Green gates to Penna. Ave

…And high tides of politics

White House solar panels being installed this week

Wa-Post — By Juliet Eilperin, Published: August 15

After nearly three years, the White House began installing solar panels on the First Family’s residence this week, a White House official confirmed Thursday.

The Obama administration had pledged in October 2010 to put solar panels on the White House as a sign of the president’s commitment to renewable energy.

The White House official, who asked not to be identified because the installation is in process, wrote in an e-mail the project is “a part of an energy retrofit that will improve the overall energy efficiency of the building.”

At the time of the 2010 announcement, then-Energy Secretary Steven Chu and White House Council on Environmental Quality chair Nancy Sutley said the administration would conduct a competitive bidding process to buy between 20 and 50 solar panels.

The officials did not identify the supplier or cost of the project, but wrote the White House “has begun installing American-made solar panels” and the initiative, “which will help demonstrate that historic buildings can incorporate solar energy and energy efficiency upgrades, is estimated to pay for itself in energy savings over the next eight years.”

The retrofit also includes installing updated building controls and variable speed fans, the official added. […/]

On Thursday, climate activist Bill McKibben, whose group 350.org had organized one of the campaigns to install solar power at the White House, welcomed the news that the installation had begun.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/08/15/white-house-solar-panels-finally-being-installed/

But wouldn’t it be great if Barry would cut his offensive, personal carbon footprint, including AF-1 and consolidate those extra and double trips? He could probably save enough in one month to pay for all those solar panels and upgrades.

Get this, he cannot afford to have school kids or visitors for White House tours but he must expidite this… achem, it will eventually pay for itself. But White House tours are way too expensive and there is no return for the “investment”. That’s the Hypobama mentality.

Well kids, unless yo can prove you can produce electricity or some service to the White House, then forget it, you are not green enough. (maybe you could take turns pedaling a generator while the next group comes through….or maybe you could wash dishes?)

Meanwhile, Barry and his family will freely abuse the privileges of carbon-producing technology as much as they can, as far as they can, as long as they can; while they deny student field trips and tours. The efficiency gauge is busted on AF-1.

In his second term, Obama becomes bolder on the environment– Wa-Post

The shift has alarmed some industry officials, as well as coal allies. Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) described the administration as coal’s “adversary” and brought a state delegation headed by West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin (D) into the White House on Aug. 1 to meet with McCarthy and Michael Rodriguez, the White House legislative affairs director.

While Manchin called the nearly hour-long session “very respectful and productive,” he also said it exposed the “deep differences” between politicians like himself and Obama.

“You cannot describe this any differently than as a war on coal, and not just in West Virginia or the U.S. but on a global scale,” he said. “They’re using every tool they have to destroy the most abundant, reliable and affordable resource that we have.”

Kids and tourists, just think, you can tell everyone your sacrifices helped pay for those solar and efficiency upgrades. Won’t that be special? And you can also remember that when you or your parents pay that added Executive Order tax on the phone you carry.

Obama’s White House put it this way:

Due to staffing reductions resulting from sequestration, we regret to inform you that WhiteHouse Tours will be canceled effective Saturday, March 9, 2013 until further notice. Unfortunately, we will not be able to reschedule affected tours.

 We very much regret having to take this action, particularly during the popular Spring touring season. Please check this webpage for updates regarding this situation, or contact the White House Visitors Office 24 Hour Hotline at (202) 456-7041.
Sincerely,
The White House Visitors Office

Fortunately, no such sequestration on solar panels to the White House.
(Whew, that’s a relief…. or, you know, people might talk and complain!)

Obama’s energy injustice

Africa bound and down.

While at home being engaged in a “war on energy”, Obama lectures Africa about “power” access and pledges a new “initiative” to power up Africa. (Doubling electricity access)

Maybe he can show them how to turn algae or rubber trees into fuel for cars too. Is he promising to give them windmills? I can hardly bear to listen to his lecturing, who does he think he’s talking to? Oh that is rich.

Does he want to show them how to price electricity out of reach of the common person? Or how to kill pipelines or prohibit natural gas development, or how to prevent off-shore drilling? I know, he can tell them how they must close their mines too, and stop using their natural resources to propel themselves. Why not wrap it up by telling them that is social justice? Then let them know the price of electricity will necessarily skyrocket.

