Carbon Morality

When a CEO of a major utility talks about controlling CO2 emissions, it’s clear America’s standard of living is under attack.

David Crane, CEO of NRG Energy, in his article in EnergyBiz, titled Carbon Morality, claims that those who argue against solar and wind will “lose the hearts and minds of future generations of Americans”.

His assumption being that CO2 is causing global warming. He states, “The issue [the utility industry] owns is climate change.”

EnergyBiz Magazine Cover
EnergyBiz Magazine Cover

The battle lines are clearly drawn. Those who believe CO2 is the cause of global warming versus those who believe natural forces are the cause.

See The Great Divide.

The absurdity of attempting to cut CO2 emissions to prevent catastrophic global warming, or climate change, is obvious, once the effect of the required cuts is understood.

The IPCC, and president Obama, claim that CO2 emissions must be cut 80% in the United States by 2050 to avoid a climate catastrophe. Worldwide they must be cut 50%.

What does this mean for Americans?

Today’s CO2 emissions are 16.5 tons per person in the United States.

Cutting them 80% by 2050 requires cutting them to 2.3 tons per person. See IPCC CO2 Reductions.

The last time per capita CO2 emissions were this low in the United States was in 1900.

There were few automobiles, trucks or airplanes in 1900. There were no TVs, refrigerators or air-conditioning in 1900. Electric lights were few and far between in 1900.

In short, cutting CO2 emissions 80% would require Americans to eliminate all modern conveniences, and reduce their standard of living to a primitive level.

This is what David Crane is advocating, even though he may not understand it.

Even Google realizes so-called clean energy, as advocated by Crane, won’t stop climate change.

Specifically, Google scientists Ross Koningstein and David Fork admit renewables won’t save the world from global warming. See Finally the Truth About Renewables.

Another article in EnergyBiz describes how utilities can move assets into stock market darlings, similar to MLPs, called Yieldcos. Yieldcos hold clean energy assets, primarily wind and solar, in a limited partnership, where the LP pays high dividends. Yieldcos are described as the future for raising capital for wind and solar ventures.

It’s also another tentacle entangling investment firms and individual investors who are attracted to the high yields.

The growth of Yieldcos is predicated on the growth of wind and solar, which is based on subsidies and mandates requiring the use of high cost electricity.

The web being spun by global warming activists is designed to entangle as many people and institutions as possible, to make it ever more difficult for the activists to be stopped.

EnergyBiz seems to be the poster child for those advocating for the cutting of CO2 emissions in the utility industry, specifically with such programs as clean energy, smart meters, demand response and smart cities.

Nowhere does EnergyBiz examine how cutting CO2 emissions 80% will affect American’s standard of living.

If cutting CO2 emissions 80% will cause great harm to Americans, which is indisputable, and if so-called clean energy can’t stop climate change, which Google scientists have established, what are the motives of the people behind EnergyBiz?

* * * * * *

NOTE:
It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

0 thoughts on “Carbon Morality

  1. Marie Jane says: Right on Donn Dears. The entire industrial wind turbine agenda is based on motives and personal agendas, many and varied, from the staunch unyielding greenwashed, to pure profit motives, to the greed factor: “the government/ratepayers-are-paying-the-bill-so-who cares-if-the agenda-doesn’t-work-we-are-getting-our-money-anyway mentality” and all of this with little care or concern about the destructive nature of the industrial wind turbine.

  2. My understanding is that the EPA wants to cut total US CO2 emissions by 80% overall, not per person. There are about four times as many persons in the US now as in 1900. Thus, for the same CO2 per person emission, each person in 1900 would have four times as much as each person today. Did you include this factor in your math?

    • Cutting total CO2 emissions 80% can also be described as cutting them per capita. Divide total emissions by the population. The only adjustment I made was to account for population growth by 2050.
      For example, GDP is expressed as total GDP and as GDP per capita, by dividing total GDP by the population. Per capita GDP in 1900 can be compared directly with per capita GDP today.
      I believe the logic is correct.
      Hope I’m not missing your thought.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*