streetcar/trolley networks until the late 40s… a lot of these were bought up by car/gas companies to avoid competition…

      • Tim A says:

        Where I grew up in northern Ohio (Norwalk), there used to be a trolley system that went from Cleveland to Toledo through numerous towns. My Dad used to ride the “Dinky” (google it) to kindergarten with his best buddy for 5 cents. The slow downfall of the railroad ended all that.

  18. Rud Istvan says:

    We do need to conserve petroleum, but not natural gas. Have written about this in three books. Extensively in Gaia’s Limits, a longish summary in Arts of Truth, and several essays covering different specifics in Blowing Smoke: Essays on Energy and Climate. The ‘best’ solution is raising fuel taxes (gas and diesel) by some fixed amount (say $0.20) every year until the tax is double the fuel retail cost. That gives plenty of time to move closer to job, get job closer to home, resize vehicle, use more public transportation, shift to more intermodal from longhaul trucking, or whatever the individual adjustments are. Also lengthens the runway for the inevitable hard landing after peak oil production about 2025. The current glut (Saudi war on US shale) does not change the underlying geophysics of crude oil, the facts of creaming curves, observed decline rates, recovery factors, … Conventional oil (API>10, reservoir porosity >5%, reservoir permeability >10 millidarcies) already peaked in ~2008 just as predicted as early as the 1970, and very clearly by 1999.

    • Gail Combs says:

      We really really need to take the next step to the use of nuclear. Once that is done ‘peak oil’ becomes much less of a problem and electric vehicles in cities becomes viable.

      However we need to put the R&D into nuclear. Ships and trains could easily be nuclear powered.

      World Nuclear Association:
      Small Nuclear Power Reactors

      Nuclear-Powered Ships


      The Aircraft Reactor Experiment, was operated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 1954 as part of the ANP Program.

      • ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N says:

        R&D into nuclear ships and trains has been done – it’s called the submarine. It’s only the safety factor of the public that’s a concern. You only need a lump of Uranium the size of your fist to power a big ship.

      • Pops says:

        We solved the problems of nuclear energy over 20 years ago, only to have it scuttled by the likes of Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and NRDC. Read this interview with Dr. Charles Till http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/interviews/till.html. The political hurdles for going nuclear are apparently far greater than the technological hurdles. There are too many people who derive their power from the world being perpetually in a state of crisis.

      • annieoakley says:

        I read about Thorium Reactors years ago. Seems to be an excellent idea. I cannot figure out a way to get my dog to the vet with out my truck.

      • Rud Istvan says:

        Annie and Gail, a very late return. Please go read the TransAtomic Power white paper on molton salt reactors available on their website. Thorium in the long run. But this has been overhyped. Far better to start with uranium and use up all the spent fuel that never got buried in Yucca Mountain. We can switch over in maybe 150 years. And the difficult technical parts (like scavenging radionucleotide neutron moderators) is easier with uranium than with thorium. Or so Transatomic says.

        So, we got lots of natural gas. Build CCGT. Buys decades to figure out uranium molten salt. And that buys centuries to figure out thorium.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Rud, when I am thinking correctly, I use the World Nuclear Organization as my resource.

          (Thorium is a waste product of mining rare earths.)

          (Updated September 2015)
          * Thorium is more abundant in nature than uranium.

          * It is fertile rather than fissile, and can only be used as a fuel in conjunction with a fissile material such as recycled plutonium.

          * Thorium fuels can breed fissile uranium-233 to be used in various kinds of nuclear reactors.

          * Molten salt reactors are well suited to thorium fuel, as normal fuel fabrication is avoided.

          The use of thorium as a new primary energy source has been a tantalizing prospect for many years. Extracting its latent energy value in a cost-effective manner remains a challenge, and will require considerable R&D investment. This is occurring preeminently in China, with modest US support. [….]

          China broke into the Oak Ridge computers and has been extracting data on nuclear esp thorium.

          Mixed thorium can ‘use-up’ nuclear waste

          Thorium fuels therefore need a fissile material as a ‘driver’ so that a chain reaction (and thus supply of surplus neutrons) can be maintained. The only fissile driver options are U-233, U-235 or Pu-239. (None of these is easy to supply)

          It is possible – but quite difficult – to design thorium fuels that produce more U-233 in thermal reactors than the fissile material they consume (this is referred to as having a fissile conversion ratio of more than 1.0 and is also called breeding). Thermal breeding with thorium requires that the neutron economy in the reactor has to be very good (ie, there must be low neutron loss through escape or parasitic absorption). The possibility to breed fissile material in slow neutron systems is a unique feature for thorium-based fuels and is not possible with uranium fuels.

          Another distinct option for using thorium is as a ‘fertile matrix’ for fuels containing plutonium that serves as the fissile driver while being consumed (and even other transuranic elements like americium). Mixed thorium-plutonium oxide (Th-Pu MOX) fuel is an analog of current uranium-MOX fuel, but no new plutonium is produced from the thorium component, unlike for uranium fuels in U-Pu MOX fuel, and so the level of net consumption of plutonium is high. Production of all actinides is lower than with conventional fuel, and negative reactivity coefficient is enhanced compared with U-Pu MOX fuel. […]

          More articles on Thorium

          From what I can see, the Royal Families, Rockefellers, Rothschilds and Bushs are all heavily invested in gas and oil. They do not WANT cheap nuclear (or coal.) Protesters where advertized for in the Boston Globe to protest the Seabrook plant @ $10/hour in the mid 1980s.
          Just up-dated —Research dollars:
          Energy Subsidies and External Costs
          (Bullet Points)

          (Updated 25 July 2016)
          * Substantial amounts have been invested in energy R&D over the last 50 years. Much of this has been directed at developing nuclear energy – which now supplies 12% of world electricity.

