Friday, September 17, 2021

On Fuel

I wonder what it’s like to freeze to death?  Someone said they heard you are a little uncomfortable at first, but then you fall into some kind of stupor, with dreams and hallucinations and then you fall into unconsciousness and the body continues the shutdown process.

This whole thing would probably be a lot quicker and easier if we didn’t have guns, because then they could just take us, or come around with …. vaccination teams…. or any number of things.  As it is, the way they are going to have to go about it , since there are so many of us  in a big country ,  is to eliminate as many sources of heat as possible.

First we saw the campaign to demonize sources of heat, like fossil fuel, and also the means of transport, like piplines and diesel trucks and so on.  And then the outright ban on extracting  or otherwise producing fuels which could be used to keep us from freezing to death.  You had bans on oil drilling in Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore drilling on the East and West coasts, the halt of pipeline construction and the strategic placement of animal species on the “endangered” list to keep fuel-seekers from disturbing their habitats.

Coal mining and coal-fired power plants are being banned.  Previously coal was banned as a direct heat source and everybody was encouraged to use natural gas to burn for heat because it burned cleaner.  Coal was still used to generate electricity because it was quite economical and electricity could be used to generate heat as well as light, though electric heat is not nearly as efficient as gas or oil.  But now, coal is being banned, so not only heat but light is in jeopardy.  Natural gas is in jeopardy too because, even though it burns clean, they have found a rationale for banning it because the new process for extracting it – fracking – is being banned, the excuse being it might cause an earthquake.

Hydroelectricity, that is electriciy generated from water pouring over dams was a pretty good source of energy, but for some reason they are tearing down the dams these days.  Something about it’s unnatural to dam up a river, or it endangers a species or something.  Not quite sure what’s going on there.

Heat and light can also be obtained from electricity, as we said, which can be generated via nuclear power.  Nuclear energy, like natural gas, is pretty clean, so it’s hard for them to ban it on purely environmental concerns strictly on the process and distribution of it, but it does require something of a fuel source and that is uranium.  Yesterday, they banned uranium.  They already had the power to stop nuclear development through the permitting process, ostensibly for safety concerns, but since the technology has advanced so much that even third-world countries are developing and using it safely and easily, that rationale was suspect, so they went after the fuel source – uranium – directly.

Wood burns pretty well.  Wood burning is banned in most urban and many suburban areas however because some people don’t like , or are not familiar with, the smell of it, and of course it’s not as efficient as gas or oil, and naturally there usually aren’t huge forests around heavily-populated cities, so that’s a problem.  Also the fuel source itself is banned many times, that is the process of obtaining it – the lumber industry, cutting trees down, is banned for aesthetic reasons and, again, to protect an endangered bird or wasp or something.

Another fuel source that gained some traction in recent years was biofuels.  You know -corn and other vegetation that can be processed to create a fuel that will burn to create heat.  It is a very expensive fuel source, though, because it is not just there, for the most part, in nature in a form easily adaptable.  It has to be cultivated, transported and processed and handled and delivered and used differently than gas or oil or coal or electricity.  Plus using the resources to grow and develop the biofuels impinges on, or makes more costly the use of those resources for food production, so there’s that problem.  The production capabilities just aren’t there on a big enough scale in the short term to keep large numbers of people from freezing to death.

So, that’s about it.  All of the stuff that you can burn to create heat is being banned.  The statist planners say that “renewables” is the way to go.  That’s the future, they say.  Renewables means windmills and solar panels.  Of course, even us dummies know that the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow all the time, and using renewable electricity, or electrically heated water or rocks or whatever, is just not real efficient or suited for meeting the needs of masses of people on a continuous, permanent basis.  And it’s going to take years to get the technology developed to somehow make renewables continuously on-line, or to store the energy.

But curiously, that’s not stopping the Central Planners from banning the fuels and the processes we currently have.  There’s no phase-in regime for the renewables.  Either they will magically come on-line in time to save us or they won’t.  Maybe enough to save some of us.  Maybe 500,000 or so.  Something like that.  I don’t know.  Just pulled that figure out of the air.  Maybe heard some wild-eyed conspiracy theorist mention it somewhere.  But we’re talking pretty short-term here, at the rate they’re banning the burnables.  Wood, coal, oil, gas, uranium.  And biofuels – you can either eat the corn or burn it, take your pick, but tens of millions surviving on that – not likely.

Starting to get a bit of a chill. Maybe I’ll just close my eyes , take a little nap.  Think about all this tomorrow.

bobmontgomery
Poor. No advanced degrees. Unorganized. Feeble. Disjointed. Random. Past it. .... Intrigued, Interested, Patriotic and Lucky.

3 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

3 COMMENTS

  1. Last February, it got really cold (below 10 degrees) in TX for a few days. So cold the windmills in West Texas didn’t work. Stupidly, they are 11% of the power grid.

    So here in Texas, sitting upon a nearly unlimited supply of shale gas, we had rolling 2 hour black-outs for 2 days.

  2. Even in lightly populated areas, e.g. Californias’ central valley, “they” are controlling the use of fireplaces and wood stoves in spite of “…last year was the cleanest air year on record…but we must do more to achieve our goals…”

  3. Yep, Ohio at least in my neck of the woods has about 270 days of no-sun days, and the winds in the winter would knock all the windmills down or out of service. Plus, let’s not forget about those poor endangered bats, one of which ran into a windmill in PA last year and they shut them all down. Obambi according to House Natural Resources is using *creative math* to make us think we are getting more oil leases when actually not.

    https://naturalresources.house.gov/Blog/?postid=274337

  1. Last February, it got really cold (below 10 degrees) in TX for a few days. So cold the windmills in West Texas didn’t work. Stupidly, they are 11% of the power grid.

    So here in Texas, sitting upon a nearly unlimited supply of shale gas, we had rolling 2 hour black-outs for 2 days.

  2. Even in lightly populated areas, e.g. Californias’ central valley, “they” are controlling the use of fireplaces and wood stoves in spite of “…last year was the cleanest air year on record…but we must do more to achieve our goals…”

  3. Yep, Ohio at least in my neck of the woods has about 270 days of no-sun days, and the winds in the winter would knock all the windmills down or out of service. Plus, let’s not forget about those poor endangered bats, one of which ran into a windmill in PA last year and they shut them all down. Obambi according to House Natural Resources is using *creative math* to make us think we are getting more oil leases when actually not.

    https://naturalresources.house.gov/Blog/?postid=274337

Must Read