Attacking the Grid

Attacking the Grid

When did the left begin attacking our electric grid?

Answering that question requires going back in history to Marx and Engles, and then, to when their theory was transformed from theory to practice in the 1917, Russian revolution.

Many Americans on the left in the 1930s were enamored with the Soviet Union, which they viewed as a success despite the reports of purges and concentration camps.

This support continued through the second world war when the left in our country heaped huge praise on the Soviet armies. Even after it was clear the Soviet Union was enslaving Eastern Europe, the left maintained its support for the Soviet Union.

The left minimized allegations of soviet spies in our government. The Pumpkin Papers established that Alger Hiss, a State Department employee, had been a spy for the Soviet Union. Hiss was convicted of perjury in 1950 because the statute of limitations had expired for his spying for the Soviet Union, but the left kept claiming he was innocent.

In New York City, New Year’s Eve, 1951, I was invited to a party by a girl from my High School. When midnight arrived I expected auld lang syne, but instead the other thirty people in attendance started to sing:

“Arise ye Children of Salvation,  

Arise ye Workers of the World … “

The lyrics vary around the world, but the song typically ends:

“The Internationale Unites the Human Race”

I immediately left, but it is a real life example of how tenacious the communists are.

To listen to the music, go to: https://bit.ly/2ZyxjA8 

The left remained supporters of the Soviet Union up until the time of its collapse. 

When the Soviet empire collapsed, it seemed that socialism and communism had finally been defeated.

It was about this time, 1992, that global warming became a new issue, and the UN Earth Summit was held in Rio de Janeiro to address the supposed threat.

The conference established the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), a treaty that the US Senate approved, i.e., ratified.

The UNFCCC provided the left with new life and a new cause and a new rallying cry for socialism.

It provided the rationale needed to attack fossil fuels and capitalism in general, and the electric grid specifically.

From this point forward, there have been a plethora of books attacking the electric grid and supporting several agendas, with the forced adoption of wind and solar as the primary means for altering the grid to end the use of fossil fuels.

These books had three primary messages.

  • Climate change is an existential threat to mankind
  • The use of fossil fuels must be eliminated
  • Capitalism must be eliminated

These objectives were specifically voiced by the head of the UNFCCC, Cristiana Figueres who said,

“This is probably the most difficult task we have given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model.”

The essence of her message was repeated by Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III, when he said,

“Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economic summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”

Christine Stewart, Minister of the Environment, Canada, 1997 – 1999, made it very clear when she said:

“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony … climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality for the world.”

Other leaders from the left have repeated the same three messages as have books written over the past twenty years.

The science of global warming would allow scientists to reach any of three conclusions, specifically the burning of fossil fuels could result in:

  • A minimal effect on warming
  • Some effects that can be managed through adaptation
  • An existential threat to mankind

The IPCC and alarmists have ignored the possibility that the effects of fossil fuels on warming could be nonexistent or slight. 

Instead, they claim that burning fossil fuels will be catastrophic, while ignoring the science that would indicate otherwise.

The books written about renewables, as the way to displace the use of fossil fuels, have promoted three core messages:

  • Climate change is an existential threat to mankind
  • The use of fossil fuels must be eliminated
  • Capitalism and consumerism are evil 

Here is a list of books promoting these ideas:

  • Published 1992: Beyond the Limits, by Meadows, Meadows and Randers
  • Published 2002: The Hydrogen Economy, by Rivkin
  • Published 2007: Winning our Energy Independence, by S. David Freedman
  • Published 2008: Apollo’s Fire, by Inslee and Hendricks
  • Published 2008: Freedom from Oil, by David Sandalow
  • Published 2008: Hot. Flat and Crowded, by Friedman

There are probably others, but these are the books I have read on this topic.

These books sowed the seeds for what the left has promoted as a clean energy revolution, without disclosing that clean energy is a euphemism for eliminating fossil fuels because of global warming. 

This article explains the historical relationship between decarbonization of the grid and socialism.

The efforts to remove fossil fuels from the grid is well underway, and is progressing rapidly.