          * Today there is about twice as much R&D investment in renewables than nuclear, but with rather less to show for it and with less potential for electricity supply.

          * Nowhere in the world is nuclear power subsidised per unit of production. In some countries however it is taxed because production costs are so low.

          * Renewables have received heavy direct subsidies in the market by various means, but these are being scaled back or abandoned in some places due to the high cost to consumers.

          * Fossil fuels receive indirect subsidies in their waste disposal as well as some direct subsidies.

          * Nuclear energy fully accounts for its waste disposal and decommissioning costs in financial evaluations.

          * External costs are real and must be considered in evaluating energy sources.

          Instead of helping China do the research AND wasting tax dollars on dead end renewable research why not support Thorium Nuclear research in THIS country?

    • Ernest Bush says:

      The U.S. Geological Survey just released a report that states they have found another 20 billion barrels of recoverable crude in Texas. There is an estimated 45 billion barrels on federal land. That figure is old and probably needs to be updated. They are still recovering oil from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. So far they have recovered three times the original estimate and are still pumping. We have plenty of crude to keep us going until other technologies can be brought into play.

      I think that peak oil might eventually happen, but it wont be as early as 2025, I bet, and may be well into the next century. We have been hearing this theory since the 70’s and nobody predicted the U.S. would bring so many fields on line so quickly, even under the Obama administration. New fields can be brought on line in months instead of years these day.

      Then there is coal.

      • Rud Istvan says:

        EB, ommented elsewherethat this report is quite suspect. They made severeral of the same mistakes as in overestimating Russia’s Bhazenov shale. See essay Matryoshka Reserves. Failu e to recognize basin non- uniformity, failure to regonize prior natural depletion into overlying conventional crude r servoirs from the source rock, failure to apply relistic recovery factors for the specific geophysics.

  19. copernicus34 says:

    Blah blah blah. Mass transit for all. These nonsensical utopian ideas with large government expenditures to give bike paths to the masses need to stop, especially from conservatives. Riding a bike to work is impossible for a numerical majority so comical that it is silly to even consider this a serious idea. Really wish Tony would stop peddling (see what I did there? :) ) this notion. Its starting to look to me like he is just doing this for environment points or something. Tony, agree with almost everything you write on here, not onboard with this mass transit nonsense. I live in DC area; my condolences to you for feeling the need to use Metro. That system is awful, predictably run poorly, and causes unnecessary delays.

    • tonyheller says:

      I would never even think of trying to drive into DC. The trains and Metro are vastly superior to driving there.

      • CapitalistRoader says:

        And expensive. I wonder how much taxpayers subsidize every Metro ride? My guess is that your fare is 1/3 or less of the actual cost. I’m also guessing the taxpayers subsidize mass transit at a rate two or three times private automobile subsidies, all in.

        Mass transit only makes sense in the US in very dense areas: New York City and downtown Chicago. Private automobiles in every other area are not only more cost efficient but environmentally less damaging than trains, perhaps even buses.

      • Ernest Bush says:

        Driving into DC on weekends is not bad. My wife and I drove from Laurel to parking at the Jefferson Memorial in about 45 minutes on a Sunday morning. There were mostly open parking spaces. We walked around the Mall for some hours before returning to our car. Then we drove to Williamsburg where we rode the shuttle buses around the reconstructed area for three days, lol.

        I would park at one of the secured transit parking areas along the beltway and use mass transit on a weekday, however. Anything else would be suicide for a driver from Arizona.

  20. RAH says:

    Ya know Tony if I had to bicycle to get back and forth the work I wouldn’t be posting here or anywhere nearly as much. Nor would I be nearly as well informed about the climate or many other subjects with the information I get from the internet.

    It is 14 to 17 minutes for me to drive the 8 miles to get to my big truck or back home from the terminal where it’s parked. I just got home from a run up to Holland, MI and back and am on call for a possible load to Schenectady, NY that must leave NLT 06:00 tomorrow morning. If I had to ride a bike I would have not even gotten online either this morning or tonight because I simply would not have had the time.

    The minutes of ones life are the most valuable commodity we humans have.

    • tonyheller says:

      If there were fewer people on the road, you wouldn’t get stuck in traffic jams in your truck as much, and would have more time at home.

    • Robertv says:

      With self driving trucks you soon will have all the minutes you need and if robots take over most of the work traffic jams will be a thing off the past. Humans have become far too expensive in the production and service process.

      • Rah says:

        I’m 61 y/o and have no fear of self driving trucks coming. They still haven’t gotten self driving cars acceptable for service.

      • Ernest Bush says:

        Self driving trucks are already out there. You just can’t tell because they still require a driver who can take over instantly if there is a problem.

        There are also self driving tractors in the fields around my county (Yuma, AZ). Some don’t even have cabs. Programming them to do their duties pays very well. There is somebody out in the fields keeping track of them. Wouldn’t want one plowing up some county road.

      • Rah says:

        BTW Robertv
        Fuel cost is the single largest operating expense in the trucking industry. The real problem is and has been a shortage of qualified drivers.

        • Robertv says:

          Trucks already can drive without a qualified driver but not without fuel.

          I found this article. What are your thoughts about it.
          Of course there could also be big terminals outside the cities where drivers wait for a trucks to arrive and take over from the computer for the delivery and load part and bring it back to the terminal.

          • RAH says:

            1. The driver will still need time out of the truck.

            2. Terminals sound great but there is a reason why intermodal drivers are either paid by the hour or have a guaranteed minimum mileage pay of 2,500 mi per week no matter how much they drive. Terminals are a huge time waster and generally the larger the terminal the worse it is.

            3. Believe it or not driving a big truck is a skill that requires pretty frequent practice to stay at its peak. Seems to me that the exact situations where a driver has to take over from an automatic system will also be the times when the driver needs his skills the most. Inclement weather/road conditions, detours onto back roads, intercity driving in large metropolitan areas, etc. The thing is the a driver isn’t going to climb out of a sleeper and grab the wheel and be oriented right away when unexpected situations pop up.

            4. You just got to have been there and done that to know damn well that the drivers of other vehicles on the road will catch on to the operating parameters the automatic system works under and take full advantage of that fact when ever necessary. Hard to sleep or do anything else when your automatic driver is slamming on the binders all the time or even using the engine brake a lot.

            I’m sure there’s more but those are the things that come to mind off the top of my head based on my time on the road.

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      In our communal future, RAH, you won’t sit idly at home and look for kindred spirits online. You’ll be busy enjoying the cheerful comradeship of fellow bicyclists on the road.

      • Rah says:

        I won’t live to see it.

        • Colorado Wellington says:

          RAH, you may not see it but others will and a little thing like being dead shouldn’t matter. Now, when it comes to bike choices …

          • Rah says:

            I put 37 mi on my bike this year. Another guy in the same job who is a bachelor and avid Harley man did only 500 mi this summer. Looking like I may miss Thanksgiving with the family. I’ll make about $70,000 this year. Questioning if it’s worth it.

          • Rah says:

            Just to be clear, I will be paid about $70,000 for driving a truck this year.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            RAH, I know other skilled and competent men asking the same question.

            I’m happy you didn’t miss the Thanksgiving.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            I’m happy you didn’t miss the Thanksgiving.

  21. RickS says:

    “my plan will necessarily make electricity prices skyrocket”

    These are the words of a madman, a societal saboteur. No one in their right mind would think or say anything like that !


    Now “if” you “recall”, Obama said that before-He-ever-took-Office !


    So when you ask how “stupid” Obama’s statements were you still gotta ask HOW STUPID CAN THOSE WHO “VOTED” HIM INTO OFFICE BE ???????????????????????



    With this election I doubt that few can quite contemplate the degree of a Miracle we just witnessed (⬆) !!!

    With President Donald Trump doing the “right” thing the United States of America was just brought back from the Brink of Disaster !


    • Gail Combs says:

      It wasn’t Americans that elected Obummer.

      3 Nov 2014 Study: Non-Citizen Votes May Have Tipped 2008 Election for Obama

      … a new academic study shows foreign nationals have been in a position to help Democrats steal elections. In fact, the study demonstrates that it is likely that President Obama won the presidency thanks to non-citizens illegally voting for him in 2008. On top of that stunning conclusion, the study also concludes that “non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.”…
      you can draw your own conclusion from the alarming assessment that comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), which is operated by teams of researchers from across the country. Non-citizens are inclined to support Democrat candidates, and President Obama pulled in more than 80 percent of the vote from non-citizens in 2008, according to CCES. There were enough ineligible voters to cast ballots in the 2008 election cycle to pull out Democratic victories in close elections nationwide.

      The results of the CCES study show how serious this problem has become…

      This conclusion is based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote that show 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010. They may not sound like big numbers, but they are big enough to make a difference in tight, competitive races….

      That is just the illegals and does not include multiple votes from people moved from polling area to polling area (One person proudly proclaimed she voted 6 times) or the number of dead people who voted.

      True The Vote got harassed by the Obama Admin for this report:
      How Widespread is Voter Fraud? | 2012 Facts & Figures

      And just recently we had the Second Veritas Video: DNC Operatives Admit They’ve Rigged Elections for Half a Century

      So please don’t blame Americans. Only a massive turnout for Trump managed to over come the fraud in this election. Why in heck do you think Hillary never bothered to do rallies, speak to the media or actually campaign? She was PROMISED this election when she conceded to Obama in 2008 after the Bilderberg meeting in June 2008!

      • Kozlowski says:


        You are 100% right. The Dems know this. Why do you think it is so important to them not to require ID to vote, why they push so aggressively to bring more and more illegals here. It is almost like they are competing with Europe to “get” more immigrants. Crazy stuff. 1% or 2% has always mattered in elections, especially when targeted.

    • CapitalistRoader says:

      Obama has been an unmitigated disaster for the Democratic Party. The Dem’s haven’t been in such bad shape on the federal level since 1922. And at the state level? One picture is worth a thousand words:

      • Rah says:

        The largest gains have been made since 2010. The Democrat party is a house of cards with a collapsing foundation at State and local levels. Without their press it would be much worse. I believe Rush said the other day there are 17 States where Republicans hold both the governorship and majorities in the State legislature.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Republicans won North Carolina but the Democrats STOLE the governorship. We have a REPUBLICAN Lt. Governor.

        Durham had a ton of ballots with ONLY Hillary and the Democrats governor marked and nothing else.

        The ballot took about 15 minutes to read and fill out. I am a fast reader and had my usual cheat-sheet. Democrats were NOT easily found on the ballot because they were not in the same place each time. (Names listed alphabetically and not by party.)

        So it looks like the PAID Demi voters and the ballot stuffers could not cheat the system easily but they stuffed the ballot box anyway and it sticks out like a sore thumb.

    • Ernest Bush says:

      This wasn’t a miracle. The lower middle class and working poor finally stood up for themselves. This election became a rebellion They are at the point of stopping the Democrat march to serfdom even if they have to form militias to do it. Trump seems to have instinctively known this and the condition of the Rino party. To many workers don’t want to lose anymore of the America they love. These are the people progressives really fear and that’s why the stupid rhetoric continues to pour out of their mouths. They don’t realize they are pushing a growing number of Americans away with it.

    • Tim A says:

      Makes me think of the resurrection of America….(the Beautiful)

    • Caleb says:

      What is needed is a return to higher standards and higher values. Some find it hard to believe that hitchhiking was a fairly safe and reliable way of getting around in the late 1960’s, but then a sort of rot set in after 1970. The last time I had to hitchhike over 50 miles every single ride seemed to involve a complete madman. (1990).

      I had friends who hitchhiked from Europe all the way to India in the 1960’s, through Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. If you tried that now you’d likely need more lives than a cat.

      This world has fallen a long way. To even think of restoring trust seems impossible, and sort of naive, like a hipster singing “Imagine.” The world is a mess, and to speak of peace is like Rodney King sparking a riot and then pleading, “Can’t we all just get along?”

      However maybe, just maybe, humanity will get sick of hell, and turn to heaven. (I can dream, can’t I?))

  22. John F Hultquist says:

    Maybe you have not heard this:
    “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” ― George Carlin

  23. gregole says:

    I’ll share my commute and my observations here in lovely Arizona. I commute by motorcycle 26 miles one-way by freeway. I do not own a car. I love riding my bike, and realize I may die on it one day. My way is not for everyone. I see empty buses everywhere I go. Some of them are absolutely huge double tow-style buses. It is insane. We have light rail and it is very lightly used. Cars are everywhere. Whomever is designing and implementing public transit is not too bright.

    • Ernest Bush says:

      Phoenix and Tucson are spread out with businesses distributed all over the place. They are poorly situated for mass transit. Phoenix has spent no telling how much money upgrading the freeway system and it has paid off very well. There are still some problem areas, but still, you can quickly get where you are going. I also have seen the same near empty buses running all over the place. Perhaps a system using extended vans would be a solution. Right now buses make the least cost-effective transportation in Arizona.

      Yuma, population 130,000 or so, also has bus systems run by both the county and city. Most people who don’t drive, take one of the large number of vans operated by entrepreneurs, not the bus systems. They come to your address and drop you where you need to go, but they fill the van before they head off to drop people off. It is cheaper than a taxi and faster than the buses and the Mexican population love them. It is a cheap way to get to the local college, Somerton, San Luis, and the Foothills. No tax subsidies required.

  24. The USA and many other “First World” countries are suffering from STUPID governments. Here are a few of the really stupid ideas that are being implemented here:

    1. Making energy expensive (see above).
    2. Destroying the coal industry and making coal miners destitute.
    3. Declaring that “Global Warming” is a serious problem while ignoring real problems such as terrorism, declining rates of home ownership and declining rates of employment.
    4. Sky rocketing public debt. Not sustainable!

    I could go on but you get my drift.

    • John Silver says:

      Not stupid, just evil.

      • Ernest Bush says:

        They are stupid in that they do not see that there are millions who will rise up to use their second ammendment rights when they finally go one step too far. I think it was a very close thing before Trump came along. He may have defused the inevitable for awhile.

  25. Eyrie says:

    What did Glenn Reynolds say “public transport is like picking up 20 random hitchhikers in your car”.
    The late G. Harry Stine said public transport is for poor societies. I think they are correct.
    How many public transport systems run without subsidies? I think they are like “renewable energy”.
    I agree the image is no way to live. I did that for 3 weeks when I was 18 and vowed not to do that. I’ve managed to avoid it for 50 years.

  26. Owen says:

    Problem is you have to run public transport all the time even when few use it such as at night time or weekends.

    Owning your own car is efficient because its not running when you’re not using it.

    So there is a trade off, in some areas public transport will save on fuel, in others maybe not.

  27. Billyjack says:

    Tony this diatribe points out the whole reason Trump won. Government is the solution to all ills and we elites know what you citizens should do; so shut up, accept what we allow you to keep of your money and do what you are told,because we know better.

    • tonyheller says:

      All transportation is controlled by government. There wouldn’t be any transportation without government.

      • Robertv says:

        Because, like green energy it is not profitable and will always need taxpayers money. So even if you only bike or walk or use a car you’re paying for it.

      • Ernest Bush says:

        That needs a lot more explaining before many of these people get it — if they want to hear what you are really saying.

  28. Scott says:

    Magnetic levitation, or Maglev systems, is the future.

  29. E Gerard says:

    Tony- would really like to know your take on the climate change/ rising sea levels situation in the Pacific Islands. It’s dangerous to even discuss this with most of my peers. Are the Pacific Islands being inundated by rising sea levels or not? If so, how is it not due to climate change?

  30. Eliza says:

    Trump will bend over backwards to please the establishment nothing will be done about the AGW fraud mark my words! You are dreaming LOL

  31. Latitude says:

    Do you guys realize a foreign national is in this country right now…..having meetings in New York
    ….and the purpose of their meetings is conspiring to undermine our president..plotting against the president of the United States

    George Soros

    I honestly thought that was against the law…….

    • Ernest Bush says:

      He isn’t the president yet and I think they will be as effective as Bloomberg has been in getting guns banned. The mindset that you can solve any problem, including winning elections, if you throw enough money at it, is very pervasive among Democrat progressives.

    • AndyG55 says:

      I hope Trump has EXCEPTIONAL Security

      I feel an attempt will be made very soon.

      It is probably their only option.

      • Ernest Bush says:

        If they get him, they will have to deal with Pence, then Ryan, in that order. I’m convinced Obama is still there because at one point it would have been
        Biden, and then Pelosi behind him.

        There is no good choice except to allow Trump to assume office. Adults acting like children are not going to change that. Most of the electoral college in states that went for Trump, if not all, will cast their vote for Trump. Tough luck all you watermelons out there.

