will - Andy Arthur.org

We Need to Balance Climate Change Against Our Needs for Energy Services

Andy | September 12, 2012

Like most Americans, I believe strongly we should do something about Climate Change, to limit it’s most severe impacts. Yet at the same time, I am fully aware of our needs for energy services – the stuff that energy provides for us like lighting, transportation, powering electronics and motors, heating, and cooling. We need a lot of energy too – as I noted when the BP Oil Spill occurred – all the oil that spoiled the ocean could only fuel America for about 45 seconds. Turns out the oil spill severity was much worst then originally predicted, but still it was only one and half minutes worth of petroleum consumption for the United States.

So how do we get there from here? I do not advocate a “crash” diet on petroleum and other fossil fuels. People really like the energy services that fossil fuels provide, and most people aren’t give up their vacations using their petroleum fueled automobiles, or heat and air conditioning in their houses – especially for a “projected” future problem. Electric lighting and computers are essentials of modern life that most people aren’t going to want to give up either. Cities – particularly large cities – have such intense energy needs, that fully substituting with renewables isn’t going to be practical, much less cost effective.

What needs to happen is a big compromise. We need reasonable but strong energy standards that promote and preferable renewables and energy efficiency. Those standards can’t compromise the core things that make up the necessities modern life – including reliable and affordable energy and products. We have to continue to develop fossil energy sources responsibility. At the same time, we need to choose a realistic climate goal that matches our need for energy.

There are those out there that say we can’t afford that much Climate Change destruction. Essentially slaughtering millions of people and destroying billions in property to ensure our society has the energy it needs, really isn’t a pretty choice. But it’s a realistic choice. There is no free lunch on climate change – and protecting all the energy services provides for our society is important. America needs services that energy provides, and it has to be balanced against the painful consequences of consuming that energy.

Today’s debate needs not be whether we will need fossil energy to provide for energy services we all depend on and deeply enjoy. We will need fossil energy for the foreseeable future – and probably more of it in coming years. The question is can we burn it cleanly, and efficiently so it provides the most energy services for the least amount of actual fossil energy consumed. We got to take the oldest and dirtiest power plants and replace them with modern technology. We also got to boost renewable energy to be the preferred source of energy whenever it’s reasonably cost effective.

Goodbye, West River Road

Andy | July 28, 2012

Tonight I write this words on my laptop, camping on West River Road, along the West Branch of the Sacanadaga River. This a beautiful site, soon to be gated off miles in the distance, to supposedly improve the “wilderness” character of this area.

Despite the fact that …

The lands of the state, now owned or hereafter acquired, constituting the forest preserve as now fixed by law, shall be forever kept as wild forest lands. They shall not be leased, sold or exchanged, or be taken by any corporation, public or private, nor shall the timber thereon be sold, removed or destroyed.

… the Department of Environmental Conservation and the Adirondack Park Agency feels it neccessary to close off West River Road to “enhance” the wilderness quality of the “Silver Lake Wilderness”. West River Road will never be expanded or extended, and it’s unlikely many campsites will ever be added to it because the lands are forever wild, and no tree over 3″ may ever cut.

I am not advocating for paving over the Adirondack Park for strip malls, or running high-speed expressways through virgin forest. I am advocating for keeping traditional, well maintained, roads open, and protecting our remaining roads and campsites in their traditional uses.

Yet, still the DEC finds it’s hands tied due to Adirondack Park State Land Master Plan that dicates the Adirondack Park’s state land must become increasingly restricted in public use, and that more restrictions must be placed on public use — less camping, less roads open to the public.

It’s sad, because people like myself liked camping on these lands. While in the future, people will be able to walk on this perfectly good road for vehicular traffic, and backpack into the limited number of campsites, roadside camping might forever be gone from this area. More and more Adirondack Park Roads are forever gone, and unless your willing to backpack in often many miles, these lands will forever be closed off for public use.

If I Leave NY State, Will I Become a Bitter Republican?

Andy | June 16, 2012

The conventional wisdom has it that when people move out of an area for ideological reasons, they become the polar opposite of what they where when they lived in their previous area. People move out to suburbs, from the city, are usually some of the most hard core conservatives, as are those people who move from the rustbelt to the sunbelt.

Maybe.

But if anything, when I was a college student at Plattsburgh, like five years ago, I felt the most active and included in the Upstate and Rural Democrats that dominated that area. The Clinton County Democrats where not dominated by a bunch of liberal extremists out to remake our state in their vision. For the most part, they were just happy to grab whatever little coat tails of power they could grab.

I have never viewed myself as a right-winger, but I do cringe at many of the things liberals advocate for in our state. More regulations and taxes on working folks, just do not seem the right direction for our country. We certainly don’t need any more gun control or people telling us how to live our lives. At the same time, we need a government that stands up for working folks against big corporations.

I feel if I lived in a place where my own political party was not the enemy, then I could be much more involved and active in politics. It’s always more fun being in the minority, and fighting the good fight for the reforms you want to see, against the opposition, rather then being disappointed with your own people for not living up to their own ideals.

Municipal Cash Incinerators

Andy | June 2, 2011

There is a new high-tech device coming to communities across America. It’s being billed as a solution to reduce government waste, create jobs, create “green” electricity, and best of all provide a great way to use taxpayer dollars. It’s called municipal cash incinerators.

Many people have not heard of the concept of burning taxpayer dollars to create electricity. Yet, studies have shown it’s a remarkably good way. Why burn perfectly good coal or natural gas, when you can burn municipal cash? We all know that renewables like solar and wind can not power a society. So there is only one real choice: Municipal Cash Incinerators.

How does this advanced technology work? Using a high-tech process, $1 bills bought using municipal tax dollars, obtained through property taxes and government grants, are burned in a large furnace that heats water to steam and turn a turbine. This turbine generates electricity. Best off all, because money is green in color, it is a green process. Moreover, money spend on cash burners will not be wasted on less productive governmental purposes like roads and schools.

There are many good reasons to burn municipal cash:

For one, if government starts hoarding $1 bills rather then storing the money in a normal bank account, city halls across the country would be overwhelmed with all this paper cash.
If this cash was used for productive purposes it would continue the money in the economic cycle and help drive inflation up.
Many conservatives feel that inflation is the biggest risk facing our society today.

Some activists are complaining about municipal cash incinerators. They say it’s stupid to burn taxpayer dollars. Some are even suggesting that constructing municipal cash incinerators is an outright fraud, a stealing of people’s hard earned dollars. So what? Government has to spend the public’s money somehow.