For those who are interested, the appendix that follows, extracts some of the words from the books that promote the end of fossil fuels and the imposition of destructive wind and solar on the grid.

. . .

APPENDIX:

Extracts from the books highlighted in this article.

Published 1992: Beyond the Limits, by Meadows, Meadows, and Randers.

This book is a sequel to The Limits to Growth. It quotes from the earlier book.

For Example: 

“A Computer Looks Ahead and Shudders, 

Study See’s Disaster by Year 2100.”

Here are relevant quotations from the book:

On capitalism:

“Market economies are in need of some intervention …”

“The third way to respond, to the human socioeconomic system as currently structured, is … to change the structure of the system.”

On renewables:

“[Wind and solar] are competitive with conventional electricity generation technologies.”

Fact: This wasn’t true in 1992, and isn’t true today. Additionally they completely ignore the issues of storage and reliability

On governance:

“A transition to sustainability will require, both deliberate [and] social constraints on further population and industrial growth …”

“People don’t need cars, chests full of clothes, electronic entertainment etc. …”

“Children need training.”

Result: Big government decides what is socially and economically acceptable, and what people need. And then educates people to accept what government decides.

Published 2002: The Hydrogen Economy, by Rivkin

Over 90% of the book is about two subjects: 

  • Climate change, as an existential threat to mankind.
  • Capitalism as a scourge.

Here are relevant quotations from the book:

On the negative effects of energy:

“[An ]increased flow-through of energy in a society correlates with greater coercion and subjugation of peoples and with environmental degradation.”

With respect to peak oil:

“Global production of cheap crude oil could peak before the year 2010, but no later than 2020.”

On private property:

“To whom does everything that constitutes life belong?”

As a philosophy, incorporating pseudo scientific thoughts, (Referring to entropy, and CO2 as its surrogate): 

“That spent energy has accumulated in the Earth’s atmosphere and has begun to adversely affect the climate of the planet and the workings of its many ecosystems…. Industrial society is approaching the final stage of its own energy regime,…”

Published 2007: Winning our Energy Independence, by S. David Freeman.

About one-fifth of the book is devoted to abolishing nuclear power, while a nearly equal amount is devoted to making the US oil independent, by using renewables and electric vehicles.

The premiss throughout is that climate change is an existential threat.

Here are relevant quotations from the book: 

On global warming:

“We stand in imminent peril within the next decade or two of seeing more hurricanes, floods, and glacial ice melt causing sea’s to rise …”

“There is real danger that the oceans will rise as much as 20 feet as early as a decade from now (2017).”

“If you are still in doubt, watch Al Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth.

Fact: All of which have been thoroughly debunked.

On nuclear power:

“The nuclear reactor’s potential for massive destruction …”

“No one in their right mind would prefer a radioactive factory to one that [doesn’t emit radiation].”

“A ban on nuclear power, is needed now.”

On Oil:

“Sweden has set the goal of being 100% oil free by 2020.”

Fact: Sweden’s Oil Consumption averaged 382,647 bbl/day from 1965 to 2019, and was 284,391 bbl/day in 2019.

Fact: The United States has achieved energy independence.

Published 2008: Apollo’s Fire, by Inslee and Hendricks.

Note: It appears as though neither Inslee or Hendricks have an engineering or science degree even though the book relies on engineering or scientific knowledge.

Inslee is now the Governor of Washington State.

Here are relevant quotations from the book:

On CO2 as an existential threat:

“We can expect further increases of between 3.24 and 7.2 degrees F this century if CO2 emissions continue on their present path.” 

“We are on the cusp of irretrievable climate catastrophe.”

This of course is nonsense. They reference the IPCC high emissions scenario as their source, which is the RPC 8.5 scenario that has now been discredited, as reported by the Washington Post.

On biofuels:

“Switchgrass is just one of the many crops that can be used to produce cellulosic ethanol.”

Fact: Cellulosic ethanol never worked and millions of dollars were wasted trying to make it work.

On renewables:

Today wind is competitive with electricity from natural gas in many parts of the country.” (2008)

Fact: Wind isn’t competitive with natural gas even today, especially when the backup power or storage is included. And the book didn’t mention reliability.

“Wave power and tidal power are just over the horizon. … A hundred-megawatt power plant of buoys [is explored] off the coast of Coos County, Oregon.”

Fact: Wave power is still mostly experimental and seen largely as a novelty.

On government:

“[Smart growth] dense communities are less costly to maintain, compact growth can be as much as 70% cheaper for governments than equivalent volumes of scattered growth.”

“[Use the tax code] and financial incentives to encourage investments in high density areas.”

Fact: Families prefer suburbs. Young singles like the downtown, but even that is changing. But should government decide?

“Use incentives (tax payer dollars) to require on-site renewable energy generation.”

Fact: Requiring on-site renewables really means PV Solar, which is uneconomic in most of the country, except possibly in the Southwestern United States.

Published 2008: Freedom From Oil, by David Sandalow.

The book uses a series of hypothetical memos from hypothetical officials to lay out the reasons for, and the actions required to achieve freedom from oil.

While the impetus for the book was to achieve oil independence, the means for doing so were based on the fear of climate change. As we all know, we have achieved oil independence by learning how to extract oil from shale. In addition, we have created an abundance of natural gas.

Here are relevant quotations from the book:

On Climate:

“Petroleum is a leading source of heat-trapping gases that contribute to climate change.”

“Oil is the United States largest source of heat-trapping gases.”

“Potential impacts include sea level rise, the spread of infectious diseases, more severe and more frequent storms, more severe and frequent droughts, shifts in farm regions, and loss of forest cover.”

All of these threats have been debunked.

Oil Independence:

“Oil dependence will not be solved in weeks, months or just a few years.”

Fact: Oil independence was achieved in a very few years with fracking.

Published 2008: Hot, Flat, and Crowded, by Thomas L. Friedman.

Long paragraphs are used to establish that climate change is an existential threat, that wind and solar should replace fossil fuels, and that government should establish regulations for controlling CO2 emissions.

Here are a few relevant quotations from the book:

On Consumerism: 

“If the currently developing world locks in American-style consumption, building, and transportation patterns, we will be living with, and limited by, the energy and climate implications for decades.”

American style consumption is based on the free market providing the goods and services people want, not socialism where the government determines what people may have.

On Methane Tipping Point:

“[According to jim Woolsey (former CIA Director)] a massive release of methane [from tundra] could provide a short-term kick to climate change – the equivalent of billions of tons of CO2.”

This was debunked by a new study from the University of Rochester published in Science [Magazine] which concluded that there was no massive release of methane from the tundra the last time temperature rapidly increased around 12,000 years ago.

On government intervention:

“People don’t know which light bulb is better than another in terms of energy efficiency… That is why you want the government to step in and guide the market place.”

The government knows best.

Summary:

While each book has a specific focus, they all cite climate change as an existential threat.

Nearly all also focus on government as the solution, and some extoll socialism as the answer.

These books never mention freedom, except freedom from oil etc., while all the proposals are for big government making the decisions. Socialism may not have been mentioned, but that’s what big government is all about.

 

2 Replies to “Attacking the Grid”

  1. Donn,
    You have had tremendous experiences in your lifetime. Thank you for sharing with us.
    On the Socialists and Communists, I recently was made aware of a book by an FBI Agent of the 1950’s and 60’s, Book Title is “The Naked Communist”, author is W. Cleon Skousen. Interestingly and scarily, the goals of the Russian Communist Party of the 1950’s and 60’s were/are very similar to the CCP of recent years. In Skousen’s book he discusses the early deviation of the UN from the best intersts of America and the Free World. Later, the UN Agenda 21 pretty much showed with certainty that the UN is not a friend of the U.S.A. and protection of the environment is not the number 1 goal of environmental extremists.
    Keep up your excellent work!
    Best wishes,
    Dick Storm

    • Thanks for your comments.
      I had not read that book. From what you describe, it must have identified communists for what they are. Unfortunately, we see their ugly, deadly faces emerging again, but this time in the United States. Suddenly, our country is threatened.

Leave a Reply

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

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.