  32. Eliza says:

    I hope ted Cruz is nominated AG

  33. Eliza says:

    It is very important that Trump be informed that AGW is a total hoax. Maybe your data needs to get there.

  34. RickS says:

    “The global warming scam has been the most destructive thing to ever happen to the [environmental movement], which I have been active in my entire life” ?

    I get a “bad” taste in my mouth when I hear the words “Environment Movement”, just like “Green Movement” (And Green is my favorite color followed by blue as in Blue Skies and Green Forests) !

    Find “any” of these [ Movements ] who along with their “leaders” and you will find the Godless of the Godless, pure [ Earth Worshipping Pagans ] where “right” is “always” wrong with them !

    Look, pick up your trash, don’t “intentionally” pollute Oceans, Rivers and Streams, don’t drive around in a Car, Truck, Boat that spits out more pollution then a Oil/Tire fire, don’t let “Drunks” Captain Oil Tankers and try to keep the/your environment respectively clean (You know, Smoky Bear) !!

    And as for the “rest” (Stuff that simply happens whether by mistake or by intentional), God-is-in-CONTROL !!!

    Global Warming will kill billions, no it won’t, God is in Control !

    An Ice Age will strike and kill billions, no it won’t, God is in Control !

    The “Poles” will melt killing millions, no they won’t, God is in Control !

    Earthquakes and famine will happen, God is in Control !

    The Beast will reek havoc on the World and its populations, perhaps, God is in Control !

    A Meteor will strike the Earth killing 1/3rd of Mankind, perhaps, God is in Control !

    “WE” were told millennia ago, the Last Days won’t be pretty, BUT GOD IS IN CONTROL !

    Look at our streets, “watch” what is “happening” after the (This) Election ?

    The “World” is flipping” a new “leaf” (Or call it a “coin” as I do, where Heads is not Tails and Tails is not Heads, the opposite of before is changing to the “new”), the Children (Kids) are working towards the destruction of themselves, willingly !

    THEY ARE BEING PREPARED FOR THE “NEW”-WORLD-ORDER, and they’re doing a “fine” job of it, “they” have been completely PROPAGANDIZED (Thanks to the (OUR) Pagan/Marxist American Public School System) where “evil” is good and “good” is evil (A “FLIPPED” coin) !!!


    Along with the New-World-Order comes the, “New”-World-Religion (Gee, I “wonder” who will be their leader ?????? ?????? ?????? ) ?

    Enjoy “Your” Days, each and every one of them, AND PUT ON YOUR ARMOR, because if not, You are on your Own…

    Look UP ⬆

    While You Still Can

  35. To obtain a sane policy you need to recognize the underlying theory. It is that GLOBAL greenhouse gas emissions cause the GHG levels to rise. GLOBAL emissions are rising, and to will continue to do so into the future without drastic policies to reduce them. For the COP21 in Paris last year the UNFCCC added together all the vague policy proposals to see the impact. The pale orange band is the impact of the proposals if fully implemented. The blue bands is the pattern of GLOBAL emissions if the policy objectives are to be reached.
    The chart shows that emissions will go on rising even if the US, EU, Canada, Australia etc. reduce their emissions. The reason for this failure is due to developing countries being exempt from reducing their emissions. I have charted the GHG emissions split between the exempt Annex 2 countries and the Annex 1 countries from 1990 to 2012.


    All the emissions growth over the period is accounted for by policy-exempt countries who now have over 60% of global emissions and over 80% of the global population. President Obama is trying to make affordable energy inaccessible to most of Americans for a policy that will not achieve its objectives. But to achieve the objectives poor countries must stop increasing their use of fossil fuels, and rapidly decrease usage instead. That would be disastrous for economic growth and political stability, so is not going to happen. A supposedly outward-looking President does not recognize basic economic geography.

  36. griff says:

    Anyone who has seen a really good integrated public transport system in operation would surely come round to Tony’s point of view…

    Vienna has a modern underground, tram and bus system which makes owning a car pointless…

    You have a ticket valid on any of underground, tram or bus with no barriers – there are random ticket inspectors.

    Frequent, clean routes wherever you need to go.

    and plenty of bike lanes, separate from pedestrians.

    London is also excellent for public transport -with the tube now running into the night at weekends. And shortly we get the new Crossrail system.
    If you like a beer (I confess I do) its ideal…

    Come over and try a European public transport system – don’t forget to try out the high speed train network too

    (fun fact: Austrian railways have tuned the electric motors on their high speed trains so they make a sequence of musical notes on start up!)

    • Stewart Pid says:

      Sometimes transit works and sometimes it sucks …. I like to joke that the definition of transit should be “goes from where you aren’t to where you don’t want to go, when you don’t want to go”.
      Temperatures here are sitting at -8C with some snow and so biking anywhere is just not sane …. good weather for skiing if we could only get several more decent dumps.
      Not everyone wants to be like the f’en commie lite Euros!!!

    • CapitalistRoader says:

      Fun fact: Most European countries have population densities four to ten times that of the United States. Mass transit only works in very dense areas. And I don’t see that changing much over the next 100 years, as many Americans still bitterly cling to this notion.

      • AndyG55 says:

        You need to look at population densities within cities, not the whole country.

        Take Australia for eg. Most of the central part is basically uninhabited, and anything outside the main cities is sparse at best.

        People who live in the big cities like Sydney and Melbourne, are quite dense.

        • CapitalistRoader says:

          Vienna is the world’s 70th densest city by population/u>. At 90th, Los Angeles is the only US city in the top 100. Sydney and New York City are side-by-side at 113 and 114, respectively.

