the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

American Folley

Posted by Jeff Id on November 8, 2009

Please read this at Watts Up With That. We don’t have much time left and this is a true tipping point, the suffering will be of a greater magnitude than anything predicted by AGW Advocates.  It will not be localized to America.

A Tale of Two Overkills

It’s time to stop the insanity and bring reason back to governance.

We are such fools.

 

 

 

7 Responses to “American Folley”

  1. Retired Engineer said

    There are several sides to this story. The plant could not survive without cheap electricity. That is a sad fact of life in the aluminum industry. The bigger issue is the lack of new sources of electricity. Coal, gas, nuclear. Increasing demand, no new supply. With the mad (insane) rush toward electric cars, we will soon hit a real ‘tipping’ point. Rolling blackouts, higher prices, all waiting around the corner. Squiggly light bulbs won’t solve it.

    Not a future I look forward to.

  2. Kondealer said

    Absolute lunacy. Isn’t aluminium, like steel (another industry we have let go to the dogs) a strategic resource?
    We are now reliant on the likes of Communist China to supply us this. I shudder to think what will happen if they decide to flex their economic muscle to impose their political will on us.

    And there’s Goldman Sachs “Doing God’s work” funding the leveraged buyouts that have put our best industries in foreign hands. They believe in “Climate Change” too…

  3. Dan W said

    Jeff,

    I hardly think the global warmist can be blaimed for the demise of the aluminum smelters in the northwest. This smelter has for years benefited from sweetheart deals with the BPA.

    Finally the public utilities of the northwest have fought to eliminate these deals because of rising demand and the fact the BPA was created to help all of the northwest rate payers not just the aluminum companies.

    As one who believes the global warmist are pushing a dangerous and unproven theory, I don’t believe they can be blamed for the demise of these smelters.

  4. Mark T said

    Dan W said
    November 8, 2009 at 12:37 pm

    I hardly think the global warmist can be blaimed for the demise of the aluminum smelters in the northwest. This smelter has for years benefited from sweetheart deals with the BPA.

    And you would be, at the very least, miguided, if not outright incorrect.

    Finally the public utilities of the northwest have fought to eliminate these deals because of rising demand and the fact the BPA was created to help all of the northwest rate payers not just the aluminum companies.

    Then ask yourself this: in the face of rising demand, why was there no other supply besides Bonneville for their power? Why are there no new coal-fired power plants? No new nuclear power plants?

    Perhaps if environmentalists had not made it so ridiculously difficult to build new power plants sweetheart deals would not have been required to keep the Al plant open.

    As one who believes the global warmist are pushing a dangerous and unproven theory, I don’t believe they can be blamed for the demise of these smelters.

    Then you are apparently not looking deep enough into the true impact of their actions.

    Mark

  5. Dan W said

    Mark T,

    I am not incorrect or misguided. I have followed the BPA for the last 10 years as a facility engineer for a local company. They have been getting sweetheart deals at the expense of the other ratepayers in the area.

    The demand on the public utilities has risen to a point where they now require the excess capacity of the BPA. That does not mean there is not electricity available, just not “cheap” hydro electricity.

    There are no new coal plants because of the pollution the spew from their smokestacks, and I don’t consider CO2 as pollution. Most people in the Northwest have seen the long term effects of over zealous mining and are rightly leary.

    I agree nuclear power plants should be part of the mix of energy in the United States. Not because they reduce
    CO2, but because they are the cleanest electrical generation facilities in the world.

    And yes I do understand the long term effects of our energy policies in the United States, but don’t believe that would have helped the smelters in Montana and Washington.

  6. Mark T said

    Dan W said
    November 9, 2009 at 2:57 am

    And yes I do understand the long term effects of our energy policies in the United States, but don’t believe that would have helped the smelters in Montana and Washington.

    This is where you are misguided.

    I am fully aware the plant was getting sweetheart deals: if you had fully read and understood what I wrote, you would have noticed that I even mentioned this problem. Had there been true competition for power these deals would never have existed. Smelting plants such as this one would have never gotten off at the taxpayers’ expense. They would have, however, added to an increase in demand to the point that additional sources of power would have been justified – and built. Given the hostile treatment such facilities (power generation) get, before, during, and after being built, this was not an option. Environmentalism is the reason for this, and more specifically, alarmist global warming activism.

    Mark

  7. Mark T said

    One final note, from an economic standpoint: how much tax revenue is lost from the plant shutting down? How does that compare to “savings” from increasing their utility bills? They aren’t buying any electricity now – what difference has that made?

    Mark

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: