China Confidential
Friday, September 05, 2008
US Official: Nation Needs More Nuclear Energy
The United States needs to start generating more of its power from nuclear energy, but will still have to rely on coal and oil for the foreseeable future, the US Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy said on Thursday.
Dennis Spurgeon told a nuclear energy industry conference in London that the era of cheap oil was over and action was needed to tackle an "energy crisis" facing the United States.
The country was "on the cusp of a transformation" in the way it produces energy and the time to start reducing its dependence on fossil fuels was coming, Spurgeon told the opening session of the World Nuclear Association's annual symposium.
"I have confidence that that day may not be too far off," Spurgeon said.
He said the United States would need to build nine new nuclear plants a year from 2016 to generate 50 percent of its power from nuclear by 2035.
China Bidding for Australia's Uranium
Australian media report China has moved to buy into Australia's booming uranium industry, with steelmaker Sinosteel applying to develop a $160 million mine in the South Australian outback, posing a further challenge to foreign investment controls.
The cash-rich Beijing-based consortium is eyeing opportunities in Australian resources, testing the Government's will to regulate Chinese investment in the sector.
Click here to continue reading.Hot Air Over Global Warming
As a congressman once joked before a political meeting in chilly Pennsylvania, "You'd think, with all these politicians present, there'd be more hot air."
The hot air of politicians inspired an ingenious idea by a free-market organization, Americans for Prosperity. It is conducting a nationwide hot air balloon tour to build grass-roots pressure against costly state, local and federal climate-change policies.
AFP, consider this your invitation to bring the Hot Air Tour to Washington. When it comes to politicians spouting hot air about "global warming," folks in Seattle and Olympia take the cake.
Gov. Chris Gregoire and her legislative allies have committed our state to an economic suicide pact known as the Western Climate Initiative.
This amazingly complex and costly scheme seeks to redistribute wealth in the name of global warming through an approach already proved unsuccessful in Europe.
The governor's own Ecology staff admit that the pact likely will result in a "leakage" of jobs to other states. Experts agree the WCI most likely also will mean higher costs for Washington's electricity consumers.
So why would anyone support this and other foolish environmental policies?
Many politicians see climate change as another way of persuading voters to surrender more power and authority to government. They also receive contributions and votes from the eco-lobby.
Some businesses have much to gain by using the "green" label and our own guilt to sell us overpriced goods and services.
Many scientists have staked their reputations (and huge research grants) on faulty and often-discredited climate change research.
The WCI is yet another example of government officials using global-warming alarmism for their own self-interest or that of their political allies.
What is most disturbing is that those policies are based on questionable science.
Despite assertions to the contrary, there is no consensus on global warming. More than 31,000 American scientists have signed a petition rejecting "man-made global warming."
"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of ... greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate," the petition states.
Even those who promote climate change have to admit the data does not match their theories. German researchers, in the journal Nature, predict that global temperatures might stay flat or decline in the next decade. They predict we'll see warming again in 15 to 20 years.
Global warming "science" is based on computer models that have never been validated through observable data. We have had 10 years of global cooling since 1998, and now the leading proponents of climate change say warming is going to be delayed another 20 years. And they expect us to endure higher taxes, higher unemployment, more bureaucracy and less freedom for this theory?
Enacting policies that will devastate our economy, kill jobs, increase energy prices and reduce our freedoms is not the answer; it's just more hot air.
The real alternative is to look to nuclear power, clean coal, smart grids and other new energy technologies that can deliver true energy independence, improve our environment and keep Washington's economy both green and strong.
US Senator Jerome Delvin, R-Richland, represents the 8th Legislative District and serves on the Senate Water, Energy and Telecommunications Committee.The Case for Coal
Paul Driessen makes a convincing case for coal in an essay titled "The Social Responsibility of Coal." An excerpt appears below.America has centuries’ worth of coal. Our reliance on this resource has tripled since 1970 – but sulfur dioxide and particulate emissions are down 40% and 90% below 1970 levels, respectively, notes air pollution expert Joel Schwartz. New technologies and regulations will reduce coal power plant emissions even further by 2020, but even current emissions (including mercury) pose no significant risks to human health, he emphasizes.
Radical environmentalists worry and wail about speculative health risks, to justify anti-coal campaigns. But their concerns often disappear when the discussion shifts to millions of Africans who die every year from real, preventable lung and intestinal diseases that result from an absence of electricity for cooking, heating, refrigeration, safe drinking water, hospitals and decent living standards. Wind and solar will save few of those lives – and yet green pressure groups stridently oppose fossil fuel, nuclear and hydroelectric power for Africa.
US electricity consumption will continue climbing, even with conservation, because our population and technology use are increasing steadily. Meanwhile, 59 coal-fired plants were cancelled in 2007 thanks to eco-activists, who are challenging 50 more.
The US now has virtually no excess capacity, and switching to natural gas as a primary power plant fuel (and fuel for backup generators to support wind farms) means electricity prices could increase “as much as tenfold,” says energy analyst Mark Mills, especially if we continue to ban drilling. “After that we may see forced conservation, or even blackouts in rotation among business and residential customers.”