Then he preaches “transparency and accountability”. So only in remote regions of Africa could they believe him or trust his words. Even they probably heard and see the hypocrisy of the elitist, dictatorial Obama. Show them how to rule by fiat, fear, and ideology. Why did he forget to remind them, “you didn’t build that”?

Climategate meets Brandenburg Gate – changing of the guards

Obama promises an end to cheap energy

The Left has shifted from being champions of the poor to being developed-world Progressives, comfortably ensconced in their own modernity

June 24, 2013 -by Marita Noon
A few months ago, in his State of the Union address, President Obama proudly pledged to tackle climate change—despite opposition from Republicans. To date, precious little action to combat climate change has been seen from the White House—which pleases most Republicans and angers the Left.
Environmental activists are some of Obama’s most ardent supporters, but they are frustrated and losing patience with the president. He hasn’t been definitive on killing the Keystone pipeline; as the Washington Post reports, he’s “fallen back from the broad clean energy agenda he envisioned when he first took office”—even to the point of supporting natural gas exploration and recently approving Liquefied Natural Gas export terminals that will increase demand by shipping U.S. natural gas to foreign markets; and he seems to have acquiesced to a fossil fuel future by proposing adaptations to make “coastal communities more resistant to increasingly severe storms and floods.” The environmental community wants to see bold steps toward a fossil-fuel free future ….
[excerpt]
Frank Ackerman, an economist at Tufts University who published a book about the economics of global warming, calls the social cost of carbon “the most important number you’ve never heard of.” According to Bloomberg BusinessWeek, he said: “This is a very strange way to make policy about something this important.” And added, “The Obama Administration ‘hasn’t always leveled with us about what is happening behind closed doors.’”
Why bury “something this important” in an afternoon announcement about something that is virtually insignificant? The answer, I believe, is found in a small piece of the Washington Post story cited previously. Apparently, the White House’s own research found that when Obama, in his State of the Union speech, “vowed to act on climate change if Congress refused to do so,” a focus group’s “favorability” rating “plummeted.” White House transcripts reveal that Obama knows that “the politics of this are tough.”
At an April fundraising event at the San Francisco home of billionaire and environmental activist Tom Steyer, Obama defended his lack of action on climate change: “If you haven’t seen a raise in a decade, if your house is still $25,000, $30,000 underwater … you may be concerned about the temperature of the planet, but it’s probably not rising to your number one concern.”
As a result, his Organizing for America team—“formed to advance the president’s second term agenda”—has been laying the “groundwork with the American public before unveiling a formal climate strategy.” Teasing out the increase in the social cost of carbon was likely part of the strategy, intended to test the waters ahead of the planned climate announcements from the White House.
Likewise, his comments in Berlin, where he reintroduced the subject, calling climate change “the global threat of our time.” The next day, headlines read: “Obama to renew emissions push.” It is believed that the new “measures to tackle climate change” will “effectively ban new coal-fired power plants”—to which I add, will effectively ban “cheap electricity.”
– See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2013/06/24/obama-promises-an-end-to-cheap-energy/#sthash.OHGMnFWP.dpuf

Good article on the politics of Obama’s weathered climate policy. And what do microwave ovens have to do with climategate? Who knew? This is the kind of politics and policies — no difference between them to Obama — we’ve grown to expect and detest. Ah yes, reintroducing the subject in Berlin, with the sun in his eyes and teleprompter issues.

In a related article, Paul Driessen fleshes out the big questions:

23) Shouldn’t Congress pass a cap-and-trade bill or carbon tax to help heal the climate? 
The climate bill that died in the Democrat Senate was a scientifically meaningless bill that Obama’s own EPA admitted would not impact global CO2 levels – let alone global temperatures.
The climate bill would only have raised the cost of energy for American families and businesses, and killed jobs, while doing nothing for the climate. A major Bloomberg News report revealed that U.S. oil companies would likely cope with the climate legislation by “closing fuel plants, cutting capital spending and increasing imports.” Bloomberg also reported that “one in six U.S. refineries probably would close by 2020,” and this could “add 77 cents a gallon to the price of gasoline.”
EPA’s unilateral “carbon dioxide endangerment” regulations would have much the same effect.
20) Don’t graphs show that current temperatures are the highest in 1,000 years?
Penn State professor and UN IPCC modeler Michael Mann did publish a hockey stick-shaped graph that purportedly showed an unprecedented sudden increase in average global temperatures, following ten centuries of supposedly stable climate. However, Dr. Mann was at the center of the Climategate scandal. His graph and the data and methodology behind it have been scrutinized and debunked in peer-reviewed studies by numerous climate scientists, statisticians and other experts.
The latest research clearly reveals that the Medieval Warm Period (also called the Medieval Climate Optimum) has been verified and was in fact global, not just confined to the Northern Hemisphere. The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change reported in 2009 that “the Medieval Warm Period was: (1) global in extent, (2) at least as warm as, but likely even warmer than, the Current Warm Period, and (3) of a duration significantly longer than that of the Current Warm Period to date.”
The Science and Public Policy Institute reported in May 2009: “More than 700 scientists from 400 institutions in 40 countries have contributed peer-reviewed papers providing evidence that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was real, global, and warmer than the present. And the numbers grow larger daily.”

Figure Description: The distribution of Level 2 Studies that allow one to determine whether peak Medieval Warm Period temperatures were warmer than (red), equivalent to (green), or cooler than (blue), peak Current Warm Period temperatures.

Read more: http://papundits.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/climate-change-issues-for-2012/
And Read more excellent articles at CFACT http://www.cfact.org/
H/T PA Pundits-International

Middle East Oil Power

In keeping with the energy oil theme, I found this article by Victor Hansen Davis:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/347108/irrelevant-middle-east

An Irrelevant Middle East

Thanks to oil discoveries elsewhere, the region is losing its geostrategic clout.

Yet the Middle East is becoming irrelevant. The discovery of enormous new oil and gas reserves along with the use of new oil-recovery technology in North America and China is steadily curbing the demand for Middle Eastern oil. Soon, countries such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Iran are going to have less income and geostrategic clout. In both Iran and the Gulf, domestic demand is rising, while there is neither the technical know-how nor the water to master the new art of fracking to sustain exports.

In it, he talks about t the Middle East situation and the changing dynamics. Would anyone in the Middle East really take a second to realize the only reason we care anything at all about their cute little governments and relationships is the oil and dependency situation. Oh, and now for Israel too, who happens to live in a very troubling neighborhood. But its the oil that supplies them the money and power that fuels their influence.

But a new dawn is breaking. As Hanson points out, with the new technology and discoveries, it’s all too clear that the old situation is giving birth to a new one. One thing that has interested me for as long as the concerns of Iran have been at the fore, is the price of oil. Iran has admitted that it needs a price point of 117 a barrel to satisfy their demands. Whether this is by wish or necessity matters little. They have been fortunate enough in the last few years to benefit from oil prices and spikes.

Now as Victor suggests, with these new developments it could sort of “spread the wealth” around. Oil sheiks may not laugh it off as proudly as they once did. And more of their production is going to feed domestic demands than ever. So what to do if you are a rich oil sheik in say Saudi Arabia? Well, they might be looking for other lucrative businesses. As some of the oil money dries up, or they receive  less of a share than they’re used to, they will have less of those petro dollars to buy influence around the world. Their loss might well be our gain.

Back to the neighborhood. If they have less expendable world oil money, they become less of a problem for Israel. How you say, because their radical culture still exists? Well, the funny part is that with Israel’s discoveries it puts them higher on the totem pole than Arab sheiks. Call it a balancing. They can resent it all they want but it will not change that coming paradigm. And Israel, actually having a functioning burgeoning economy, will benefit all the way around while their economies based almost entirely on oil, and exporting jihad, may take a distant backseat to that real economy.

Off to see the wizard, the wonderful wizard of Obamaland

Barry started his term out on a rocky road. That is if you call playing golf with a couple of big-oil guys in Palm Springs while his minions are screaming for ending the Keystone pipeline outside the White House, “rocky”.

So his sycophant, low information voters weren’t too happy with that news. Oh well, welcome to the land of disenchantment with the rest of us. Do they want to compare outrage? I don’t think so. His magical mystery agenda will not solve our country’s problems, nor will the Kool Aid.

Everyone who uses oil or its byproducts has seen the price tag double since he came to office. But that matters not to the anti-energy tyrant or his little green friends with their war on energy. They scream for more inaction. “Can we have LESS, please?”

It is entirely contrary to the needs of the nation, but that’s okay to the Left. They’ll run their cars on mushrooms and algae or nothing. Meanwhile, everyone on the Left is quite content to pay double for their fuel, triple if they could have their way. And they would praise the results, as people go to the poorhouse for their agenda.

