Only a Liberal…

Just read the excerpt from the Associated Press:

Winemakers and grape growers who forgo pesticides, sow cover crops, reduce waste and energy consumption, provide workers health insurance, and are mindful of their non-farming neighbors will be able to distinguish themselves as certifiably sustainable under a new third-party audit system announced Wednesday by the Wine Institute, a public policy advocacy group.

The article is titled, “Red, White or Green? Calif. Wine Choices Expand.” So believe it or not, the term “Green” now also covers health insurance. Whether a company is considered “sustainable” depends on whether employees of that business are given health insurance.

I will not be nice here. If you have bought into the green nonsense for all these years, you are an idiot. WHAT DOES HEALTH INSURANCE HAVE TO DO WITH THE ENVIRONMENT? And you’re sustainable if you’re “mindful of your non-farming neighbors”? What kind of irrational babbling is this? Being “mindful” is now environmentally friendly.

The Green movement has NOTHING to do with saving the environment. At its best, it is a feel-good (but no good) meaningless movement to label some businesses as evil and hurtful and others as good and compassionate. At its worst, it is simply communism wearing the mask of environmentalism.

The Green movement supports electric cars and opposes gasoline cars, even though the environmental impact is identical. Electricity pollutes when it is created (with coal mostly) and is clean when used. Gasoline is clean when created and pollutes when used. There is no difference. The only way currently to make electricity cleaner is nuclear power… which the green movement opposes.

So why would the green movement support something that doesn’t prevent pollution and oppose something that does? Because the Green movement doesn’t give a crap about the environment. They hate capitalism. They hate corporations. Here’s a great excerpt illustrating the Green/Red movement:

At the 12/09 Copenhagen U.N. Climate Change Summit, Hugo Chavez, the nutty quasi dictator of Venezuela got huge applause. What new scientific data did he provide? Why was he even there at all?

He said the process in Copenhagen was “not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really an imperial dictatorship…down with imperial dictatorships.” [Rousing round of applause]

[There was a] “silent and terrible ghost in the room” [a ghost called capitalism] [even louder applause]

“our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell….let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.” [standing ovation]

Nevermind that the attendees all showed up to the conference in private jets that they supposedly think are killing the planet.

Nevermind that opposing drilling for oil in the U.S. simply exports the task to countries who don’t have an EPA, and therefore hurts the environment more than if we did it ourselves.

The Green movement does not care about the environment. The evidence is staggering.

From the Govt Accountability Office via Hotair.com

“It’s a beautiful theory — highways full of electric cars emitting no greenhouse gases or pollutants after being plugged into an outlet in our garages overnight. The problem, according to a new Government Accountability Office report, is that the effort may only shift the problem somewhere else.

“If you are using coal-fired power plants, and half the country’s electricity comes from coal-powered plants, are you just trading one greenhouse gas emitter for another?” asks Mark Gaffigan, co-author of the GAO report. The report itself notes: “Reductions in CO2 emissions depend on generating electricity used to charge the vehicles from lower-emission sources of energy.”

The GAO report says a plug-in compact car, if recharged at an outlet drawing its power from coal, provides a carbon dioxide savings of only 4% to 5%. If the feeling of saving the environment from driving an electric car causes people to drive more, that small amount of savings vanishes entirely.”

Currently about half of American electricity is made from coal plants. If you increase the demand for electricity with cars, the pollution will decrease on the streets, but will simply increase at the coal plant. Its hilarious! Environmentalists hatch plans with no concern for the consequences or even a plan of action.

The funniest part is there is a way to decrease the eeevil emissions on the road AND at the coal plant. You mean we create the electricity with wind and solar? Nope, sorry, those won’t get the job done. The solution to the environmentalist dream of electric cars with clean production emissions is NUCLEAR. That’s right. Nuclear power is clean energy, and it can fill the electricity demands of electric cars.

So now environmentalists are in a dilly of a pickle: do they keep pushing for electric cars with evil coal-burned electricity, or do they bite the bullet and abandon their psychotic opposition to nuclear power?

Why not solar and wind? Rush Limbaugh’s Limbaugh Letter addressed the issue in an article about nuclear power.

One reason oil and coal work so well as energy sources is because energy companies can control their use to meet demand in real time. As energy expert William Tucker explain in National Review in March, an energy grid “is not a machine for cranking out electricity, but a highly tuned instrumentl; because electricity travels at the speed of light, it must be consumed as it is generated. If electricity drops more than 5 percent, brownouts or blackouts may occur. If it surges by an equal amount, it can damage electrical equipment.”

Wind and solar are notoriously erratic. Even if wind energy could magically be tamed tomorrow to meet instantaneous demand, notes  Tucker, “Our 345 kilovolt (kV) transmission lines cannot transport electricity more than 300 miles without excessives losses to heat and friction. The only way to reduce line loss is to upgrade to 765 kV. That means building an entirely new national grid… The cost will easily surpass $1 trillion.

The ignorant masses who hold clean energy up on a pedestal have NO CLUE about the physics of electricity. They “know” that we can switch to clean energy at any time… we just have to put our mind to it… its total nonsense. You can’t argue for wind power without having researched the realities of replacing the entire electric grid. Unbelievable.