          Big European cities were built before the advent of the automobile and are by design denser than US cites. Spending taxpayer money or worse going into debt to build light rail in spread-out US cities is foolish. Autonomous cars will obsolete all light rail and even many buses in almost all US cities within a decade especially since the infrastructure already exists.

          Why use a mode of transportation when it doesn’t actually come to where you are or take you to where you actually want to be?

  37. CheshireRed says:

    Great post re our unsustainable lifestyles. Mass-transit only works where there’s mass populations though – out in the sticks it’s a non-starter. However the intent is honourable.

    It appears scepticism is finally gaining some serious traction. Trump is already causing mass palpitations in the Green Blob – they’re worried alright and hopefully with good reason. We’ll see. Hope London goes well Tony, well overdue.

  38. CheshireRed says:

    PS I tried to post up-thread with a link to a Brietbart article but it appears to have vanished down the rabbit hole. Are they a banned news outlet?

    • Latitude says:

      I tried to post a Breitbart link yesterday….Wordpress blocked it too
      There’s a work around…..break the link up into different lines


      …then just copy and paste it

  39. gator69 says:

    Mass transit and bicycles are about as useful for commuting out here as sailboats. If you don’t like traffic, move far from the city.

  40. MichaelC says:

    “my plan will necessarily make electricity prices skyrocket”
    Is there a link to a video or transcript where Obama said that? I’d love to find the source.

  41. Bytor says:

    I know, why don’t we must pack everyone into large metropolis’ and into gigantic housing complexes, then nobody has to transport anywhere /sarc

    This is Agenda 21 .. that is precisely the goal. Remove personal transport and pack everyone into tiny cubes in a huge metropolis.

    Eh, no thanks … next…

    • Noah Figg says:

      I have to agree on this, this is what UN Agenda 21 (and Agenda 2030?) is already building around the world, at the local city council level. I think a more sane approach would be doing things to reduce the dependent situation of cities and urban areas, such as incorporating food production locally, lessening zoning restrictions that force concentration, making more sparse living self-sufficient and reduce the needs for long distance travel somewhat. Concentrating just creates a more dependent and controllable small political unit that all follow the UN guidelines. It attempts to force all humans into small compact areas while leaving most rural areas off-limits to most humans, and governed by world bodies as nature areas. I’m trying to paraphrase from memory what should really be researched in depth to understand. To start, look up youtube discussions of Agenda 21 in detail. I think all real environmentalists, as well as those who desire more self-rule and smaller government, have common cause to oppose Agenda 21, as we do to oppose carbon taxes and the AGW control movement here. Don’t know all the answers, but playing into the agenda 21 plan is something to avoid.

  42. Bytor says:

    Tony, go back to climate discussion, this one is stupid.

    • Ernest Bush says:

      Nobody forced you to join this thread. This is a perfectly valid discussion about lifestyles that depend on local environments.

  43. John E says:

    I see no way to email the author of the site so posting here… looking for your commentary on this story.. did not see it on the main page:


  44. Obama robbed the poor by raising the cost of electricity. He said he would do it and he delivered on his promise while putting miners out of work in the process.

    Obama gave to the rich such as Elon Musk ($ 5 billion), Next Era Energy ($1.6 billion), Solyndra ($0.4 billion) and thousands more. Here is a link on the Next Era Energy scam that was reported in Newsweek yet nobody has been indicted:

    Obama is the “Anti Robin Hood”. He robs the poor to feed the rich.

  45. Eliza says:

    AGW is probably the only issue that Trump cannot cave in on to please the masses based on Science

    • Ross says:

      Don’t hold your breath. There are reports out today that he is already “softening” his stance or words. I hope it turns out to be game playing.
      It has also been reported in other media besides the Guardian.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Ross, by now you should now the MSM LIES.
        They LIE intentionally.
        They LIE to generate $$$ and to cause chaos.
        I would not believe the Guardian if they said the sky was blue without checking first.

        The New York Times has already been caught DELIBERATELY lying about Trump and mis-quoting women who worked for him/with him and the WOMEN called out the NYT on TV for lying..

        A final point.
        Trump is not in office. His cabinet picks have not been OK’ed by Congress and he has legislation he wants to get thru in the first 100 days like repealing ALL regulations written in the last 3 months. (There is a law allowing that if Congress agrees.)

        I think Trump’s remarks are a head fake because at this time he doesn’t want to divide the country more until he can consolidate his position. (The USA still has a Riot Act but only the president can use it and Obummer certainly won’t.) Therefore he can let several hot topics slide at least for now to defuse the butt-hurt Progressive Cry Babies. He knows his supporters won’t riot and most know by now that he plays 3D chess.

        Also Trump has already said he will not tell the enemy his plans. And I think that is the bottom line. As Trump said in one of the debates when asked what his plans about ISIS were, “Why should I tell the enemy exactly what my plan is.”

        So expect the MSM to continue playing their mind games to remove Trump’s public support. And expect Trump to continue to yank the MSM’s chain.

        • Ross says:

          I hope you are right that it is probably a “miss direct” although I’m not sure exactly what his game is.
          He has already committed to removing obstacles and regulations relating to fracking and O&G in general. In his Contract he has stated that he will remove AGW related funding. He has stated he will reopen the coal industry.
          So even if he cannot rip up the Paris Agreement he can make it more of a lame duck than it is.( from the US point of view)

          But I was disappointed in his back track on Mrs Clinton’s deeds. It possibility would have been OK to stand back on her but still pursue the Foundation but to back out on both seems strange. Once again he might be playing a long game ( this ” pizzagate” business might have something to do with it). If he is playing a long game he is showing that he is learning the politics business very quickly.

          • Gail Combs says:

            It is not a back track on Mrs Clinton’s deeds. It is sleight of hand. Trump will not go after the Clintons Jeff Sessions as the new Attorney General will because THAT IS SESSIONS job not Trump’s.

            Trump hates the MSM for all their lies and he will be intentionally playing word games with them so watch closely to exactly what he says and what it means. He also uses Kelly to misdirect them.

            Those who have watched Trump carefully for the last year and a half are having the time of their lives laughing their rumps off watching Trump play the MSM and Progressive cry babies like a violin.

            It really is quite fun once you catch on.

          • Gail Combs says:

            Let me give a couple examples of how Trump has played the media.

            On September 16, 2016 Trump held a ceremony at Trump International (the Old Post Office Bldg) to pay respects to Medal of Honor recipients who endorsed him. He got the press to cover the entire 30 minute campaign event by telling them he would address the Obama birth certificate controversy. Which he did — for 27 seconds — Then refusing to take questions. The press was livid.

            He played them again just recently.

            Trump went out to a steakhouse for dinner without informing the press. Former Obama administration spokesperson Tommy “Dude” Vietor threatened Trump over media access.

            The White House Correspondents Association has to be ready to respond much more forcefully if Trump continues to ignore long-standing traditions of press access. That’s especially true for the five network bureau chiefs who hold most of the power.

            I’d like to see them publicly detail their expectations as well as the potential repercussions if those demands continue to be ignored.

            This is too important, and the Trump campaign learned all the wrong lessons during the campaign when they faced no penalty for blacklisting reporters. [Like the NYT and Post]

            A few days later Trump invited the heads of the alphabet media and top newspapers to a media summit. The lobby cam showed them marching in triumphantly thinking they were going to discuss media access only to get a through Arse chewing. “It was like a f–ing firing squad,” one source said of the encounter link The cam showed them slinking out like whipped dogs or as Sundance put it The Media exit Trump Tower: “outta there like a fat kid playing dodge ball”

            Then “Trump ha[d] another media meeting scheduled for Tuesday with reporters from The New York Times and the paper’s publisher” — Daily Mail UK

            Trump knows how the media treats Republican presidents. He knows how he was treated. With media trust dropping from an already low of 6% he see no reason to put up with their B.S.

            Expect to see more battles if the MSM refuses to come around. Expect to see more lies from the media.

            MORE POPCORN!!!

          • Gail Combs says:

            After all when NYT and Snopes come out to “Debunk it” it must be 100% true!!


            Or maybe not….

            Twittergate: More ‘massive child porn rings’ emerge on following shock discovery

            DC Pizza Gate: A Primer UPDATED 11/12 – Suspected Pedophile Ring Exposed

            Ever think this is why the MSM is going on and on about Trump is not going to do as promised?

            If all this crap is true it is going to blow DC wide open.

        • Ross says:

          I don’t disagree with you about his ability to play the media ( it basically won the primaries for him).
          But if the NYT ( yes I know they can be liars ) report on Breitbart about their interview and what he said about not going after the Clintons is any where near accurate then he puts Sessions in a corner before he starts the job –Trump will after all be Sessions boss. ( sorry I can’t link the Breitbart piece because of the games WordPress are playing).
          The only way they’ll be able to get out of it is if the FBI or someone else comes up with some more VERY significant new evidence and maybe they have that already.
          Having said that I sincerely hope you are correct and I am wrong.
          PS. This may not follow your latest comments but there is no reply button showing on them

        • Ross says:

          You are right about blowing DC wide open re pizzagate
          Look at this video

  46. Eliza says:

    As I predicted Trump is a 100% lame duck “On climate change, which Trump has previously called a “con job” and a “hoax perpetrated by the Chinese,” the President-elect appeared to back track completely.” NY times Today. Not enough was done to convince the man Im afraid

    • Gail Combs says:

      Eliza, you believe the NEW YORK TIMES??? Are you kidding me?

      The have been caught flat out lying.

      Remember Walter Duranty? The New York Times reporter that single handedly saw to it that the Soviet Union was not eliminated back in the 1930’s?

      And just this May? Woman At Center of New York Times Story About Trump Says Entire Article “Filled With Lies”

      Good Grief, the guy is not even in office and has to tread carefully not to spark more riots and worse until he actually has the reins of control in his hands. Give him a chance for goodness sake.

      Trump has already said he will not tell the enemy his plans. And I think that is the bottom line. As Trump said in one of the debates when asked what his plans about ISIS were, “Why should I tell the enemy exactly what my plan is.” At this point the Progressives are his enemy.

    • Rah says:

      With the Donald it is probably best to wait and see what he does and not swallow the press interpretation of what he says as the Gospel. For all we know he may be calming the scammers in order to make it easier to blind side them.

  47. Eliza says:

    If Trump is going to backtrack like this he will be a one term 100% failure lame duck president https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=global+warming+trump&oq=global+warming+trump&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j0j43i53.2624.8495.0.9806.…0.0…1ac.1.vHGtIiMFIho Pandering 100% to PC already what a hypocryte!

    • Rah says:

      While I understand your cynicism, I think you should reserve such judgments. His cabinet appointment’s certainly don’t indicate this is business as usual.

  48. C Johnson says:

    Just discovered this site. It is a fantastic resource.

    I do have one quibble with this post: “Government should….” The same entity which is presently ignoring real environmental issues to emphasize social engineering on a global scale is not likely to solve the problem. You’ll get billion dollar high-speed trains to nowhere useful, which will then have to slow down to avoid killing people and some protected species. Solutions will come from innovative individuals trying to solve the problem and make a buck, or many bucks.

  49. michael hart says:

    Obama may be going, but to this day it still beggars belief that his statement “my plan will necessarily make electricity prices skyrocket” received so little critical attention in the MSM. The importance of energy cost, and availability, still seems to be lost on many people.