Energy shortages and price hikes could cost millions of jobs in the automotive, airline, tourism, food and beverage, textiles, paper making, plastics, chemicals, metals and manufacturing industries – especially if Congress also enacts cap-and-trade rules. Most will never be replaced by “green collar” jobs that some claim will be created by intermittent, unreliable wind and solar energy.
Switching to plug-in hybrid cars will only exacerbate the problem. They will need a well-stocked power grid to plug into, and current energy policies virtually ensure that it won’t be there.
In addition to balance of trade issues, over-reliance on imports has major national security implications, as Russia’s invasion of Georgia forcefully reminded Europe. Germany imports 40% of its natural gas from Russia, and six Eastern European countries are entirely dependent on Mr. Putin’s energy. Shackled further by their opposition to nuclear power, fear of climate change Armageddon and fixation on the Kyoto Protocols, the EU has barely protested actions by a rogue bear that has already cut off natural gas supplies to Latvia, Lithuania and the Czech Republic, to impose its will.
That should cause Congress to reflect more soberly on US dependence on oil from Venezuela, Nigeria, Iran and Russia. Coal could be converted into synthetic liquid and gas fuels, to replace the oil and gas we refuse to develop, but legal and regulatory hurdles restrict that option, too.
A key justification for these anti-energy policies is cataclysmic global warming. However, 32,000 scientists have signed the Oregon Petition, saying they see “no convincing evidence” that humans are causing climate change, or that it will be catastrophic. Climate models continue to predict chaos but, as one scientist wryly notes, faith in their predictions is as misplaced as reliance on emails from Nigeria, advising recipients that they have won the Lotto.
Global temperatures have not increased since 1998, despite steadily increasing carbon dioxide levels, and solar scientists like Pal Brekke say the sun’s formerly high activity level is leveling off or abating, which could bring falling global temperatures.
China and India are planning or building 700 coal-fired power plants; European countries plan to build 50 more in five years, to reduce dependence on Russian gas; and other nations are also increasing fossil fuel use for transportation and power generation.
Thus, no matter how much the USA reduces its energy use, driving, heating, air-conditioning and living standards – no matter how much it punishes poor families or commits economic suicide – its actions would not reduce global CO2 levels, or affect Earth’s climate.
We need to conserve, and continue improving renewable energy technologies that currently provide just 0.5% of our energy. But at this time renewables are simply too inefficient, expensive and unreliable to permit a shutdown of hydrocarbon-based systems.
Click here to read the entire essay. It is must reading for anyone seriously concerned about the energy crisis.Global Cooling? An Inconvenient Truth
The sudden change of focus from global warming to global cooling by leading environment group World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) demonstrates the lack of substance to the argument that manmade carbon emissions are responsible for global warming, according to Senator Boswell.
The prominent NP senator for Qld says, “The WWF now claims that recent freezing temperatures in Sydney are proof of the urgent need to cut carbon pollution.
"Does that mean that global warming causes global cooling?
"Does that mean that we should be increasing emissions in order to cool the earth or increasing them to warm it back up?”
“I though we were concerned with the perils of global warming – that we had to act immediately to stop temperatures and water levels rising and inflicting untold disasters.
"Now the WWF wants us to believe that manmade carbon emissions are responsible for colder temperatures.”
Senator Boswell says that the Rudd government’s carbon pollution reduction scheme is built on the assumption of man-made global warming.
“Which is it – are temperatures going up or down?” he asks.
“Cooling temperatures are what I would call a very inconvenient truth for the green movement.
"This is a twisting charade and no mistake.”
Senator Boswell says it is imperative that scientists get it right because so many of Australia’s competitive industries are being asked to take on higher costs under the government’s carbon reduction scheme.
“If the Rudd government’s Emission Trading Scheme is not drastically altered, then it is Australia who will end up pleading with the East Timorese to take us as guest workers – and not the other way round,” he says.Over 20 Questions the Media Won't Ask Obama
Set forth below are questions that the mainstream media have steadfastly refused to ask the Democratic Party's Presidential candidate.
1. What is your legal name? Is it the same name that appears on your birth certificate?
2. Are you now or have you ever been a citizen of another country? Are you now or have you ever been a citizen of Indonesia?
3. Are you aware that Islamic religious law traces a person's religious identify through the father, and that according to Islamic religious law you were born a Muslim because your biological father was a Muslim?
4. Do you approve of Islamic religious law?
5. Kenya's opposition leader, Raila Odinga, whom you have campaigned for, says he is your cousin. Is he?
6. Do you support the efforts by Muslims to implement Islamic religious law in Kenya, the birthplace of your father, or in any other country?
7. Do you believe that radical islam, or Islamism, is a threat to the United States and to Western civilization?
8. Do you believe Islam is a peaceful and beautiful religion?
9. How does the religion-of-peace claim square with the fact that Muslim groups have carried out more than 11,000 terrorist attacks since 9/11?
10. Are you alarmed by the rise of radical Islam in Europe? Do you think Europe is on the way to becoming a predominantly Muslim continent?
11. How do you respond to those who say that organized Islam and Islamism are today virtually synonymous?
12. Why do you differentiate between America's Islamist enemies--as you made clear in your interview with Bill O'Reilly? Do you believe the ideological or theological differences between Islamist Iran and Islamist Al Qaeda are meaningful in terms of the threat they represent?
13. You have promised to pursue Islamist terrorist networks, but you have avoided mentioning Indonesia, where you were educated as a child, even though Al Qaeda-associated groups have carried out horrific terrorist bombings there. Would you use the American military and intelligence agencies to attack those groups if necessary? Do you think they should have been attacked and destroyed after 9/11?
14. How would you have responded to 9/11 if you were in the White House when the Islamist terrorists struck America in the worst-ever attacks on US soil? Would you have asked Congress for a declaration of war against Afghanistan? Would you have attacked Iran instead of Iraq?
15. Would you ever use tactical nuclear weapons to defend the United States?
16. If Iran, which has threatened to "burn Tel Aviv" and destroy Israel, were to bombard Israel with ballistic massiles, causing thousands of civilian casualties, would Israel, in your opinion, be justified in responding with nuclear weapons?
17. Do you think President Bush should have revoked the visas of all aliens--non-citizens--from predominantly Muslim countries after 9/11? Your supporter, President Carter, revoked Iranian student visas in response to the hostage crisis.
18. Do you believe there are moderates in the Iranian regime?
19. Do you believe there are moderates in Hamas?
20. Do you believe there are moderates in Hezbollah?Islamist Threat Alert: Indonesian Province Implementing Koran Tests for Political Candidates
Foreign Confidential....
Officials in Indonesia's Aceh province have confirmed that they plan to test election candidates for their knowledge of the Koran.
Aceh has long been a center of Muslim extremism and separatism. But the Koran test is another indication of growing Islamist influence in Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, where Al Qaeda-associated groups have carried out major terrorist bombings.
"We will implement the local ordinance on political parties requiring all legislative candidates to take the Koran proficiency test," Aceh Electoral Commission chief Salam Paroh was quoted as saying by Agence France-Presse (AFP).
The test will gauge a candidate's ability to recite verses of the Koran.
They will also be tested about their knowledge of Islamic rituals.
Only those who pass the test will be able to contest Aceh's provincial elections next April.
The election commission has already prepared 10 teams to test the 1,368 candidates contesting the April vote.
Implementing Islamic Law
Aceh is gradually implementing Islamic religious law under a broad autonomy package granted by the central government in 2001 to pacify Islamist demands for independence.
It also has a religious police force whose task is overseeing Islamic regulations on dress, alcohol, gambling and immoral acts.
The Koran test requirement has sparked a heated debate.
"We have a right not to perform the test," said Sayed Fuad Zakaria, a member of the secular and national Golkar party. "The commission cannot ban us from contesting the election just because we haven't sat the Koran test."
National Home Affairs Minister Mardiyanto has reportedly asked the provincial authorities to exempt candidates from the more secular national parties.
But an official with the local Aceh People's Party said the Koran test must be applied across the board.
"We do hope that the Aceh electoral commission will be fair by requiring all candidates from both local and national parties to perform the Koran proficiency test," said Thamrin Ananda. "Justice must be done."
EDITOR'S COMMENT: US Democratic Party Presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama should be asked his opinion of the Koran test, as he was educated in Indonesia and may also hold Indonesian citizenship--about which he should also be asked. Obama's Muslim stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, registered Obama for classes in a Catholic school as a Muslim--and an Indonesian citizen--under the name Barry Soetoro. There are also credible reports that Obama may have used an Indonesian passport when he visited Pakistan as college student. Obama was born a Muslim according to Islamic religious law, which traces a person's religious identity through the father. Obama's biological father, a Kenyan citizen, was a non-practicing Muslim.Soaring Rhetoric From a Sincere Patriot
I'm not running for President because I think I'm blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save our country in its hour of need. My country saved me. My country saved me, and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her for as long as I draw breath, so help me God.
If you find faults with our country, make it a better one. If you're disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to correct them. Enlist in our Armed Forces. Become a teacher. Enter the ministry. Run for public office. Feed a hungry child. Teach an illiterate adult to read. Comfort the afflicted. Defend the rights of the oppressed. Our country will be the better, and you will be the happier. Because nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself.
I'm going to fight for my cause every day as your President. I'm going to fight to make sure every American has every reason to thank God, as I thank Him: that I'm an American, a proud citizen of the greatest country on earth, and with hard work, strong faith and a little courage, great things are always within our reach. Fight with me. Fight with me.
Fight for what's right for our country.
Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.
Fight for our children's future.
Fight for justice and opportunity for all.
Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.
Stand up for each other; for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America.
Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. Nothing is inevitable here. We're Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.
Thank you, and God Bless you.
-John McCain
Friday, 5 September 2008
By JEROME DELVIN
Dateline USA....
Australia's rural news service reports:
Posts