If people cannot afford to heat their homes or neglect their other necessities to pay for their fuel, it bothers the Left about as much as a flea on a grizzly bear. Whoops, sorry to bring those poor bears into a matter of politics. Well, it is politics. Does anyone in Obama’s land of make-believe really think this is about the environment, climate, or being stewards of our resources? Of course it isn’t. It’s politics, pure and simple.

That’s why, in my opinion, it was good to see all the green hypocrites and all their friends out demonstrating for what they believe in. Remember they “believed” in Obama too. It must make any used car salesman drool with envy that there are still that many suckers. Why worry about a sucker being born a minute when there are already that many of them out there, probably multiplying too…even if it’s by accident. It only shows how out of step they really are.

Isn’t it convenient for the left that the mantra “drill baby drill” has been replaced with pay baby pay? They are ecstatic about what that does to consumers forcing cuts in use and choices. That’s what they wanted and they got it. The next time Obama tries to twist the oil issue into an illogical pretzel, remember who is getting what they want.

The who by the way applies to Iran too. While they talk about the tough sanctions, Iran knows the one thing that hurts their economy drastically is low oil prices. They need or want the price of Brent around 117 /barrel. And they are near enough to their optimal price it doesn’t hurt them much. We, however, are hurting. The economy is still sputtering. Do you think the high cost of oil and energy has anything to do with it? Not if you are in their land of make-believe. (it might be a nice place to visit, but you sure wouldn’t want to live there.)

Bloomberg.com

The rally in crude prices earlier this month was driven by renewed optimism in economic growth rather than “hard demand data,” according to a report by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Brent prices reached a 2013 high of $118.90 on Feb. 8.

“The current sell-off in oil is bringing prices more in line with the underlying fundamentals,” said the bank’s New York-based head of commodities research, Jeffrey Currie, in a report e-mailed today.

Price Outlook
WTI may fall next week after weak consumption boosted crude inventories, a separate Bloomberg News survey showed.

http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Pollution-Laws-Threaten-to-Drop-Britain-into-an-Energy-Crisis.html

It sort of makes you curious what other solutions may lurk along their yellow brick road in Obamaland?

BP vs. Benghazi

Apparently, no one knows who changed or wrote the talking points Susan Rice blurted on every media channel long after the attack in Benghazi. Picture a bunch of kids in a circle saying “it wasn’t me!”

But this week offered another glaring contradiction into this administration. It was surrounding the BP disaster.

In an ongoing battle and settlement talks, the (in)Justice department fought to hold BP accountable on manslaughter for those killed from the blast that started the Gulf oil spill. Think about that. They claim the catastrophe was due to BP’s misconduct and negligence, and thereby making it responsible for manslaughter that killed 11 crewmembers.

Contrast that with the security, terrorism and murder that killed an ambassador and three Americans. It would even have been worse except for the heroes that responded to the attack after being told to stand down, who saved many lives. And then in the aftermath, Obama and his administration cannot understand why we the people are so outraged over their negligence, and subsequent cover-up, in handling the attack. Or about the many warnings going back for months of security problems. He even goes so far as implying he is a victim, along with Rice Rice, of his critics’s politics.

Yet when it comes to BP, they clearly see a connection with the blame for dead people due to BP’s negligence. And they are willing to fight a court battle to prove it. They even demand BP accept that blame. Both cases come from the same administration.

One would think that the accountability would be even higher in one of its embassies; in a place they are taking credit for liberating. And look at all the different stories we heard from the administration describinbg this serious act of terrorism on 9/11. In BP’s case, the CEO wanted his life back (whoa is me) and in this case Americans want their government back and some accountability. Heck, we can’t get any clear answers to the many questions on Benghazi. They didn’t even want to admit the terrorists who took credit for the attack soon after.

Had it been BP, this administration would be outraged beyond outrage. And they would demand answers immediately – on behalf of the people.

Ref: Headlines about BP are

BP guilty of misconduct, negligence in Gulf oil spill

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-bp-criminal-penalty-gulf-oil-spill-20121115,0,6778555.story

Businessweek.com reports:

“The U.S. also charged two BP well-site managers with involuntary manslaughter and a former executive with obstruction and false statements.”

They will conduct a war on energy but deny the radical terrrorist threats. “Al Qaeda is decimated”…. so the dictator has spoken.

***
Remember the hearing on BP where “Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao, R-Louisiana went so far as to suggest McKay try a type of ritual suicide”?

Maybe no one has used the right language to get Obama’s attention yet.