    If a politician said “my plan will necessarily make food and water prices skyrocket” then people might have understood what kind of person they were dealing with.

    • Robertv says:

      As long as the Fed thinks inflation is the way to go but not price stability everything becomes more expensive and your savings buy less.

  50. Charles Diaz says:

    While everything you said may be well and good, I don’t want us to forced to do anything like riding a bike. When politics is finally removed from science and technology, innovation and the market place should decide what we the People will choose.

  51. Tab Numlock says:

    Allow whites to have their own neighborhoods and schools again so they don’t have to commute two hours to find them. We need a Freedom of Association Amendment.

  52. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    Jon Rappoport reminds us to be grateful for mankind’s innate ability to distinguish reality, as revealed by measurements and observations from political pronouncements of “97% consensus science


  53. GREG PETERS says:

    Lots of good comments in here but let’s not nitpick. Obviously transit only works for developed areas and if properly structured. If you live more than a short ride to work, cycles aren’t the answer. . Yes, i get that gov’t run transit systems are wasteful, inefficient, employ too many bureaucrats and spend a ton of money on themselves and their perks and ‘conferences’
    BUT….the principle of this piece is sound. I live near Toronto, and I take transit because the drive would be insane. Is it perfect? No. But if more people did it, things would be better. I also know people who drive because they hate transit, and i think they are insane–and have a lot of time to waste.
    As with most problems, the answer is dozens of small things. Better scheduling, better facilities, analysing routes to ensure the jammed ones get more trains/buses, and the empty ones maybe get cut back. I’m not anti car at all–get the traffic lights synced as well–anything to get things moving. Slowing things down to make transit look more appealing is insane. (although i can believe it when i try to drive around town) And the trend to more people working at home is moving along nicely. There’s no need to gov’t to ‘do anything’ about it. But companies should encourage it whenever possible.
    Every big metro area has transit. In some cases it is managed decently and things work. It’s the cities where things have been mismanaged for years where improvements have to be made. That’s tougher. Changing entrenched government bureaucracy isn’t any easier in transit than anywhere else.

    • Bob Roberts says:

      ” if more people did it”

      If more people CHOSE to do it I would be OK with that.

      If more people are FORCED to do it, no, wrong.

      • GREG PETERS says:

        Agreed, Bob. Around here they are likely going to throw another tax on people driving into the city to ‘force’ them onto transit, which is just wrong. The gas taxes we pay would have provided for better roads several times over, but of course they just get swallowed up in ‘general revenues’
        At the same time, watching people drive when taking a decent transit system would get them downtown in half the time makes me shake my head.

  54. Bob Roberts says:

    While I agree that traffic jams are bad and we need to try to find a variety of solutions to solve them, I disagree that simply building mass transit will help.

    For example, here in San Diego, California, practical mass transit, that being a system that will pick anyone up and drop anyone off within a reasonable distance of their starting and ending points at any time they’re likely to need transportation, is not possible without spending far more than you would have to charge per ride to come anywhere close to breaking even.

    Now I admit that some other cities can have practical mass transit – at least in parts of their cities. Philadelphia seems to be a good example there, though not necessarily throughout it’s whole area. Just the parts I visited.

    New York (i.e. Manhattan primarily) perhaps as well, though from all the traffic there it doesn’t seem the residents, workers and/or visitors agreed.

    And from what I understand those who ride some of the government rail (AMTRACK) routes are heavily subsidized as well. Is that fair? Making the rest of us pay for someone else’s train rides? I don’t think it is.






    Now highways, which arguably benefit more people, also are suffering from excessive subsidies:


  55. davidsuk says:

    …………………………………and so it won`t get fixed until it`s broke!

  56. Chris says:

    So, get the government out of the business of taking money at gun point and spending it on ridiculous green energies, etc. and get the government in to the business of taking money at gun point and investing in public transportation like trains and buses? Yes you sound that delusional when you say obama did it wrong and my guy can do it right by investing in infrastructure. Let me give you a few examples of things the government has done right in the last 250 years:
    (it’s a short list)

  57. David_B says:

    Large corporations run by men with even larger egos are tribe builders.
    They do NOT want to let people work remotely, because it doesn’t stroke there very large Egos.
    Companies like Apple and Comcast and Microsoft are moving every part of their corporations to a single location, all because these small men with huge egos want to point to some building and say the OWN the people filling them.

    There is only one way to fix it. Stop building bigger roads. Don’t build mass transit.

  58. RAH says:

    This OT but I thought some may find this interesting. There is a new strong contender for the land speed record and they’re shooting to break the 800 mph mark. They are using an adapted F-104 Starfighter airframe and engine for their car.


    For those that may not know much aviation history this aircraft was designed by the same guy that headed the development of the SR-71. Kelly Johnson was a genius. He was the one that came up with the design for the P-38 and it just went on from there until he did his greatest work at the Skunk Works where he headed development of U-2, F-104, SR-71 and several other less known projects. Several F-104s were adapted by the USAF for exploring the altitude limits for jet aircraft. They had retro rockets to help provide some control when the control surfaces lost their effectiveness. It was in one of these that Chuck Yeager pushed the aircraft beyond it’s limits and had to eject ending up with severe burns to his hands and face when the seats rocket ejection engine tangled in his chute shrouds.

  59. CapitalistRoader says:

    Randal O’Toole has a multi-part series on the undesirability of mass transit at his site The Antiplanner.

  60. “Government should undertake a massive influx of spending on mass transit,”

    They have. The people don’t want it. The people want suburbs and longer commutes. So let them have it, and enjoy the choices you make in your own life, instead of foisting expensive public transportation that isn’t viable outside of DC-Boston on the taxpayer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.